End Of Oil Is Near--What Next?

[Vmedvil2]

1 hour ago, ArthurSmith said:

I happen to live in France. We currently have an oversupply of nuclear energy though, due to demand fluctuations, the net average contribution is around 71% as one drawback of nuclear is the slow response time to change in demand.

Well, I hope you French people can get the Germans to understand that there is little other choice than nuclear for a sustainable and net zero emissions economy. As Merkel and the Germans have been bitching about nuclear for years now and how much they hate it, on a baseless idea that nuclear is dangerous and bad.

Edited January 11 by VictorMedvil

[ArthurSmith]

4 minutes ago, VictorMedvil said:

Well, I hope you French people can get the Germans to understand that there is little other choice than nuclear for a sustainable and net zero emissions economy. As Merkle and the Germans have been bitching about nuclear for years now and how much they hate it, on a baseless idea that nuclear is dangerous and bad.

It's Olaf Scholz now. They're making great strides with wind and solar. And buying nuclear energy from France.

[Vmedvil2]

On 1/11/2022 at 11:13 AM, ArthurSmith said:

 And buying nuclear energy from France.

The grand solution to not using nuclear power is to buy nuclear power from your neighbors, brilliant. I wish I could be as smart as the Germans and mooch off my neighbors because of my beliefs.

Edited January 12 by VictorMedvil

[ArthurSmith]

4 minutes ago, VictorMedvil said:

The grand solution to not using nuclear power is to buy nuclear power from your neighbors, brilliant. I wish I could be as smart as the Germans and mooch off my neighbors because of my beliefs.

Especially when overproduction means it gets sold at a discount.

Edited January 12 by ArthurSmith

[OceanBreeze]

On 1/11/2022 at 11:13 PM, ArthurSmith said:

It's Olaf Scholz now. They're making great strides with wind and solar. And buying nuclear energy from France.

I doubt that will go on much longer:

QUOTE

France's Fessenheim nuclear plant, for years the focus of anti-nuclear protests, has been switched off after more than four decades.

The divisive plant near the borders of Germany and Switzerland produced 70% of the Alsace region's energy needs.

Fessenheim's closure raises questions over how the energy gap will be filled and what will happen to local jobs.

France has pledged to reduce its reliance on nuclear power by shutting down 12 nuclear reactors by 2035.

The country relies on nuclear energy for 70% of its electricity, a figure that will be cut to half over the next 15 years.

UNQUOTE

Source: France shutting down nuclear reactors - Bing

[ArthurSmith]

7 hours ago, OceanBreeze said:

I doubt that will go on much longer

That's the snag with real life. There's no control to the experiment. Climate change is happening and I doubt there's enough time for humanity to affect the change. I'd love to be wrong for the sake of future generations.

[OceanBreeze]

2 hours ago, ArthurSmith said:

That's the snag with real life. There's no control to the experiment. Climate change is happening and I doubt there's enough time for humanity to affect the change. I'd love to be wrong for the sake of future generations.

I don't believe humanity has any way to affect the change, which has been happening in cycles for millions of years. But I am fairly certain we have the means to adapt to it. There may be many advantages to the Antarctic continent becoming at least partially ice-free. Who can say what minerals and other valuable treasures we may find there, not to mention increased land mass for human settlement. Also, an ice-free North may be very beneficial for shipping. I doubt very much if all of the ice will ever disappear, and if history is correct, it will all return with the next cold cycle in a few thousand years.

[ArthurSmith]

28 minutes ago, OceanBreeze said:

I don't believe humanity has any way to affect the change, which has been happening in cycles for millions of years.

Unfortunately, I agree. By the time it it is obvious to all that the changes are happening now and chaotic, not cyclical, it will be too late. It is, in my view, already too late but I sincerely hope I'm wrong.

30 minutes ago, OceanBreeze said:

But I am fairly certain we have the means to adapt to it.

And I sincerely hope you are right. Just in case, I've chosen to live at an elevation of 280m. Coastal dwellers, pacific island nations, New Yorkers may need other plans.

 

32 minutes ago, OceanBreeze said:

There may be many advantages to the Antarctic continent becoming at least partially ice-free. Who can say what minerals and other valuable treasures we may find there, not to mention increased land mass for human settlement. Also, an ice-free North may be very beneficial for shipping. I doubt very much if all of the ice will ever disappear, and if history is correct, it will all return with the next cold cycle in a few thousand years.

Well, again, lets hope you are right. The problem is life is an experiment without a null hypothesis, there is no way to revers the time variable. The annoying thing for me is that so many things we can do to reduce carbon emissions, pollution, habitat destruction and so on would be worth doing anyway if Climate Change were a myth.

[Vmedvil5]

The Human species could survive 100,000 years without fossil fuels and it isn't going to happen now, link = https://www.yahoo.com/news/meps-object-including-gas-nuclear-120520943.html

[clim]

On 1/13/2022 at 2:59 AM, ArthurSmith said:

That's the snag with real life. There's no control to the experiment. Climate change is happening and I doubt there's enough time for humanity to affect the change. I'd love to be wrong for the sake of future generations.

It'll probably cool again. One possible reason for the Roman Warm period, the Dark Ages Cool period, the Medieval warm period,  the Little Ice Age and now the current warming might be associated with the tectonic plate rebounding of both the Eurasion and North American tectonic plates. That would slow the thermohalibe circulation . And if you consider that 93% of excess warming is found in the oceans......

 With what the person from France said about nuclear energy,  meltdowns can happen if demand drops too quickly.

 It's like when a country uses both coal and wind turbines for energy. The wind turbines will shut down first.

 With coal, very little load at night but they have to still burn coal so they'll be ready for morning.

 Where long distance transmission (think US to England ) might've allowed for less coal to be burned. Kind of why natural gasis so popular.

Edited July 7 by clim
correct typo

[atomsmasher]

On 7/6/2022 at 8:53 PM, clim said:

It'll probably cool again. One possible reason for the Roman Warm period, the Dark Ages Cool period, the Medieval warm period,  the Little Ice Age and now the current warming might be associated with the tectonic plate rebounding of both the Eurasion and North American tectonic plates.

• Two things are happening at the same time.
• [1] Fossil fuels are running out.
• [2] Earth’s climate is changing. Our planet has gone through three (3) major climate changes; from being covered in ice to a heat wave back to ice.
• Facts never lie; only people do; or they are just mistaken----
• Splitting Of The Polar Vortex: The Arctic Is Melting In The Dead Of Winter
• Models show the temperature is above freezing at the North Pole.
• Despite the North Pole being shrouded in darkness for another month, temperatures in the Arctic have soared by as much as 45 degrees Fahrenheit above average. This has brought temperatures above freezing in February in one of the coldest places on Earth.
• https://tinyurl.com/yc9q9y73
• The North Pole just had an extreme heat wave for the 3rd winter in a row
• As snow falls in Rome, the Arctic is getting alarmingly hot in the middle of winter.
• It’s been downright toasty at the North Pole, at least by Arctic standards.
• The northernmost weather station in the world, Cape Morris Jesup in Greenland, saw temperatures stay above freezing for almost 24 hours straight last week, and then climb to 43 degrees Fahrenheit (6.1 degrees Celsius) on Saturday before dropping again.
• https://tinyurl.com/ycglzywj
• The Arctic recently sent us a powerful message about climate change
• Arctic scientists aren’t usually afraid of a little cold. Windy conditions don’t usually get us howling. The beasts we pay attention to are usually polar bears. But last week’s “Beast from the East” triggered a few anxious conversations.
• Social media memes aside, our problem isn’t this one extreme weather event per se. Our key fear is that the Beast isn’t really from the East – its birthplace was farther north.
• https://tinyurl.com/yconampf
•  
• Hasn't Earth warmed and cooled naturally throughout history?
• Author: David Herring and Rebecca Lindsey
• October 29, 2020
• Yes. Earth has experienced cold periods (or “ice ages”) and warm periods (“interglacials”) on roughly 100,000-year cycles for at least the last 1 million years. The last of these ices ended around 20,000 years ago.
• Hasn't Earth warmed and cooled naturally throughout history? | NOAA Climate.gov
• Earth has been a snowball and a hothouse at different times in its past. So if the climate changed before humans, how can we be sure we’re responsible for the dramatic warming that’s happening today?
• How Earth’s Climate Changes Naturally (and Why Things Are Different Now) | Quanta Magazine
• The largest global-scale climate variations in Earth’s recent geological past are the ice age cycles (see infobox, p.B4), which are cold glacial periods followed by shorter warm periods . The last few of these natural cycles have recurred roughly every 100,000 years.
• Recent estimates of the increase in global average temperature since the end of the last ice age are 4 to 5 °C (7 to 9 °F). That change occurred over a period of about 7,000 years, starting 18,000 years ago. CO2 has risen more than 40% in just the past 200 years, much of this since the 1970s, contributing to human alteration of the planet’s energy budget that has so far warmed Earth by about 1 °C (1.8 °F). If the rise in CO2 continues unchecked, warming of the same magnitude as the increase out of the ice age can be expected by the end of this century or soon after. This speed of warming is more than ten times that at the end of an ice age, the fastest known natural sustained change on a global scale.
• 6. Climate is always changing. Why is climate change of concern now? | Royal Society
• The Snowball Earth hypothesis proposes that during one or more of Earth's icehouse climates, Earth's surface became entirely or nearly entirely frozen
• Snowball Earth - Wikipedia
• Snowball Earth: The times our planet was covered in ice
• Ancient rocks suggest that ice entirely covered our planet on at least two occasions. This theory may help explain the rise of complex life that followed.
• The Earth has endured many changes in its 4.5-billion-year history, with some tumultuous twists and turns along the way. One especially dramatic episode appears to have come between 700 million and 600 million years ago, when scientists think ice smothered the entire planet, from the poles to the equator — twice in quick succession.
•  
• The story of Snowball Earth | Astronomy.com
• WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT THIS?
• ADAPT
• (:-

Edited July 13 by atomsmasher
text is to large

[atomsmasher]

I could not reduce the text size above, sorry

https://astronomy.com/news/2019/04/the-story-of-snowball-earth

 

[atomsmasher]

On 5/31/2021 at 2:31 AM, Vmedvil2 said:

The Depletion of oil is far lesser a crisis than what the news and media make it out to be.

I must disagree. When the lack of fossil fuels starts contracting the world’s economy a true worldwide panic will engulf us which will end in WW3.

.,.,.,.then maybe not

Edited July 14 by atomsmasher

[Cyberserker]

I'm too tired and drunk to thoroughly read this right now, but based on the title, it's probably some combination of electric and that biofuel they've been making out of used restaurant deep fryer oil. If there's one thing we'll never run out of it's McDonald's. Personally, I think we need more nuclear. It gets a bad reputation, but statistically it's actually one of the safest kinds of energy. And considering a nuclear submarine only needs to be refueled about every 3 decades or so it seems relatively sustainable. Think about the fact that I'm 41 and I could still be driving a sub that was built the year I got my driver's license on the original fuel from when I bought it. I mean yeah you need a pretty deep tunnel to dispose of it, but at least it won't sink Florida like a combustion engine or anything.

Edited July 20 by Cyberserker

[atomsmasher]

On 7/20/2022 at 2:08 AM, Cyberserker said:

 Personally, I think we need more nuclear.

I totally agree. 

Ukrainian has known this for some time.

Ukraine is heavily dependent on nuclear energy – it has 15 reactors generating about half of its electricity.

Ukraine had been receiving most of its nuclear services and nuclear fuel from Russia, but is reducing this dependence. In June 2022 an agreement was signed with Westinghouse that will see the company provide all fuel for the Ukrainian fleet.

In 2021 Westinghouse was contracted to finish building a new reactor at Khmelnitsky using AP1000 components from an aborted US project.

https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/countries-t-z/ukraine.aspx