The Day After Oil: Alternatives and Solutions

  • Thread starter Thread starter estro
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Oil
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the reliance of modern civilization on three essential liquids: water, beer, and oil, highlighting the challenges posed by dwindling oil resources. While nuclear power is suggested as an alternative for electricity, concerns arise regarding its applicability in transportation and food industries, which heavily depend on oil. The conversation acknowledges the existence of viable alternatives but emphasizes that oil remains the most cost-effective option for transport, despite rising prices. The potential crisis is underscored, with fears that escalating food costs due to expensive oil could lead to global conflict, particularly affecting poorer nations. The need for increased funding in alternative transport and fuel research is stressed, as well as the influence of corporate interests on sustainability efforts. The discussion also touches on the finite nature of resources like nickel for batteries, questioning the long-term viability of electric vehicles. Overall, the thread reflects a sense of urgency for sustainable solutions while critiquing the current reliance on oil and the obstacles posed by corporate greed.

The day after oil?


  • Total voters
    30
estro
Messages
239
Reaction score
0
Its not a secret that the human race runs on 3 essential liquids; water, beer and oil.
Mother nature gifts us the first, we know how to cook the second but the third is somewhat problematic.

What alternatives we have now, nuclear power for electricity? But what will happen in the transportation industry or the food industry which is highly depended on oil?

For many years now we talk about electrical and some kind of hybrid cars [but what about airplanes], although I don't think these are adequate long term solutions.

I think we are intelligent enough and have the time to avoid apocalyptic scenario, or maybe I'm wrong?

[Edit] How can I edit the poll? [I've made a typo]
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
We already have viable alternatives, and as far as oil usage is concerned it's a problem sure, but it's far from critical (ie we aren't just going to run out) it's just getting more expensive. Currently it's still the cheapest and most viable solution for transport.

More funding to alternative transport/fuel research means we will get it quicker. Simple.
 
estro said:
Its not a secret that the human race runs on 3 essential liquids; water, beer and oil.
Mother nature gifts us the first, we know how to cook the second but the third is somewhat problematic.

Actually, usable fresh water is as big a problem as oil. Except, in the case of water, the problem is that the water always seems to be in the places that don't need it and never in the places that really need it.

In any event, human history is filled with civilizations that progressed to a new level, only fall back into a more primitive level. During those first decades before the rules of new culture have been etched in stone, it isn't that hard for that particular civilization to fragment into parts too small to maintain the whole.

There's no reason to think that a post-industrial culture is so different from any culture that has come before that we're exempt from the possibility of fragmenting into more primitive cultures.
 
The crisis will hit us actually long before the oil will run out, imagine how the food price will skyrocket when oil gets too expensive. This will bring chaos to many poor countries not before long the whole world can be ignited into conflict. Or maybe I'm to dramatic here?
 
I think it's something like 10 hydrocarbon calories per 1 "food" calorie consumed, so I don't think you're being overly dramatic.
 
We have the alternatives but the corporate bigwigs only want more money, not a sustainable planet. The USA is such a big player, but earn so much money from their wells that they want to keep them going. solar needs a decade or so to become a major source that is highly efficient. Nuclear is very "green" unless a mistake happens. the other problem is that the Chinese have a lot of coal and will make money on that. I sure hope that a Major government think about the Earth before their wallets.
watch the movie "the story of stuff" please
sorry that this is so opinionated, BT
 
brother time said:
We have the alternatives but the corporate bigwigs only want more money, not a sustainable planet. The USA is such a big player, but earn so much money from their wells that they want to keep them going. solar needs a decade or so to become a major source that is highly efficient. Nuclear is very "green" unless a mistake happens. the other problem is that the Chinese have a lot of coal and will make money on that. I sure hope that a Major government think about the Earth before their wallets.
watch the movie "the story of stuff" please
sorry that this is so opinionated, BT

You mean we do have an alternative to oil and it's products?
So we can put it into our planes and automobiles and keep going?
I'm not so sure.
 
It's electricity. Given the funding the car car and oil companies have, we could probably produce a battery that could do the job. Look at the cap that Obama put on oil spill costs: 75 million, I don't think so. 1 billion is more like it. They are wrecking the planet with our greed.
cheers, BT
 
Don't forget batteries are made of nickel, and like oil nickel is finite.
 
  • #10
I selected the second option, but the reality will likely be somewhere between the second and first (but closer to the second).
 
  • #11
I agree with Russ
 

Similar threads

Back
Top