3 ms·

Look at their plots, they show it running out... Right about now. When in reality oil is most likely to last longer than us using it. If any of this was true y

by svara 3y ago

Look at their plots, they show it running out... Right about now. When in reality oil is most likely to last longer than us using it. If any of this was true you'd see commodity prices spiking across the board. And even if that happened, agriculture would be the last thing affected, since demand for food is completely inelastic.

baq 3y ago
Read the article, they say upfront they have no idea how much is really left. What’s important is that exponential growth in consumption shifts the exhaustion a few decades at best even if there’s still a lot left.
- svara 3y ago
  They have no idea, which is why the predicted dynamics are nonsense. They actually have dates on their x axes, you can't do that and then claim it's all just qualitative arguments. World oil consumption is not growing exponentially and in many advanced economies is decreasing.
  - baq 3y ago
    1) again read the article, you're quoting charts but they're so aggregated it's a waste of time to discuss just them 2) 1%/year growth is most definitely exponential and we're not talking about 'many advanced economies' but the total world consumption, 'many advanced economies' are in a terrible demographic situation but the world added a billion people in the past couple decades
    - svara 3y ago
      1) Please tell me what you want me to read that has any impact on the point I'm making. I've read enough to make clear arguments about the parts of the paper relevant to my comment. Reminder: The original comment that I reacted to was this: "Recent recalibration of the limits of growth model has shown that collapse of industrial civilization is imminent". I have pointed out how the paper does not support this conclusion and would appreciate specific pointers to improve my reasoning. (Besides, "don't look at this part" is one hell of a defense of a paper... Again, you can't show dynamics with a clear physical time axis and then claim that you don't actually mean it.) 2) It's not growing exponentially. Exponential growth, even at 1%, would be plainly visible in any long term plot. Take this one for example, but feel free to find you own: https://imageio.forbes.com/blogs-images/rrapier/files/2018/07/Global-Oil.jpg https://imageio.forbes.com/blogs-images/rrapier/files/2018/0... World consumption is what I was referring to. The reference to advanced economies is because it is specifically advanced economies that have the ability to increasingly decouple their growth from energy consumption; the fact that oil consumption is not increasing there anymore is therefore significant.

by svara 3y ago

baq 3y ago

Read the article, they say upfront they have no idea how much is really left. What’s important is that exponential growth in consumption shifts the exhaustion a few decades at best even if there’s still a lot left.

svara 3y ago
They have no idea, which is why the predicted dynamics are nonsense. They actually have dates on their x axes, you can't do that and then claim it's all just qualitative arguments. World oil consumption is not growing exponentially and in many advanced economies is decreasing.
- baq 3y ago
  1) again read the article, you're quoting charts but they're so aggregated it's a waste of time to discuss just them 2) 1%/year growth is most definitely exponential and we're not talking about 'many advanced economies' but the total world consumption, 'many advanced economies' are in a terrible demographic situation but the world added a billion people in the past couple decades
  - svara 3y ago
    1) Please tell me what you want me to read that has any impact on the point I'm making. I've read enough to make clear arguments about the parts of the paper relevant to my comment. Reminder: The original comment that I reacted to was this: "Recent recalibration of the limits of growth model has shown that collapse of industrial civilization is imminent". I have pointed out how the paper does not support this conclusion and would appreciate specific pointers to improve my reasoning. (Besides, "don't look at this part" is one hell of a defense of a paper... Again, you can't show dynamics with a clear physical time axis and then claim that you don't actually mean it.) 2) It's not growing exponentially. Exponential growth, even at 1%, would be plainly visible in any long term plot. Take this one for example, but feel free to find you own: https://imageio.forbes.com/blogs-images/rrapier/files/2018/07/Global-Oil.jpg https://imageio.forbes.com/blogs-images/rrapier/files/2018/0... World consumption is what I was referring to. The reference to advanced economies is because it is specifically advanced economies that have the ability to increasingly decouple their growth from energy consumption; the fact that oil consumption is not increasing there anymore is therefore significant.