NewScientist Article - Oil Crash

[Quercus-robur]

An interesting article from NewScientist:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg2 ... nhWM1PgyXk

Thoughts? The author does seem to be biased and overoptimistic as to the impact of renewable energies in diverting a disaster but I do share his opinions as to the potential for an oil crash in the coming years.

Qr

[hobo]

Agreed, clean technology wont save us IMO. We need to power down/use less.....

[prepperG]

oil has made it cheap for us to live the way we have in the past, but as it becomes more expensive to extract the cost of plastic products will go up. Bio fuel can help a little but it is allready pushing the price of food up as land is being diverted away from food production to bio mass.
shale oil has helped the us economy, some would even say save it from compleate collapse.
renewable energy is expensive to buy and no one wants you to put a solar pannel or turbine up as the companies and goverment depend upon the profit/tax from fosil fuel.
we will find that the cost of living is going to go up a lot and there is not much we can do about it as even if we change now we can not stop 1/3 of the worlds population (china) wanting what we have enjoyed for the last 50 years.
my advise buy land, avoid using oil and apreciate the simple things in life.

[Oldarborman]

Agreed, clean technology wont save us IMO. We need to power down/use less.....

I agree totally with you Hobo, there are so many benefits from "powering down", but in this day and age there are millions who could not cope or don't know how to

[grenfell]

Agreed, clean technology wont save us IMO. We need to power down/use less.....

I agree totally with you Hobo, there are so many benefits from "powering down", but in this day and age there are millions who could not cope or don't know how to

you forgot those that simply don't want to power down and consider their consumption some sort of God given right.
It does make me laugh when I hear or see people saying we need to invest in this technology or that technology to "solve" the energy crisis when actually using less is a far more cost effective and simpler to implement .

[Plymtom]

I think the end of oil as we know is inevitable and whilst steam trains may not be making a comeback, tracked transport for heavy goods and commuters for that matter is far more efficient, so we may need to buy back all the stuff we have built on our decimated railways and re build them whatever we fuel them with, learning the valuable lesson that whilst one way may be better/cheaper in the here and now, disposing of the old system entirely could prove to be the most expensive foolish mistake we have ever made.

[redskies]

For many years, I've been confused by the whole ''old bad, new good'' thing that society has going on. I know it stems from corporations and consumerism, but it genuinely puzzles me that more people can't see through this and don't get it when I say that I find a blend of the best of old and new works best. Some new stuff is best left well alone, so is some old stuff, come to that. But a blend of the best from both worlds, well, am I the only one who finds that logical?

If there was any sense in the world, power generation would switch from central to local. The energy companies would be warned that they'd be pretty much out of business in the next few years and to man up about it. We'd be putting generation such as wind (the 9m turbines; the big ones are neither use nor ornament) and solar on public buildings, and teaching folks how to generate their own power, in a combination of ways. In conjunction with that, we'd be embarking on a mission to encourage the building of self contained, off grid housing. As well as teaching people how not to use so much power in the first place.

But that would require common sense. And all the governments have far too many vested interests to engage that

[Tocsin]

I think the end of oil as we know is inevitable and whilst steam trains may not be making a comeback, tracked transport for heavy goods and commuters for that matter is far more efficient, so we may need to buy back all the stuff we have built on our decimated railways and re build them whatever we fuel them with, learning the valuable lesson that whilst one way may be better/cheaper in the here and now, disposing of the old system entirely could prove to be the most expensive foolish mistake we have ever made.

For better or worse, here in the Scottish Borders, the old Waverley Line which went from Edinburgh to Carlisle (90 odd miles), closed in1969 thanks to Mr. Beeching is being partially reinstated. It will run approx. 35 miles from Edinburgh to Tweedbank (between Galashiels and Melrose). It's costing an arm and a leg (£300m) and will mainly be single track unlike the former which was main line double track. Due to reopen in 2015 if you are travelling on the A7 you will see bridges being restored and rebuilt, embankments being cleared etc. and in Galashiels, huge earthworks to restore the line through the town. Some disagree with the expense and whether it will be used, however time will tell....

[Plymtom]

My money's on it being for the better, cars, trucks, will all still be around in smaller numbers until (or if) alternative fuels are found or perfected, but however you look at it railways were very efficient ways of moving stuff and people around, mainly stuff because of the weight of it, and following contours.

As you say time will tell, Waverley line, is that so named because of a connection with the paddle steamer? I went on that in the 80s on a little pleasure trip what a machine! The steam punks these days would love it

[Tocsin]

My money's on it being for the better, cars, trucks, will all still be around in smaller numbers until (or if) alternative fuels are found or perfected, but however you look at it railways were very efficient ways of moving stuff and people around, mainly stuff because of the weight of it, and following contours.

As you say time will tell, Waverley line, is that so named because of a connection with the paddle steamer? I went on that in the 80s on a little pleasure trip what a machine! The steam punks these days would love it

I'm sure I'll be corrected if I'm wrong here, I think it was named the Waverley Line after Edinburgh's main station, which is Waverley. That in turn was named Waverley after a book by Sir Walter Scott, who lived at Abbotsford, about a mile from Galashiels. I remember going on the paddle steamer too in the late 70s, when I lived at Stranraer, a trip around Ailsa Craig!! There are campaigners in the Borders who want the line expended to Hawick and then onto Carlisle, but let's get the first stage done and see what happens in years to come. As fuel rises in cost and becomes scarcer it'll be interesting to see what the powers that be decide....