14:53 - 15:17 this is what "peak oil" is really about which is the decline of cheap easily recovered oil. "Peak oil" is not about running out of oil absolutely it's about the decline of cheap oil which has been the catalyst of economic growth in the last 100 years.
It's unfortunately, that 'cheap oil' & financial chicanery that has allowed our 'continual growth' environmentaly destructive economies to exist. It's going to be a very rude awakening, living within our means, on renewable power, in that new world...
Some energy experts in Canada (are also anti-fossil fuels) say that willy nilly Oil, Gas and all such non-renewables will continue dominating till the end of 2099.
Found your podcast through Daniel Schmachtenberger. I've loved everything I've heard so far! Paradoxically, it's a a relief to hear these more realistic analyses on the important issues of our time instead of the often bright eyed but less thought out perspectives that seem to be common.
The most impactful part of this conversation for me is when Art explains how he maintains his composure, given the chaos we face in the future. His response was so refreshingly realistic and balanced. Most people will freak out, but those of us who, for whatever reason, anticipated the unraveling of the carbon pulse, can strive to be strong, composed, and help lead the way forward. That's the best we can hope for.
Your podcasts Nate are amazing. all of them. thank you. In the same time and i apologize for such a sad note, but looking at the number of views, its so depressing. millions should be watching them. to learn the truth to start to care. a lot of millions.
I think the creator(s) of this and similar contents actively approach decision-makers on higher levels too, so they try to achieve a deeper and substantial reaction. But of course it's debatable what we as individuals can do to make the possible outcomes a bit more positive (besides working on our local social connections and improving our community, which in itself is very difficult).
Thank you very much for bringing to light these important issues. I hope that soon most of us will begin to understand reality through an objective study of it and not through suffering its consequences. From experience, we inhabitants of the global south know a lot about it. Thank you Nate for your excellent work.
So true: We need to be satisfied with "having enough," to be realistic. Physics trumps preferences. Oil depletion catastrophes will lead to behavioral change. Uncertainty is the nature of the universe. Art expresses the de facto Stoic distinction between what is in our control, and what is outside our control. Need to know the truth....supere aude, indeed! May we all Dare to Know. Thank you!
great info on how we got here....what energy is and what it did for us,,,but,,i differ on the future, i believe your way too optimistic..damage has been done to the world that gives us life and woe to us in the very near future...
Hi Nate ; as usual a great input. The big problem is we do not prepare ourselves to the economic degrowth that we are going to face due to the 2 walls in front of us (scarcity of energy and of raw materials) . And we need to stop fossil fuels which implies automatically a degrowth of the economy. Are we going as a civilization to solve those equations without wars ? Let's struggle for this. Thank you for your high contribution for helping to understand the whole picture of the challenge.
Great interview and insights coming forth - I agree with Art about the desire for more growth and denial of the end of growth stems from a deep psychological / organismic desires for ever expanding life. In chasing these subconscious and conscious desires, we are effectively pushing the limits of where our organism can extend. The current mainstream economic paradigm could be argued to be a manifestation of our desires. It could also be argued that our modern cultures have been blinded by the capitalist narrative, to have more, to produce and consume in order to succeed. Where is the success in destroying the life giving properties this amazing planet offers?
Thank you for this extremely informative discussion. One essential continuing use for fossil fuels that I didn't hear either of you mention in this video is to safely maintain (cool) the nuclear fuel in the reactors at the world's 400+ nuclear power plants.
so glad to find this sort of discussion back after the closing of ; the oil drum; (i haven't found a way to use quotation-marks on my new-secondhand laptop yet ...)
Excellent content. I work in the energy efficiency field, and I look forward to hearing something closer to the truth and farther from ideology (and maybe even religion) of the typical framing and proposed solutions.
It is never all or nothing. Eliminate fossil fuels for transport. Eliminate fossil fuels powering the grid. Eliminate all single use plastics from fossil fuels. Do these 3, then let's conduct a review of fossil fuel usage.
Great podcast and some great thoughts on energy and the balance of our ecosystems. I agree with the energy density challenges with renewables, not to mention the higher real costs and intermittency issues. We only have to look at Germany and Europe to understand that the cost of energy to their citizens has gotten out of hand, even before Russia/Ukraine. With respect to shale gas and oil production, I think Peak Oil advocates have surely been surprised (if not disappointed) at the positive impact to production these new plays have had, at in fact, lower cost than conventional plays. It took some time to prove up, but even the major oil companies today acknowledge the competitive economics and other advantages of these plays versus conventional plays around the world. Yes, decline and depletion of wells has always been an issue, but I think Art failed to acknowledge the massive increase to the resource base that has been generated by the application of old technologies to new resource shale plays. Yes, we have made a bigger straw, but the tank did get a whole lot bigger...exponentially so. Art has been a naysayer on shale plays since the early days of the Barnett, and while there have been challenges for producers financially from the creation of oversupply, a more disciplined approach will not only make these plays more financially and environmentally sustainable, but improve the longevity of the resource. I also believe that technology and innovation offers the opportunity to develop more competitive options for future energy than the current renewable line up can offer (which I agree with you and Art, renewables don't work because of lower energy density and therefore higher costs). What we must be careful about is the cost of energy to society...when it gets too high, there will be social unrest caused by an onset of moving the poverty line in the wrong direction...not to mention the 2-3 billion people in the world who do not have access to modern energy today. I am hopeful we will prevail, but I do take seriously the concept of overshooting you talk about and we need to consider that also.
@Wayne Thickett We absolutely do get positive net energy from renewables. That's not the question - the issue is can declining net energy from fossil hydrocarbons in any combination w renewables continue to support the amount of financial claims upon them. And beyond that how can we use remaining fossil fuels/minerals towards some self-perpetuating system - which will undoubtedly include technology - just what type and at what scale. thanks for comment.
@@thegreatsimplification Thanks Nate. It does feel like there should be a positive eroei on renewables, maybe Simon Michaux is talking about the intermittency when he says it’s negative. And yes as you say if we reached peak oil in 2018 and as Art says, the economy is energy, then we are going to start seeing problems. And well, the world economy looks perfectly ok from where I’m sitting 😳…
@@winthorpe2560 there absolutely is positive EROI on renewables. The issue is whether the system wide EROI (of more expensive FF and more complex/intermittent renewables) a) is enough to power this size/scale civilization and more urgently b)whether its enough to generate the income stream necessary to service/maintain societies financial claims
It is never all or nothing. Eliminate fossil fuels for transport. Eliminate fossil fuels powering the grid. Eliminate all single use plastics from fossil fuels. Do these 3, then let's conduct a review of fossil fuel usage.
28:40 oil being created very slowly inside the earth. It's my understanding that the conditions that created oil millions of years ago no longer exist.
Renewable energy isn't new, but the same old energy that was used before hydrocarbon fossil fuels. There isn't anything to replace fossil fuels. Talking in circles is what's left.
@@johnmitchell2741 What I believe we are seeing is the end of the growth in oil production. The golden age of growth has been empowered by high quality, high availability, energy. And what we are seeing is that the availability and range of quality is constraining. We grew, but the earth did not. Now the milkshake makes a sucking sound.
Don't worry, look abiotic oil up. We probably just need to give it some time to regenerate, the geological views of most of these people are based on old ideas rather than hard fact, and the probability that oil is a mineral constantly generated by earth is very very high. These doom and gloom predictions have been going on for decades.
Sorry to say that but honestly in my opinion Renewable energy will work only and only if humanity in the world were less than a million people not with billion humans.
Latest desperate plan being seeded in the minds of UK populace is the 50 year mortgage. Can you imagine borrowing from the depleted world 50 years hence, in the face of such poor judgement I need to hear things that make sense to me and this all does. Thanks
That's definitely not true that humans always had a psychology to grow. Stone Age Economies by anthropologist Marshall Sahlins shows that hunter gatherers very much aware of the size of their economy and had social mechanisms to prevent over population and resource extraction.
you can try to figure out what went wrong with the World like Art or you can plan for the Ends Times and be a smart prepper- I rec stockpiling canned soup in caches around the US and buy donkeys [horses are too expensive]. Learn how shear sheep and to repair cars and how to communicate with smoke signals. Stockpile Campbells soup and can openers. Disclosure: I own stock in Campbells.
As someone educated in science & who was around & about in the 1970s it has been like 'screaming in a box' ever since because of the general ignorance of the inevitable consequences of our profligacy with these 'one time' resources!
@Nate Hagens fair enough and true overall. But wanted to add that this plant vegetation in the form of algae here in east Texas has contributed to both oil and coal. At least this is what I remember being told in the 80s in petroleum geology at UTD.
You're one of the only people that thinks like I do. I can't stand the insanity of the American way of life. The insanity that too much oil consumption brings. Richard Heinberg said, "People will look back and say, "Who WERE those people???"" One of James Kunstler's guests: (Can't remember who right now), said, "There's such a thing as too much energy" We're living proof of too much energy usage.
Unless you have lived the life of someone from Africa, Eastern Europe and South America where they required physical and social skills to thrive in the extreme environments with just tertiary education as a bonus to adapt to environment shortages, I am very certain that no human whom is a Northerner above the temporal region(North America and Europe) can physically survive the energy constraint environment. This doesn't even include climate change shifts that will radically change the consumption behavior of Northern democratic nations that require prior energy content just to maintain declined standard of living.
if you're asking for references, each podcast has thorough show notes and references underneath the podcast link. In this case Art also created a powerpoint referencing his key points: www.thegreatsimplification.com/episode/03-arthurberman
Ffs. It is never all or nothing. Eliminate fossil fuels for transport. Eliminate fossil fuels powering the grid. Eliminate all single use plastics from fossil fuels. Do these 3, then let's conduct a review of fossil fuel usage.
Jeff sounds smart, but he's been so wrong for so long it's laughable. This guy just can't call anything right. Shamelessly calling out doom and gloom despite being completely disproven by real world outcomes and events must be a pretty good grift.
Likewise I came to this via Daniel Schmachtenberger. I would like to know what the known reserves of Thorium translate to in human energy unit equivalents. Small modular reactors come some way towards the ease of energy distribution comparison with oil. We should be able to mine thorium using thorium energy. Conversion to hydrogen energy equivalents that may mean a 60% hit in efficiency but lessens that distribution of energy comparison with oil. Again with an efficiency hit we have the technology to use reactors powered by thorium that can refine seawater into aviation fuel. Our cargo ships can be retrofitted to do this whilst transporting our goods. The Chinese are spending billions on this R&D and in the same way as perhaps the USA saved the day in 1945, China may be seen to have saved the day in 2045? Time will tell.
If we had access to that kind of energy ("jet fuel from seawater"), than our environmental problems would be far worse. The problem is the scale of the human economy as a complex system, which grow proportional to the quantity and quality of energy available to them. Counterintuitively, inefficiencies might actually serve as negative feedback loops that limit the scaling capacity of growth.
20% is a tiny amount? trust me solve the tiny twenty percent problem and the rest of the dominoes will fall \it is the most logical first step. By replacing 1.5 billion vehicles a day will solve the farming problem and will definitely solve or at the very least lead to a pathway to dramatically reduce the output and production of the externalized costs. I really do not believe that production of turbine blades is comparable to burning fuels in a combustion engine. Sure Oil is used in many processes, but burning it or its reductions is the root cause. You make the erroneous claim that Energy is Oil, Oil is one method to generate energy and Energy typically is Electrical, i can assure you that No One burns a barrel of Oil to power the blender or stove except by proxy. Electricity is NOT exclusive to Oil. our history has been altered by insertion of that claim that Oil is Energy. My Cadillac gets 300 million years per mile whereas my Tesla gets it from the Sun right now.
In essence, we are a jackass species (pardon). For about 100,000 years we were barbarians, stateless peoples, with lots of energy, fire, resources, infinite in a sense. The last 5000 years we as species expanded preposterously, thanks of more energy (food, fuels, water, better tech, mobility etc etc) Now 100 years later it's almost game over. Oil, Gas or Twigs or solar panels or windmills, we have gone way over biophysical limits. 8 billion people heading towards 9. The great simplification would be a gradual collapse, says hard-science. Back to how it was 100,000 years ago, or worse?
14:53 - 15:17 this is what "peak oil" is really about which is the decline of cheap easily recovered oil. "Peak oil" is not about running out of oil absolutely it's about the decline of cheap oil which has been the catalyst of economic growth in the last 100 years.
Which is what the banksters and wallstreet have been trying to cover up with their financial f*ckery for the past 14 years
It's unfortunately, that 'cheap oil' & financial chicanery that has allowed our 'continual growth' environmentaly destructive economies to exist. It's going to be a very rude awakening, living within our means, on renewable power, in that new world...
Some energy experts in Canada (are also anti-fossil fuels) say that willy nilly Oil, Gas and all such non-renewables will continue dominating till the end of 2099.
Found your podcast through Daniel Schmachtenberger. I've loved everything I've heard so far! Paradoxically, it's a a relief to hear these more realistic analyses on the important issues of our time instead of the often bright eyed but less thought out perspectives that seem to be common.
I also found him through Daniel. They're doing great work!
Same, same, same! Nate and Daniel are top of my list man.
Found through Daniel!
As a young working class person in Canada my standard of living is comparable to 1950s Canada. We are already rolling back.
better that way .. why? Because the Age of Exuberance is over. Not just for Canadians, but the rest of the world also...
When you have privilege, equality feels like oppression
The most impactful part of this conversation for me is when Art explains how he maintains his composure, given the chaos we face in the future. His response was so refreshingly realistic and balanced. Most people will freak out, but those of us who, for whatever reason, anticipated the unraveling of the carbon pulse, can strive to be strong, composed, and help lead the way forward. That's the best we can hope for.
Your podcasts Nate are amazing. all of them. thank you. In the same time and i apologize for such a sad note, but looking at the number of views, its so depressing. millions should be watching them. to learn the truth to start to care. a lot of millions.
I totally agree that's why we're doomed as a species,and we'll be taken all the other species with us💀☠
I think the creator(s) of this and similar contents actively approach decision-makers on higher levels too, so they try to achieve a deeper and substantial reaction. But of course it's debatable what we as individuals can do to make the possible outcomes a bit more positive (besides working on our local social connections and improving our community, which in itself is very difficult).
Thank you very much for bringing to light these important issues. I hope that soon most of us will begin to understand reality through an objective study of it and not through suffering its consequences. From experience, we inhabitants of the global south know a lot about it. Thank you Nate for your excellent work.
Wow, this needs to be on everyone's mind!
So true: We need to be satisfied with "having enough," to be realistic. Physics trumps preferences. Oil depletion catastrophes will lead to behavioral change. Uncertainty is the nature of the universe. Art expresses the de facto Stoic distinction between what is in our control, and what is outside our control. Need to know the truth....supere aude, indeed! May we all Dare to Know. Thank you!
Thanks for putting this summary together. I hope everybody listens through to the last couple of minutes.
great info on how we got here....what energy is and what it did for us,,,but,,i differ on the future, i believe your way too optimistic..damage has been done to the world that gives us life and woe to us in the very near future...
Hi Nate ; as usual a great input. The big problem is we do not prepare ourselves to the economic degrowth that we are going to face due to the 2 walls in front of us (scarcity of energy and of raw materials) . And we need to stop fossil fuels which implies automatically a degrowth of the economy. Are we going as a civilization to solve those equations without wars ? Let's struggle for this. Thank you for your high contribution for helping to understand the whole picture of the challenge.
Great interview and insights coming forth - I agree with Art about the desire for more growth and denial of the end of growth stems from a deep psychological / organismic desires for ever expanding life. In chasing these subconscious and conscious desires, we are effectively pushing the limits of where our organism can extend. The current mainstream economic paradigm could be argued to be a manifestation of our desires. It could also be argued that our modern cultures have been blinded by the capitalist narrative, to have more, to produce and consume in order to succeed. Where is the success in destroying the life giving properties this amazing planet offers?
Great discussion, thank you! Please get out for a run, hike, weight train, bike...move your body, you will feel better!
unless you have a herniated disc and sciatica , you have my permission to lay on the porch 🐕
Thank you for this extremely informative discussion. One essential continuing use for fossil fuels that I didn't hear either of you mention in this video is to safely maintain (cool) the nuclear fuel in the reactors at the world's 400+ nuclear power plants.
Excellent and thank you. I am looking forward to part II.
so glad to find this sort of discussion back after the closing of ; the oil drum; (i haven't found a way to use quotation-marks on my new-secondhand laptop yet ...)
44:40 being satisfied with enough
Excellent, people must learn everything discussed here. Less is more-circumstances will dictate.
Thanks so much for that. Quite a cliffhanger of a topic that Art left us with, hope you can do a follow up soon!
Good job, very nice job. Thank You
Excellent content. I work in the energy efficiency field, and I look forward to hearing something closer to the truth and farther from ideology (and maybe even religion) of the typical framing and proposed solutions.
It is never all or nothing.
Eliminate fossil fuels for transport.
Eliminate fossil fuels powering the grid.
Eliminate all single use plastics from fossil fuels.
Do these 3, then let's conduct a review of fossil fuel usage.
Great podcast and some great thoughts on energy and the balance of our ecosystems. I agree with the energy density challenges with renewables, not to mention the higher real costs and intermittency issues. We only have to look at Germany and Europe to understand that the cost of energy to their citizens has gotten out of hand, even before Russia/Ukraine.
With respect to shale gas and oil production, I think Peak Oil advocates have surely been surprised (if not disappointed) at the positive impact to production these new plays have had, at in fact, lower cost than conventional plays. It took some time to prove up, but even the major oil companies today acknowledge the competitive economics and other advantages of these plays versus conventional plays around the world. Yes, decline and depletion of wells has always been an issue, but I think Art failed to acknowledge the massive increase to the resource base that has been generated by the application of old technologies to new resource shale plays. Yes, we have made a bigger straw, but the tank did get a whole lot bigger...exponentially so. Art has been a naysayer on shale plays since the early days of the Barnett, and while there have been challenges for producers financially from the creation of oversupply, a more disciplined approach will not only make these plays more financially and environmentally sustainable, but improve the longevity of the resource.
I also believe that technology and innovation offers the opportunity to develop more competitive options for future energy than the current renewable line up can offer (which I agree with you and Art, renewables don't work because of lower energy density and therefore higher costs). What we must be careful about is the cost of energy to society...when it gets too high, there will be social unrest caused by an onset of moving the poverty line in the wrong direction...not to mention the 2-3 billion people in the world who do not have access to modern energy today. I am hopeful we will prevail, but I do take seriously the concept of overshooting you talk about and we need to consider that also.
A really detailed and interesting entry, thank you! :)
Great👍👏🌹 episode, thank❤🌹🙏 you, Arthur and Nate! Eye-opening information... 😢😊
BRILLIANT PRESENTATION
FOR SOMEONE WHO KNOWS NOTHING
WOW
THANKYOU
everyone should listen to this. Revelatory and scarier than nuclear war
obviously you haven't watched some of the latest reports on climate change,and how fast it's coming to a coast line near you
I'd pay a small subscription fee to get transcripts. So many great quotes.
*YES*
*GRATITUDE*
Great video. We really need to know if we get net energy out of renewables otherwise it’s completely bonkers to continue building them.
@Wayne Thickett We absolutely do get positive net energy from renewables. That's not the question - the issue is can declining net energy from fossil hydrocarbons in any combination w renewables continue to support the amount of financial claims upon them. And beyond that how can we use remaining fossil fuels/minerals towards some self-perpetuating system - which will undoubtedly include technology - just what type and at what scale. thanks for comment.
@@thegreatsimplification Thanks Nate. It does feel like there should be a positive eroei on renewables, maybe Simon Michaux is talking about the intermittency when he says it’s negative. And yes as you say if we reached peak oil in 2018 and as Art says, the economy is energy, then we are going to start seeing problems. And well, the world economy looks perfectly ok from where I’m sitting 😳…
@@winthorpe2560 there absolutely is positive EROI on renewables. The issue is whether the system wide EROI (of more expensive FF and more complex/intermittent renewables) a) is enough to power this size/scale civilization and more urgently b)whether its enough to generate the income stream necessary to service/maintain societies financial claims
It is never all or nothing.
Eliminate fossil fuels for transport.
Eliminate fossil fuels powering the grid.
Eliminate all single use plastics from fossil fuels.
Do these 3, then let's conduct a review of fossil fuel usage.
28:40 oil being created very slowly inside the earth. It's my understanding that the conditions that created oil millions of years ago no longer exist.
Renewable energy isn't new, but the same old energy that was used before hydrocarbon fossil fuels. There isn't anything to replace fossil fuels. Talking in circles is what's left.
Love it! I'll spare you the puns on drilling for info...💐
10 years..... wow, that is very very bad news
aw you probable won't have to worry .. I'd be more concerned about a nuclear exchange between a few country's first..just saying
@@johnmitchell2741 What I believe we are seeing is the end of the growth in oil production. The golden age of growth has been empowered by high quality, high availability, energy. And what we are seeing is that the availability and range of quality is constraining. We grew, but the earth did not. Now the milkshake makes a sucking sound.
Don't worry, look abiotic oil up. We probably just need to give it some time to regenerate, the geological views of most of these people are based on old ideas rather than hard fact, and the probability that oil is a mineral constantly generated by earth is very very high. These doom and gloom predictions have been going on for decades.
Sorry to say that but honestly in my opinion Renewable energy will work only and only if humanity in the world were less than a million people not with billion humans.
Latest desperate plan being seeded in the minds of UK populace is the 50 year mortgage. Can you imagine borrowing from the depleted world 50 years hence, in the face of such poor judgement I need to hear things that make sense to me and this all does. Thanks
That's definitely not true that humans always had a psychology to grow. Stone Age Economies by anthropologist Marshall Sahlins shows that hunter gatherers very much aware of the size of their economy and had social mechanisms to prevent over population and resource extraction.
you can try to figure out what went wrong with the World like Art or you can plan for the Ends Times and be a smart prepper- I rec stockpiling canned soup in caches around the US and buy donkeys [horses are too expensive]. Learn how shear sheep and to repair cars and how to communicate with smoke signals. Stockpile Campbells soup and can openers. Disclosure: I own stock in Campbells.
Why do we extract shale oil if it is useless?
As someone educated in science & who was around & about in the 1970s it has been like 'screaming in a box' ever since because of the general ignorance of the inevitable consequences of our profligacy with these 'one time' resources!
More more more
I think that in addition to marine and other species making fossil energy, plant vegetation also added to this. Like animals, plants contain carbon.
Coal yes. Vast majority of oil comes from old oceans/seas
@Nate Hagens fair enough and true overall. But wanted to add that this plant vegetation in the form of algae here in east Texas has contributed to both oil and coal. At least this is what I remember being told in the 80s in petroleum geology at UTD.
Ok--I think you were talking about Oil Shale being useless---sorry--listened to it again.
Gran Tierra energy GTE on the NYSE or LSE
I hope we're running out soon...
You're one of the only people that thinks like I do. I can't stand the insanity of the American way of life. The insanity that too much oil consumption brings.
Richard Heinberg said, "People will look back and say, "Who WERE those people???""
One of James Kunstler's guests: (Can't remember who right now), said, "There's such a thing as too much energy"
We're living proof of too much energy usage.
oh it's gonna be exciting that's for dam sure
Unless you have lived the life of someone from Africa, Eastern Europe and South America where they required physical and social skills to thrive in the extreme environments with just tertiary education as a bonus to adapt to environment shortages, I am very certain that no human whom is a Northerner above the temporal region(North America and Europe) can physically survive the energy constraint environment. This doesn't even include climate change shifts that will radically change the consumption behavior of Northern democratic nations that require prior energy content just to maintain declined standard of living.
@@georgeokello8620 Do you think "Northerners" are some sort of different species from the rest of the world?
His voice sound a lot like Merrick Garland's
He's far more intelligent than Merrick Garland.
As I’m watching this I would like to know some scientific facts about this prod casting?
if you're asking for references, each podcast has thorough show notes and references underneath the podcast link. In this case Art also created a powerpoint referencing his key points: www.thegreatsimplification.com/episode/03-arthurberman
Ffs. It is never all or nothing. Eliminate fossil fuels for transport.
Eliminate fossil fuels powering the grid.
Eliminate all single use plastics from fossil fuels.
Do these 3, then let's conduct a review of fossil fuel usage.
Good luck. Let us know how it goes. In the real world the economy could not function with your proposals.
Jeff sounds smart, but he's been so wrong for so long it's laughable. This guy just can't call anything right. Shamelessly calling out doom and gloom despite being completely disproven by real world outcomes and events must be a pretty good grift.
Likewise I came to this via Daniel Schmachtenberger. I would like to know what the known reserves of Thorium translate to in human energy unit equivalents. Small modular reactors come some way towards the ease of energy distribution comparison with oil. We should be able to mine thorium using thorium energy. Conversion to hydrogen energy equivalents that may mean a 60% hit in efficiency but lessens that distribution of energy comparison with oil. Again with an efficiency hit we have the technology to use reactors powered by thorium that can refine seawater into aviation fuel. Our cargo ships can be retrofitted to do this whilst transporting our goods. The Chinese are spending billions on this R&D and in the same way as perhaps the USA saved the day in 1945, China may be seen to have saved the day in 2045? Time will tell.
If we had access to that kind of energy ("jet fuel from seawater"), than our environmental problems would be far worse. The problem is the scale of the human economy as a complex system, which grow proportional to the quantity and quality of energy available to them. Counterintuitively, inefficiencies might actually serve as negative feedback loops that limit the scaling capacity of growth.
@@zeamaiz945 we will probably find out sooner or later. Chinese are spending billions on it.
20% is a tiny amount? trust me solve the tiny twenty percent problem and the rest of the dominoes will fall
\it is the most logical first step. By replacing 1.5 billion vehicles a day will solve the farming problem and will definitely solve or at the very least lead to a pathway to dramatically reduce the output and production of the externalized costs. I really do not believe that production of turbine blades is comparable to burning fuels in a combustion engine. Sure Oil is used in many processes, but burning it or its reductions is the root cause.
You make the erroneous claim that Energy is Oil, Oil is one method to generate energy and Energy typically is Electrical, i can assure you that No One burns a barrel of Oil to power the blender or stove except by proxy. Electricity is NOT exclusive to Oil. our history has been altered by insertion of that claim that Oil is Energy.
My Cadillac gets 300 million years per mile whereas my Tesla gets it from the Sun right now.
your Cadillac gets 300 million years per mile.what does that even mean ?????
@@johnmitchell2741
how long does it take to make "oil"?
In essence, we are a jackass species (pardon). For about 100,000 years we were barbarians, stateless peoples, with lots of energy, fire, resources, infinite in a sense.
The last 5000 years we as species expanded preposterously, thanks of more energy (food, fuels, water, better tech, mobility etc etc) Now 100 years later it's almost game over. Oil, Gas or Twigs or solar panels or windmills, we have gone way over biophysical limits. 8 billion people heading towards 9. The great simplification would be a gradual collapse, says hard-science. Back to how it was 100,000 years ago, or worse?