Crash Course: Chapter 17a – Peak Oil (2 of 2) by Chris Martenson

Posted by admin on October 19th, 2009 and filed under oil production peak | 21 Comments »

Chapter 17a – Peak Oil (2 of 2): Energy is the lifeblood of any economy and a steady supply of energy is necessary to maintain the status quo, while an ever-increasing supply is needed to grow an economy. In this chapter, Dr. Chris Martenson explains that Peak Oil is not a theory, rather it is a description of how oil production increases over time, reaches a peak, then declines. Evidence points to a global production peak in the near future, which is troubling since the U.S. imports two-thirds of its oil and relies on it to much of its transportation and food production needs.

http://www.chrismartenson.com

Duration : 0:10:6


[youtube uoFTNurAcws]

21 Responses

  1. MrCoolwater23 Says:

    I have been getting …
    I have been getting all my advice from the OTCSP newsletter.. check it out at authoropen . com

  2. leofrankfurter Says:

    Damm I needs to get …
    Damm I needs to get me hundreds of slaves.

  3. florgat91 Says:

    this is myth – …
    this is myth – there is plenty of oil left in Alaska !

  4. steadydecline Says:

    I don’t use oil. I …
    I don’t use oil. I use pixie dust.

  5. freepress666 Says:

    now you can see the …
    now you can see the reason for the Georgia guild stones, if you take worlds population down to 500,000,000 then demand goes down wait i didn’t put those stones up there I’m telling what they say, google them for yourself and read your future

  6. quuaa1 Says:

    Did you actually do …
    Did you actually do some research into SECOND generation ethanol? Look it up then tell me I’m wrong. Tar sands are actually profitable down to $40/barrel. Then below that they start losing money. Syncrude raked in a $17 Billion profit last quarter.

  7. Greyshark09 Says:

    quuaa1, there are …
    quuaa1, there are some issues i would like to underline:
    1. ethanol is not a good substitute due to poor energy yield of the fermentation process, meaning that you would get quite little energy at the end as ethanol from large biomass. In this sense biodiesel is a much better solution, but also not ideal since it consumes ethanol in some quantity.
    2. As pointed before – tar sands, while containing huge amounts of world oil, are very expensive to extract and not profitable below 100$ a barell.

  8. quuaa1 Says:

    There’s also more R …
    There’s also more R&D on new forms of underground mining, to access the oil buried deep underground, to have machines essentially tunnelling to get at the stuff buried deep underground. The people making these decisions don’t think of it as energy consumed to energy produced. They’re more concerned with cost/benefit. If it’s not profitable, they wouldn’t be doing it. They’re also concerned about the quantity of goods they can recover and export, that’s why massive machines are used, more oil.

  9. quuaa1 Says:

    There’s technology …
    There’s technology out there which separates the oil from the sand in the ground, and all they need to do is pipe it back to the plant. Other technology is in development, which is basically a massive machine that mines the tar sand out, separates the sand from the bitumen, pipes the oil back to plant site and dumps the sand behind. It’s still in the experimental stages and they’re working out bugs right now. The Chinese are conducting R&D on some new technology which I hear is pretty impressive

  10. bdist Says:

    Have you ever …
    Have you ever thought of the rate it can be extracted? Thought about how much energy is used to get it out of the ground and make fuel out of it? Read up on ERoEI. Your governement is giving tax incentives to the oil business…

    With todays technologies & oil price only 10% of the deposits are recoverable = 0.17 to 0.25 Trillion. Which the world would use up in 4 – 7 years if Canada was the sole supplier.

  11. bdist Says:

    It is a poor …
    It is a poor substitute because yes – it is limited by the amount of garbage! And all other sources of bio material that you can make ethanol from. The amount of energy in oil is simply incredible. The energy return on energy invested on ethanol is low. It is getting lower for oil as well. It’s quite poor in tar sands fxp.

  12. quuaa1 Says:

    Last thing, again, …
    Last thing, again, I don’t know where you heard that, but we have 1.7 – 2.5 Trillion (with a “Tee”) barrels of oil. We have more oil here than in all of the middle east. “Drop in the bucket”?!?

  13. quuaa1 Says:

    I don’t see how …
    I don’t see how second generation ethanol is a poor substitute. It makes all the sense in the world to me, garbage in, ethanol out, the limit is not how much garbage there is, but how much ethanol they can process at a time. That’s when the industry would expand. I don’t know where you get your information from, but the trees we remove in most cases just get transplanted to recovered areas. I’ve personally seen areas that have been mined out, and have been restored, they look fine.

  14. bdist Says:

    Hi quuaa1, even …
    Hi quuaa1, even second gen ethanol is a very poor substitute for oil.

    I know where Canada get it’s oil from – tar sands. Oil stored under your borreal forest, one of the last three in the world. You replace the forest with toxic waste lakes and party on. Horrible.

    Even if you would take all the oil out of the ground and lay waste to all of your wildlife & pristine nature the amount of oil you can bring to market is but a drop in the bucket.

    It cannot offset the inevitable production decline.

  15. quuaa1 Says:

    What about second …
    What about second generation ethanol? Ethanol from garbage or otherwise any biomass? Fusion obviously isn’t a viable option today, but eventually if someone does make it work then it would be an impressive energy source.

    BTW, if foreign dictators are the reason you don’t like oil. Buy your oil from us (Canada) we have all the oil you could ever need!!

  16. bdist Says:

    There isn’t enough …
    There isn’t enough landmass available to grow both bio fuels & food. Biofuels are not the answer & never will be.

    Fusion currently consumes more energy than it produces. It might become viable in the future, but it is not an option in the coming 10-20 years were we really need it.

    The losses in transmission is a lot less than what we need to replace oil, that is, even with perfect transmission we still wouldn’t have enough electricity.

    Best option right now = DRASTIC reduction in usage, today

  17. quuaa1 Says:

    There’s new options …
    There’s new options for turning biomass into ethanol, which could take a chunk of the petroleum usage. Research has long been done on Fusion, one person in B.C (Canada) has even made a working model in his garage. Whether there’s any truth to it, I can’t say, but if it does work out, electricity could be a new energy source. Also, given that most of the electricity produced doesn’t make it to consumer (losses) if someone made a near perfect transmission method, we’d have a LOT more energy.

  18. AnUnlawfulPlot Says:

    Its working now.. …
    Its working now..Great Vid’s

  19. ChrisMartensondotcom Says:

    Please try again. …
    Please try again. It seems to be working fine now! :)

  20. AnUnlawfulPlot Says:

    why is this video …
    why is this video not working..what a bummer!

  21. UnderseaCaveman Says:

    66% of petroleum …
    66% of petroleum goes into light trucks and small vehicles….
    20% goes into food production…
    This implies a great deal of light truck and small vehicle use (plus heavy trucks and aviation……absurd but true) is used to transport FOOD!

Leave a Comment

Please note: Comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment. There is no need to resubmit your comment.