3 ms·
> but it hasn't happened yet To provide some context, I think it is worth quoting this article[0] from February: > In a Thursday statement, the fossil fuel gi
by dane-pgp 5y ago
> but it hasn't happened yet
To provide some context, I think it is worth quoting this article[0] from February:
> In a Thursday statement, the fossil fuel giant [Shell] said its “oil production peaked in 2019,” and that we can now expect it to decline gradually by 1 or 2% per year. Shell also said its total carbon emissions peaked in 2018 at 1.7 gigatonnes.
[0] https://gizmodo.com/shell-says-it-has-reached-peak-oil-production-1846248229 https://gizmodo.com/shell-says-it-has-reached-peak-oil-produ...
- schimmy_changa 5y agoYes, but the term 'Peak Oil' implies the catastrophic and sudden crash in the availability of oil, not in the slow decrease in production due to alternatives. (Don't get me wrong, I'd like production to decline much faster for climate reasons!) The 'Peak Oil' hypothesis was that all the wells would run dry without good alternatives and society would be trapped between a rock and a hard place because of that. Again, not necessarily for better, humans figured out more technologically advanced ways to extract oil to avoid this outcome (fracking and tar sands).
- wussboy 5y agoI hear you, and I regret that the Environmental movement feels the need to ratchet everything up to a catastrophe. But surely if “peak” means anything it means that we used to grow, now we contract, and therefore peak oil has already occurred.
- XorNot 5y ago> The 'Peak Oil' hypothesis was that all the wells would run dry without good alternatives This was literally never it. Peak Oil never had anything to say about the pumping capacity of oil, it was about the expansion of supply relative to demand. That "preppers" decided this meant immediate societal collapse is there and your problem with comprehension.