The Greening of Entertainment Tech
July 18th, 2007 | by Mark Fleischmann
Post Your Comment...Comments
Prof. Goose on Jul 18th, 2007 at 5:35 PM:
Mark,
Thanks for your link to The Oil Drum (we're the link under the word "vigil" *laugh*).
To answer Matt's question, there is no new technology that has anything close to the return of energy invested of light sweet crude...that's the problem.
The other problem, as Mark points out, is a lack of energy education or knowledge. We take so much for granted, that's why we are working so hard over at The Oil Drum on just facilitating conversations so people can learn.
Truth is, we need a bunch of silver bb's to help ameliorate this problem...a Manhattan Project style effort.
I don't see that happening until there's a real economic consequence, or until people actually get the fact that we are not going to be able to produce any more oil than are currently. (NB: we are not running out, it's just that other countries are growing...and we can't produce any more...that means higher prices.)
If you're interested, this is what we talk about every day over at TOD. Stop by some time.
(Mark, drop me a note at our eds box would you? Cheers! PG)
Prof. Goose on Jul 18th, 2007 at 5:40 PM:
Oh, and Matt asked about timelines...
It depends on who you ask. The problem is that our estimates of how much oil is left in the ground (usually termed "reserves") are based on what countries tell us as opposed to what is actually there.
Matt Simmons' book _Twilight in the Desert_ argues that many of the ME countries have exaggerated their reserve numbers...
A lot of evidence is coming out of Saudi Arabia that their largest oil field Ghawar has peaked in production. If this is true, then the world has likely already peaked with regard to light sweet crude production...and as my other comment said, there's nothing quite like a barrel of light sweet for energy.
It's complicated, but we need to have these conversations. It may have already passed, it may be in five years...either way, it's close.
David J. McCartney on Jul 20th, 2007 at 8:30 AM:
Mark,
Thank you for bring up this issue in the context of technology.
The average person has absolutely no concept of our dependence on oil. Aside from its use as a fuel, oil is a component or feedstock in over 500,000 products and chemicals. Our life as we know it is wholly dependent on cheap energy.
The core issue is not that technology might be better served in a post-carbon era through reductions in energy consumption, miniaturization, or other improvements, but that technology might continue to exist at all. Without cheap oil, it can not exist.
We do not comprehend the fact that our entire agriculture system is based on producing food from oil: fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides are all carbon based. Add the fuel needed to plant, till, harvest, and transport the food thousands of miles to our plates and you ultimately have an unsustainable system.
Aside from the fact that we are up against a geophysical reality that will bring us to our knees, the real issue is one of potential catastrophic economic effect. We're looking at a recession or recessions, with a major depression highly likely. Remember, unlike the 1930's, we are the world's largest debtor nation. What is happening on Wall Street right now belies that fact.
This reality is very difficult to wrap your head around, the prospect of us losing every modern comfort and convenience within the next hundred years. The effects are already being felt with considerable economic ramifications on the horizon.
This coming maelstrom is just beginning to be picked up by the mass media, yourself included.
Everyone: Google "Peak Oil" and tighten you seat belts. It's going to be on heck of a ride.
Cherenkov on Jul 20th, 2007 at 3:28 PM:
I would like to point out that we are running out of oil. There are many who will say we aren't running out or that we will never run out, but they are mistaken. From the moment we began using oil, from the very first teaspoon we burned, we began running out. Oil does not renew itself, at least not on a meaningful time scale. Therefore, like a glass of beer, the very first sip means that a sip is missing from the glass. Since the oil, nor the beer in my example, will not reappear magically, then it can be said with authority that with each sip we have less and having less means categorically, we are running out.
Now, to further confuse the issue, most people who believe in peak oil, prefer to focus not on "running out" but on the peak in production, because that is in fact what they are talking about when they refer to "peak oil."
Since our economy is based upon the high growth that cheap energy bestows on modern economies, any reduction in the production level means a reduction in growth. And that means problems as far as our paradigm is concerned. It means recession after recession, leading finally to a depression that never ends.
Now, the most frightening aspect revolves around population. We are 6.5 billion people precisely because of cheap energy. Without that fossil sunlight in the form of anhydrous ammonia derived from methane, or natural gas, we would be unable to feed our population. Not possible. What you may not know is that natural gas peaked in the North America some years ago. It is only through frantic drilling that we have managed to avoid a spectacular catastrophe. Unfortunately, many experts in the field, such as Julian Darley, believe that we will be unable to hold off that catastrophe for much longer. In fact, because of cheap energy inputs, we have been able to act as if the earth was effectively two or three planets. That is about to come to an end. What that means for the excess population, approximately 4 billion people, is perhaps starvation unless extraordinary efforts are made.
In any event, it is nice to see that the peak oil trope is escaping into the mainstream. Keep up the good work.
Wade on Aug 2nd, 2007 at 11:11 AM:
Hey, I just came across this looking for peak oil stuff. I want to thank you for commenting on the future of something important to you, and me, considering peak oil. Usually it's only mentioned on websites dedicated to it. It makes me glad to see somebody considering peak oil as a part of the future who isn't in the peak oil ghetto of the web. The issue is in bad need of mainstreaming. We're in **** shape if only peak oilers talk about our future shortages.
Comment on this article
Please keep your comments relevant to this article. Email addresses are not displayed, they are only required to verify you are human.
When you submit your comment, an email will be sent to your email address with a confirmation link. Once you have clicked on that confirmation link your comment will be posted.
HTML is not allowed.

Matt on Jul 18th, 2007 at 4:40 PM:
I wonder with all that your saying, where do you think the time line falls? Within 10-20 years? I wonder if new technology will provide a relief to help prevent this from happening in the first place. Or are we too late to act in order to make this change already?