Preparing for Peak Oil

[TithonusSyndrome]

Just throwing this out there: would it be a bad idea to start heading into the engineering field now? What I specifically want to do is get a degree in mechanical engineering and quickly move on to do graduate study in nanoengineering.

The idea of being on the leading edge of technologies which could turn out some meaningful solutions is something that appeals greatly to me. At the same time though, I'm worried that there wouldn't be much use for skills like that if the moderate to worst-case scenarios play out.

I'm actually looking into a career in nuclear power; it's said that it's only a matter of time before a reactor opens here to power the oilsands. Anyone know where I ought to start looking?

[Admiral Valdemar]

The US Army is essentially dead now. What with Iraq and pork along with insufficient high-calibre leadership and grunt recruiting, the bulk of the US military force is in their far superior air force and navy relative to other nations. That won't really help, though. Since to "acquire" and retain future resources requires a decent land force. It's not much good throwing F-22As and TLAMs if the enemy just waits for the smoke to clear and move back in to the area disputed.

About Russia too. There is a lot of talk going on about the energy security (or rather, lack of) within the EU and how Gazprom is shaping that. So far, they seem to be eager to supply the more costly pipelines and pumping stations, but are leaving the actual gas (and oil) fields really underdeveloped. Having such massive reserves of fossil fuels doesn't help if, again, your problem is a production bottleneck. The EU at least has the ability to use Russian or Asian gas and coal much more easily, along with oil, while the US' neighbours, Canada and Mexico, are either peaking or about to peak. As J mentioned, the oil sands of Alberta are more than enough for Canadian use given limited growth. Whether America accepts that or not, is another matter. The US, once it uses all of Canada's limited NG up, will be without gas, a significant proportion of electricity creation stems from that source. LNG is pricey and no one wants rather unsafe and expensive ugly LNG stations near their homes, so the US can't really import foreign supplies witht the dilapidated LNG situation. Course, that will hopefully make nuclear and coal more the thing to invest in, though don't expect miracles from the latter if demand keeps up.

I noticed someone mentioned fuel-cell cars again. I really would try and knock this idea on the head that we have to keep cars running at all costs. They are hideously wasteful and expensive. Just converting the US car fleet to hydrogen, if it was even practical, would take years and probably bankrupt the already decaying corpses of the Big 3 in US automobile industry. The hydrogen economy is simply not an answer, which means if you somehow get your nuclear infrastructure powering the majority of the grid, you're going to be looking at trying to get more energy dense power cells and capacitors, rather than use fuel-cells or ICEs.

By the way, it's been decided that no sticky or sub-forum be made on this subject. The recent awareness of the situation is good enough for now and there are various sites such as TOD and the PO Board that are more in-depth on the topic. When the problems are finally more mainstream and the MSM report them rather than accept the "It's just a minor supply issue because of politics" mantra, then N&P and SLAM will carry more threads on the matter.

[His Divine Shadow]

We don't have to, but it's preferable to keep as many as possible running. Higher fuel prices will take care of that all of it's own though. The market can handle this itself, the government can focus on rail and collective transport instead while automobile makers try and transition.

Eventually I think they'll make a comeback as huge as now when we got better options. Wastefull or not, it's fucking awesome.

[Admiral Valdemar]

Keeping logistics working to maintain the stupid just-in-time delivery service will be mandatory to ensure no total social collapse happens. Anyone driving for leisure needs to be shot. High prices don't usually work given how inelastic the product is, so while you'll hear grumbles coming from the US driver this summer, short of physical shortfalls, they'll keep on truckin'.

And while cars may appear again in the far off future, they'll likely never be as abundant as they are now for the simple reason that there'll be more people then needing more energy for other things and we'll likely be used to more efficient public transport anyway.

[His Divine Shadow]

Well I guess you better shoot me then because I am going ot be driving for leisure this summer, in a V8.

[Admiral Valdemar]

I would, but you're over in "OHMYGOD! A polar bear is eating my baby!" land, so I'd rather not.

Anyway, your state won't be experiencing what the US is. Only when you cannot afford to use your car for anything but work because you cannot physically get enough fuel, will it seriously put off road trips.

[Darth Wong]

Not to sound like one of those "Eat Drink and Be Merry for Tomorrow We Die" ancient Greeks, but to be quite blunt, I'm planning to try and get in a fair bit of traveling while gasoline is still relatively cheap and air fares are still affordable for ordinary people. It's not like I'll be able to do that afterwards.

[Enforcer Talen]

Indeed. Im enjoying my hour long drives now. I dont anticipate them being here in a few years.

[Soontir C'boath]

Not to sound like one of those "Eat Drink and Be Merry for Tomorrow We Die" ancient Greeks, but to be quite blunt, I'm planning to try and get in a fair bit of traveling while gasoline is still relatively cheap and air fares are still affordable for ordinary people. It's not like I'll be able to do that afterwards.

My family plans on going back to Taiwan for awhile and airline prices next year are already pretty damn high compared to what my mom paid to go this year. I shudder to think how far they'll go more down the road.

[aerius]

Driving will get damn expensive in the future, which is why we've started stockpiling gasoline at my friend's cottage. We have a few hundred gallons put away right now and we plan to add more as long as gas is affordable. Technically speaking, I also own a couple swimming pools full of gasoline right now in the form of futures contracts, but those are getting cashed in to provide funds for setting us up for life in an oil scarce world.

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

Buying and stockpiling gasoline is probably a good idea. So is investing in nuclear. The gas prices will skyrocket, which will cause a mad scramble to build nuclear. You win on both counts.

[SCRawl]

Driving will get damn expensive in the future, which is why we've started stockpiling gasoline at my friend's cottage. We have a few hundred gallons put away right now and we plan to add more as long as gas is affordable.

How long are you planning on keeping this gasoline? I mean, this is a product with a finite shelf life, even with stabilizers.

[aerius]

How long are you planning on keeping this gasoline? I mean, this is a product with a finite shelf life, even with stabilizers.

Quite a while. According to my chemical engineer friend who works for one of the evil oil companies, gasoline will keep for a few decades if treated with industrial grade stabilizers (not the watered down stuff they sell in Canadian Tire) and stored in airtight metal containers which are kept away from heat & sun.

[Darth Wong]

Obviously, you people don't realize that you can run a high-performance automobile indefinitely off gasoline which has been collected in filthy dirt-encrusted pots and pans in the desert. Haven't any of you watched Mad Max?

[Kwizard]

How long are you planning on keeping this gasoline? I mean, this is a product with a finite shelf life, even with stabilizers.

Quite a while. According to my chemical engineer friend who works for one of the evil oil companies, gasoline will keep for a few decades if treated with industrial grade stabilizers (not the watered down stuff they sell in Canadian Tire) and stored in airtight metal containers which are kept away from heat & sun.

Stockpiling fuel is certainly a good idea. But how should one handle the safety and/or legal complications of storing dozens of gallons on a property?

[aerius]

Obviously, you people don't realize that you can run a high-performance automobile indefinitely off gasoline which has been collected in filthy dirt-encrusted pots and pans in the desert. Haven't any of you watched Mad Max?

Well first I'd have to get 1970's musclecar with a big block V8 engine and then stick an oversized supercharger on it. I don't think my 2000 Chevy Malibu with a dinky little V6 is up to the task.

Stockpiling fuel is certainly a good idea. But how should one handle the safety and/or legal complications of storing dozens of gallons on a property?

My friend's cottage is in a rather remote location, and yes we did check with the environmental and legal bylaws. As long as it's above ground, it's cool, if we wanted underground storage then we'd have to fill out a 10' tall stack of forms in triplicate and pay a whole bunch of licensing and inspection fees.

[Alferd Packer]

Not to sound like one of those "Eat Drink and Be Merry for Tomorrow We Die" ancient Greeks, but to be quite blunt, I'm planning to try and get in a fair bit of traveling while gasoline is still relatively cheap and air fares are still affordable for ordinary people. It's not like I'll be able to do that afterwards.

Same here. I'm hoping that, next year, air fares to Europe will still be reasonable; I'd like to see Germany in summer again. I imagine that, when I'm sixty or so, international travel will be cheap again, but who knows. It's worrisome, but not particularly so. Like I said, I live an area that's been densely populated since well before the automobile.

See that huge gob of red? I live smack in the middle of that.

And this image doesn't do the real densities justice, especially as you get closer to Manhattan or Philadelphia, wherein the population densities are up around 16,000+ per square mile. The town I live in has a population density of about 6,500 per square mile, and that's about 30 miles out of Manhattan.

In all honesty, I feel sorry for people who live in younger cities built after the invention of the automobile. I mean, the population density for Phoenix is around 3,000/sq. mi. The density for New York City is around 26,000/sq. mi.

So if you don't feel like living out in northern Manitoba or out on a farm in Kansas, move to a major metropolitan area of an older city. If you act ahead of the game, you'll be sitting pretty while everyone else scrambles to find a place to live that's not car-dependent.

[Hillary]

Two questions for those who obviously know far more than I do about this.

1) When is this going to get serious? 10 years, 30 years, 50 years?

2) WTSHTF - is it better to be living in the middle of the city with everyone else (high prices but relatively good supply) or in the middle of nowhere (self sufficient, but more reliant on ensuring your own safety).

I currently live in West London, close enough to the West End to avoid the suburban problems (with any luck), but I'm looking to move down to Cornwall to a nice, middle(ish) of nowhere place with a bit of land and a degree of self-sufficiency. Now I'm wondering whether I need to re-evaluate.

This thread is utterly depressing reading

[Coyote]

This may seem silly, but...

Those of us who are in relatively close geographical proximity (a relative term in cases of large countries like Canada, the USA, and Russia) it may be a good idea to share contact information or even set up pre-arranged rally points if deemed necessary.

If for some reason you're forced to go nomadic, best to pick a direction where a relatively supportive person may be available to lend some help, or at least point in a safe direction.

Me, I'm in Boise, Idaho... I know Uraniun is in Oregon and Knife is in Utah, which is "close" when one considers distances in the USA. Interstate-84 would be th eprimary link.

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

Two questions for those who obviously know far more than I do about this.

1) When is this going to get serious? 10 years, 30 years, 50 years?

According to some evidence, it's already serious. The peak may have happened in 2005 or 2006, meaning that the new record high gas prices may be permanent, and only the tip of the iceberg.

2) WTSHTF - is it better to be living in the middle of the city with everyone else (high prices but relatively good supply) or in the middle of nowhere (self sufficient, but more reliant on ensuring your own safety).

I currently live in West London, close enough to the West End to avoid the suburban problems (with any luck), but I'm looking to move down to Cornwall to a nice, middle(ish) of nowhere place with a bit of land and a degree of self-sufficiency. Now I'm wondering whether I need to re-evaluate.

This thread is utterly depressing reading

If you know how to raise your own livestock and / or crops, you might be able to get by that way, but who wants to live that kind of live? In my country, many thousands illegally cross the border each year to get away from it. In a European or older American city, there will still be affordable mass transit, while rural folks will have a tough time going anywhere. Assuming that there will be a bad depression lasting at least 10 years with unemployment of probably 1 in 4, it's good to secure a good job that is essential enough that you won't get laid off. In other words, avoid middle management.

[Darth Wong]

I live in a neighbourhood which was laid down in the 1950s, so you can walk to a bus stop or the grocery store rather than driving to the regional big-box superstore. I think people have to consider voluntarily going a week without a car in order to see if they can do it. If you try to go a week without a car and you can't function at all, then you won't be able to function when gas prices are $20 per gallon. It's an experiment that everyone should try.

In my case, the only real hitch is my older son's private school, which is difficult to reach by mass transit. I currently drive him there every day and we pick him up afterwards. But his private school only goes to grade 8, and he's already in grade 6, so it should be a moot point soon.

PS. Contrary to popular belief, the suburbanites are not the worst off when it comes to life in a post-carbon world. Even those who have a long way to walk to get to a bus stop usually still have some mass transit available. Having lived in a small town for a while, 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. Small-towners love to talk about how they're closer to nature, but that's only true in a geographical sense, not a lifestyle sense. And most of them aren't even farmers; the actual farmers in a typical rural community are only a small fraction of the population. The rest are service industry workers and people who commute to nearby cities (I know plenty of people who commute as far as 100 km).

[Hillary]

I will certainly keep a bolthole in town if/when I move out, although 'remote' in England bears no relation to 'remote' in North America.

At present I could easily live without a car - I sometimes go a couple of weeks without driving. Living in London has its plusses in that respect.

[Colonel Olrik]

If you try to go a week without a car and you can't function at all, then you won't be able to function when gas prices are $20 per gallon. It's an experiment that everyone should try.

3 weeks without touching it and counting, and almost all last times were to go for leisure cycles or hikes - not really survival stuff. Gas is getting very close to €1.5/liter around here, me and my girfriend are considering to sell one of our cars, since we hardly use them and when we use one it's most of the times together. I'm almost certain this will happen within one year.

It will be fun to see all these germans have strokes when gas reaches €2/liter (it's getting there..) and they finally realize they're spending hundreds of Euros every week with their high powered, fast going cars, oh yes it will.

[Eulogy]

Wow. Lots of good responses here. Let's keep it up!

By the way, why not considervelomobiles as a possible substitute for cars, at least for short distances?

[Alferd Packer]

I think people have to consider voluntarily going a week without a car in order to see if they can do it. If you try to go a week without a car and you can't function at all, then you won't be able to function when gas prices are $20 per gallon. It's an experiment that everyone should try.

This is an excellent idea, and if you're really worried about this Peak Oil stuff, you definitely should try it. Two weeks ago, I actually started doing this, though for different reason. Most days my wife would drop me off at the train station on her way to work, and she would then pick me up when I got back in the evening.

I'd been searching for a way to get a bit of exercise, because summer's almost here and I don't want to have bigger titties than the girls on the beach. So I decided to start walking home from the train station in the evening, weather permitting. It's 2.4 miles, or about 35 minutes at my brisk pace, and to my delight, I found that I could easily handle it. Furthermore, now that it's May, the sun remains up for my entire walk, which is nice, too. Next week, I'm going to start walking to and from the train station. Not only will I have made myself entirely independent upon cars for my commute, but I'll be getting myself into better shape and losing weight. It's completely win-win.

Furthering this motif, I also discovered that the major supermarket in our area is a scant 1 mile's walk away, as is the the local liquor store (you can't buy beer in grocery stores here in NJ). So that covers food and cocktails. Various doctors, vets, and dentists are nearby. Big-box retailers are on the other side of the interstate, which makes them difficult to get to via bike and prohibitively time-consuming to get to on foot. But if gas is $20 a gallon, I don't exactly have to worry about sharing the road with a zillion cars, now do I?

My wife would have a harder time commuting without her car. She could get most of the way via the same train I take (though in the opposite direction) but her work is still about five miles away from the closest train station. As far as I know, there's no bus service in the area at the moment, but hey, that could change. As it is, she would have to be able to bring a bike on the train, because it'd simply take too long to walk five miles each way to work. So for her, I'd say that it's a difficult, but not impossible, to live without her car. We could definitely live where we are right now and only use mass transit/bikes/foot patrol to get around, though my wife would require some secondary mass transit to make it less horrible. Hell, her company could buy a shuttle bus to run between the train station and the manufacturing facility where she works.

We'd probably keep a car for extreme emergencies, of course, but that's easy to do. If you're only driving it once every other month and maybe putting 600 miles a year on it, your fuel costs are going to remain low no matter what.