4 ms·

The difference is that with water, if the aquifers run out you can increase the output of your desalination and sewage treatment plants, or build more of them,

by khafra 16y ago

The difference is that with water, if the aquifers run out you can increase the output of your desalination and sewage treatment plants, or build more of them, or whatever--all it takes is more energy inputs. Oil is energy inputs; if the EROEI drops too low we can't replace it until we find more than the energy we're currently getting from it from non-petroleum-based sources. It's unfortunately quite difficult to build thousands of nuke plants overnight without using petroleum inputs.

tbrownaw 16y ago
This isn't really an overnight sort of problem though, it's not like all the existing sources will suddenly run dry over the course of a year and leave us with nothing to bootstrap new sources.
Retric 16y ago
The amount of processing it takes to turn oil into gasoline already takes a lot of energy from sources other than oil. Gasoline energy cost about 15x what wind energy does today, changing that to 16-20x is not a huge issue.
wisty 16y ago
Fortunately, a lot of oil use is recreational. Look at the USA, which uses 10 times the oil per capita as heavily industrialized China. When oil does start running short, there will be huge price shocks. Either market driven, or war-style command economies will curtail most shipping; while manufacturers pump out electrical vehicles and wind generators as fast as they can (wind generators can be built in factories and set up fairly quickly; nuclear plants require a long lead time due to site construction, planning, etc). Energy production is a relatively small part of the economy, so cutting back on the rest of the economy can pay for alternative energy supplies. Planes can run on bio-fuel (which costs a fortune, but nobody needs to fly), cars can run on stationary energy (if you convert them to use electric motors). I don't know what container ships can use, perhaps rail will replace them in many cases (though this will be a big disruption). It won't be pretty. There may be severe shortages. But at least the technology is being developed now.
- ghshephard 16y ago
  Or, alternatively, people will live close to where they work and just walk there.

by khafra 16y ago

tbrownaw 16y ago

This isn't really an overnight sort of problem though, it's not like all the existing sources will suddenly run dry over the course of a year and leave us with nothing to bootstrap new sources.

Retric 16y ago

The amount of processing it takes to turn oil into gasoline already takes a lot of energy from sources other than oil. Gasoline energy cost about 15x what wind energy does today, changing that to 16-20x is not a huge issue.

wisty 16y ago

Fortunately, a lot of oil use is recreational. Look at the USA, which uses 10 times the oil per capita as heavily industrialized China. When oil does start running short, there will be huge price shocks. Either market driven, or war-style command economies will curtail most shipping; while manufacturers pump out electrical vehicles and wind generators as fast as they can (wind generators can be built in factories and set up fairly quickly; nuclear plants require a long lead time due to site construction, planning, etc). Energy production is a relatively small part of the economy, so cutting back on the rest of the economy can pay for alternative energy supplies. Planes can run on bio-fuel (which costs a fortune, but nobody needs to fly), cars can run on stationary energy (if you convert them to use electric motors). I don't know what container ships can use, perhaps rail will replace them in many cases (though this will be a big disruption). It won't be pretty. There may be severe shortages. But at least the technology is being developed now.

ghshephard 16y ago
Or, alternatively, people will live close to where they work and just walk there.