Preparing for Peak Oil

[Coyote]

In the old days, folks planted "Victory Gardens", plots just big enough to supplement their living, if not supplant food purchases outright in some cases. If at all possible, even with a little ground space, consider a victory garden. Maybe coordinate with neighbors if you're on good terms with them. Not just "I'll grow this if you grow that" but maybe knocking down fences and making a large, common backyard garden.

If you're not on good terms with your neighbors, start getting that way.

Grow shade trees to keep the house cool in the summer and save air conditioning money. Or, in an apartment, consider putting up awnings over windows to provide shade and keep AC use from kicking in, if not turned off altogether. Get used to temperatures, either way. This winter we kept the thermostat at 56 F and put on fleece.

If things get really bad, you may need to post guards at your garden. A dog might be a good consideration as a sentry. I have a dog, and I have a good social network among my neighbors. Hungry or fuel-thieving marauders will be met with coordinated resistance.

[Gil Hamilton]

On victory gardens, in Pittsburgh, I know there are several community victory gardens where the entire neighborhood invested in a plot of land and each member has a small plot within it to grow whatever they want.

Plus, if climate permits, don't just grow shade trees. Grow ivy on your house. Ivy is a great reflector so sunlight.

[CaptHawkeye]

I quickly came to realize that the people who live out in the boonies are actually the worst off, unless they're farmers. These people are completely dependent on cars, much more so than even a suburbanite

My family is fucked if they stay where they are. I am going to be going to a college in the town of Poughkeepsie. PK isn't exactly a great town, (it's crime rate is really bad) but it is on the Hudson River. Their is also Kingston.

[Bounty]

It strikes me as a bit odd that much of the seemingly "drastic" measures proposed here are already commonplace in my end of the world. I don't know a single person in my street who doesn't grow his own food (not enough to live off, but at the very least some fruit); public transport is commonplace and considered by many to be their primary means of transport; airconditioning is completely absent, apart from movie theaters (granted, this is climate-related); and systems like solar panels are becoming more and more wide-spread.

What's even more striking is that global warming and the over-reliance on fossil fuels are widely accepted by the public. The only ads from power companies you'll see are about conservation of power, with leaflets and websites devoted to energy-saving tips. The largest power company will be handing out hundreds of thousands of An Inconvenient Truth next week. The state bus company is trying to switch to renewable fuels right now; prototype buses running on zero-carbon seed oil are already running, fuel cell prototypes have been in the news and even the older diesel buses are being upgraded and tweaked to get maximum efficiency for minimum pollution. Programs where citizens can trade their license plate for a bus or train pass have been a success; a new program where solar panels are refunded for businesses has been such a success it's been scaled back to meet demand.

This is something that's very much alive in the public eye. Just today I saw a BMW ad - BMW of all things! - boasting about their new 52MPG sedans with minimal carbon emissions. It's not perfect, granted, but the issue not being ignored.

So isn't something similar happening in the US?

[Coyote]

So isn't something similar happening in the US?

So much of the US society is determined by business interests trying to make a buck, they've encouraged the buying & selling of disposable everything (even cars) so that after a year or two anything "out of style" is considered old, junky, useless, and nerdy. It does not encourage a lifestyle of conservation. To undo it all now would create financial woes for Big Business and they have a collective aneurysm at the very thought.

And, of course, Big Business pretty much controls Big Politics through campaign money, favors, etc.

It takes massive public buying trends to change before the corporations will try to follow the money and offer greener alternatives. That's why I am cynical of a lot of "green" things beiong sold today because I fear a lot of it is just jumping on a bandwagon. Look at aggregate costs-- something, someone, somewhere is getting screwed to make things worthwhile for business. Light bulb companies don't want to sell you a proper "green" lightbulb that will use low energy and last 50 years. They want to sell you hundreds of light bulbs over the course of a lifetime because they burn hot and then go out. It's how they make their money-- built-in failure forcing you buy replacements over and over again.

I'd gladly pay $20.00 for a light bulb that would last 50 years, but they don't see it that way. Better to make me pay .80-cents for several dozen lightbulbs over the course of the same 50 years. But each time the ligh bulb factory has to hire more trucks to ship the mass volumes of light bulbs to the store, then there's the ecological impact of disposing the light bulbs that broke-- but the light bulb company doesn't really see or care about that stuff...

[Arrow]

So isn't something similar happening in the US?

There is, but probably not to the extent you're describing. BP had a primetime ad going on about clean coal a couple of nights ago, and the NBC Nightly News had a segment on Green Houses last night. There's also a lot of low-emission, fuel efficient car and hybrid ads on billboards and in print (though TV still seems to be dominated by SUVs and trucks). From what I've read on web, energy policy is big issue for Edwards, Clinton and Obama, with a focus on lowering emissions, conserving fuel, switching to biofuels (they've all latched on to cellulosic ethanol, and I didn't see any of the three mention hydrogen), and (at least in Edward's case) a big push to create a decentralized, renewable-energy electric grid. Corn-based ethanol also keeps expanding.

Electrical power prices have also basically doubled in my area over the last couple of years, due to deregulation and other factors, which has also encouraged more conservation.

I've also done some digging into alternative energy, and it there are lot of companies and universities doing work on the problem, and they seem to be gaining more and more venture capital support. The biggest thing holding back a lot of companies is that the want financial incentives from the government before expanding to industrial scale production (this seems especially true of cellulosic ethanol).

And then there's the railroad expansion Dutchess mentioned earlier.

So we're not ignoring the issue, either, but we should be moving faster. I don't think we'll hit worst-case or nightmare scenarios, but I'm definitely expecting an economic depression, rationing, regulation, migration out of the suburbs and the like.

[Alferd Packer]

So isn't something similar happening in the US?

Something similar is happening in the US, it's just that our entire lifestyle is based around the car. You're fighting against decades of inertia here, so it's going to be a struggle to change to a public transportation model. I would imagine that most homeowners have gardens of their own here in the states.

The air conditioning is a climate thing, and frankly, I don't know how to fix that. Most of the US. lies below the 40th parallel, which generally translates to incredibly hot and humid summers. Hell, New York in July and August is roughly equivalent to Satan's asshole in terms of tolerability. Solar panels on top of houses would make AC affordable, I suppose. It's definitely not being ignored, there's just a lot more we have to do.

[Gustav32Vasa]

It strikes me as a bit odd that much of the seemingly "drastic" measures proposed here are already commonplace in my end of the world.

Where in the world are you?

[CaptHawkeye]

Just out of curiosity, what is an absolute best case scenario? Say the public suddenly wakes up and immiediete, heartfelt efforts are made to cut off oil use entirely?

[Bounty]

It strikes me as a bit odd that much of the seemingly "drastic" measures proposed here are already commonplace in my end of the world.

Where in the world are you?

Flanders.

[Arrow]

Just out of curiosity, what is an absolute best case scenario? Say the public suddenly wakes up and immiediete, heartfelt efforts are made to cut off oil use entirely?

The best case scenario is that the USGS and Big Oil reports that AV cited earlier are right and we don't hit peak oil until 2040. Bush (even though he's done nothing about it), the presidential candidates, congress and the military all realize staying with oil is hurting us, from national security, economic and environmental perspectives, so alternative fuels and renewable energy will be one of the big issues over at least the next couple of decades. A lot of companies and investors see opportunity in getting away from oil, so they're starting to get in on the action. So, going with the 2040 date, with three decades of building alternative fuels up and expanding electrical power, peak oil would probably just be a bump in the road.

This is all from the US perspective, obviously.

[Admiral Valdemar]

I don't see such best case scenarios being remotely useful now. The KSA announced today that they won't increase output anywhere in the near future (read: can't). They cite the shifts to ethanol and cutting of SUV and other fuel hogs as being their reasoning, which is quite the genius move, since when they admit finally that they can't increase output, no matter what, they can simply point to their risk analysis stating "But you shouldn't be using so much now anyway, not our fault!".

As for me, I don't use my car. I've only had it since last September or so, and really I go everywhere via public transport anyway. My parents both live within cycling distance of their jobs too.

For food, my parents' garden used to be an orchard with a chicken coop. If pushed, we could tender the near half acre to get food, though living around several large farming fields helps too and a local garage with a second just down the road and no longer trading (could use the underground tank still). None of this makes any difference if your neighbour's garden is empty, so the local gunsmith would be useful too in deterring any raiding party.

The rural areas, while they won't be totally unaffected, will be far less so than the suburbs and urban areas still. The suburbs are simply a totally inefficient form of land use, with many hectares of land globally devoted to such places that could best be used for agriculture. The cities will be something of a lottery, since not every metropolis is going to be fully functional unless it's large enough and important enough to warrant a larger slice of the resource pie.

While areas have existed with large populations since before the automobile age, the drastic change in the world's farming industry and boost in population (see the "green revolution") will make this a situation never before experienced by mankind. The die-off potential is most likely to be met in the developing world, of which virtually no one from here is a part of. However, there is a big but here. To keep current yields of food with less and less liquid fuels in the future, requires we switch to organic farming which is usually subsistence level in the many Third World nations that use it, and even then, with masses of subsidising injected to help. The problems caused by modern mechanised agri-business, along with genetic diversity falling along with global grain output despite ever increasing population, means depending on the slope coefficient of the post-peak era drop-off, die-off could easily reach 100 million people annually globally from undernourishment that will eat into the developed world also. A great deal of benefits came that were not tied to fossil fuels that allowed population growth, though these are by far the smallest factors contributing to the growth spurt post-war.

As I've said before, right now, the average Westerner eats ten calories for every one gained from the food. That is simply thermodynamically unsustainable with finite resources. Assuming nuclear plugs the gap (the economic, social and technical issues with nuclear make crash programmes that replace even NG use today as hopelessly optimistic, even accounting the MIT paper which doesn't come close to replacing global consumption; uranium production bottlenecks, economic problems and the like are also major hurdles), other problems step up such as soil erosion, desertification and water shortages. While a household can produce their own natural fertiliser and use small amounts of water as well as conserve using rainwater, not everyone can do that for various reasons e.g. urbanites just don't have the space and concreted over their soil anyway.

There are huge hurdles to be overcome here. Those that think their energy sufficient nation will be unaffected are missing the bigger picture. The shockwaves from impacts to other nations will carry over and cause indirect complications to arise, such as mass migration of refugees, warring over limited supplies one nation has managed to keep at equilibrium and climate change.

[aerius]

Just out of curiosity, what is an absolute best case scenario? Say the public suddenly wakes up and immiediete, heartfelt efforts are made to cut off oil use entirely?

The question is, best case for who? Best case for Canada would be a war over oil fought between the US, China, India, Pakistan, and a bunch of 3rd world shithole countries which goes nuclear and results in those countries being wiped off the map, and somehow leaving Canada relatively unscathed. Now that we don't have anyone to steal our oil, we can keep it for ourselves and continue life much as before, but with smaller cars. We now have many decades, maybe even a century or 2 to gradually shift our resource base away from oil. It also solves the overpopulation and food shortage problem, as we've now killed off a few billion people. Sucks to be them.

[Admiral Valdemar]

The Four Horsemen would be the best way of mitigating this situation in a reasonable time-frame. Like it or not, culling humans is the only way to resolve this short of magick. Economics will not be able to survive a stagnant population that then starts falling in number along with per capita energy amounts. If growth continued, then land area and sustainability come into it. We're not colonising another planet anytime remotely soon, so population levels need to balance else overshoot is the final result.

Some may even want to initiate warfare by proxy just to bring down the total number of consumers for the lower number of producers and make odds more favourable.

[Enforcer Talen]

I think the likely solution is going to involve the death of the 3rd world - the 1st world can afford to dodge the repercussions.

Breathing space, 3 billion dead, and all that.

[Admiral Valdemar]

The Third World doesn't use all that much in the way of resources as it is, so there's going to come a point where they can't die fast enough and we're still having the awful headache of $20 gasoline (I hear $8 would kill the US economy, what's left, anyway). The Third World is already looking at near zero energy input from outside now because of the cost. Take a look at Nigeria and Senegal. They're running low as it is now, so they've not got much further to go, but since most live at barely over subsistence level anyway, it's not as major a problem for most of undeveloped Africa (SA is having issues, with or without coal-to-liquids).

Since your average American consumes five times more energy than the average rest-of-worlder, there's going to be more extreme hits against the American livelihood than those in Zimbabwe. Like they say, the bigger they are, the harder they fall.

[Enforcer Talen]

Well, I think we'll be living great depression style, while others will be playing Lord of the Flies.

[CaptHawkeye]

Here's a kind of random question. For me, and I imagine for increasing numbers of people it will be a question too.

What's going to happen to video games? I'm going to need SOMETHING to pass the time while I wait for my pathetically boring life to keel over.

[Admiral Valdemar]

No doubt about that. The Great Depression was man-made and temporary. The energy crisis we're running headlong into will be neither down solely to crazy speculators or over quickly.

[Enforcer Talen]

Im curious what will happen to the internet, honestly. Will we still chat, just not visit IRL?

I think the Western World will adjust - itll just take a few decades of Spartan living.

I dont think the 3rd world will survive, be it war, AIDS, or famine.

[Admiral Valdemar]

Here's a kind of random question. For me, and I imagine for increasing numbers of people it will be a question too.

What's going to happen to video games? I'm going to need SOMETHING to pass the time while I wait for my pathetically boring life to keel over.

Since videogames are a) capital intensive and b) luxury items, I don't think you'll be buying many in the near future. Companies like MS and Sony are already losing a lot of money in their present consoles, though Sony is all in the red now it seems. The economic ramifications will likely destroy Microsoft altogether.

And yes, I know how much money MS has. It means jack and shit when their less-liquid treasure chest monies won't even buy a two-up, two-down house.

Im curious what will happen to the internet, honestly. Will we still chat, just not visit IRL?

I think the Western World will adjust - itll just take a few decades of Spartan living.

I dont think the 3rd world will survive, be it war, AIDS, or famine.

9/11 saw the Internet hit hard by the loss of a major hub and the economic troubles thereafter. Depending on how people prioritise things and how steep the decline is, the Internet may or may not be as functional as it is today. You won't be seeing massive increases in bandwidth or server space, that's for sure, because most technology companies will be dead or dying trying to switch to more necessary pieces of equipment manufacture.

[aerius]

What's going to happen to video games? I'm going to need SOMETHING to pass the time while I wait for my pathetically boring life to keel over.

It depends on a few things. Is the power grid still up? How much does electricity now cost, and how strict is the rationing? If you're lucky you get to keep playing video games, if not, you get to ask your parents what they did in their spare time when they were kids. If worse comes to worst, you could hook up a generator to your bicycle and pedal it for an hour or 2 to charge the batteries on your laptop computer.

[CaptHawkeye]

Here's a kind of random question. For me, and I imagine for increasing numbers of people it will be a question too.

What's going to happen to video games? I'm going to need SOMETHING to pass the time while I wait for my pathetically boring life to keel over.

Since videogames are a) capital intensive and b) luxury items, I don't think you'll be buying many in the near future. Companies like MS and Sony are already losing a lot of money in their present consoles, though Sony is all in the red now it seems. The economic ramifications will likely destroy Microsoft altogether.

And yes, I know how much money MS has. It means jack and shit when their less-liquid treasure chest monies won't even buy a two-up, two-down house.

Im curious what will happen to the internet, honestly. Will we still chat, just not visit IRL?

I think the Western World will adjust - itll just take a few decades of Spartan living.

I dont think the 3rd world will survive, be it war, AIDS, or famine.

9/11 saw the Internet hit hard by the loss of a major hub and the economic troubles thereafter. Depending on how people prioritise things and how steep the decline is, the Internet may or may not be as functional as it is today. You won't be seeing massive increases in bandwidth or server space, that's for sure, because most technology companies will be dead or dying.

My aviation is out the window, and so are video games? Well fuck. Looks like i'll be dancing with the fishes comes the crisis. Since i'm not expecting to outlive it either.

[Aaron]

My aviation is out the window, and so are video games? Well fuck. Looks like i'll be dancing with the fishes comes the crisis. Since i'm not expecting to outlive it either.

Look man invest in some board games and books. What do you think my parents and I did before the invention of video games?

[Crazy_Vasey]

I'm more worried about the publishing industry. I could survive without the Internet but if I can't even get a good book to pass the time with then life is going to be very boring. I seriously have no idea what I'd do without books and the Internet to pass the time. Sleep a lot most likely.