[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

2017/01/28: An issue regarding the front page of /jp/ has been fixed. Also, thanks to all who contacted us about sponsorship.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 405 KB, 474x712, 1288475411702.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
1974482 No.1974482 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]
Quoted by: >>1974485 >>1974858

What do you think of this book?

>> No.1974485
Quoted by: >>1974515

>imlying the mighty trans-human armada of vacuum sucking cyborgs will need oil or planets for that matter

>> No.1974486

Liberal propaganda.

>> No.1974491
Quoted by: >>1974825



>> No.1974512

Haven't read it but peak oil is legit. It's a genuine problem. However, I think that after we enter the oil crisis we'll start making use of coal and natural gas (and, as time permits, nuclear), allowing us time to transition. After the oil shocks people will probably understand why building a civilization on fossil fuels is a bad idea and work rapidly to build alternatives.

If we didn't have coal, though, we'd be FUCKED. The Olduvai hypothesis would actually probably come true.

>> No.1974515
Quoted by: >>1974531

>being delusional is fun

>> No.1974531
Quoted by: >>1974541 >>1978535

Being a twat that offers criticism without proof is fun.

I can ad hominem too......

>> No.1974541
Quoted by: >>1974554 >>1974558

What makes you think that matrioshka brains cyborg genetically-engineered super-furries? I mean really, this is fucking faith we're dealing with here.

>> No.1974554
Quoted by: >>1974561

Singularity's just Technorapture. It's a very handy way not to worry about the present.

>> No.1974558
Quoted by: >>1974574

I didn't say any of those things. I meant that if we are to continue our survival as a species our only way forward is to continue our merger with technology, and becoming vacuum sucking cyborgs means that our odds of survival are better is all.

>> No.1974561
Quoted by: >>1974581


Anyway, what do you think of my coal idea? That we're not fucked because we have a fall-back?

>> No.1974574
Quoted by: >>1974577

Or, you know, we could lower our energy consumption to the 1930s levels and go biotech. Which one of these is a more realistic solution, eh?

>> No.1974577
Quoted by: >>1974600

Into space, because we will be more spread out and maybe witness the heat death of the universe. Go for gold.

>> No.1974581
Quoted by: >>1974599

Peak coal is coming eventually, too. Also, coal's pretty dirty to burn and it's inefficient compared to oil, so it's not going to be a full-scale substitute. What we really need is to alter our consumption patterns, produce more stuff locally and look into using nuclear energy more, especially thorium reactors.

>> No.1974599
Quoted by: >>1974624

I'm not saying it is a full-scale substitute. What I'm saying is that this will happen:

Oil crisis -> People realize that using fossil fuels fucks us over -> Coal and natural gas temporarily save the day -> People have the time and resources to build renewable energy sources

Rather than this happening:

Oil crisis happens -> People realize that using fossil fuels fucks us over -> No energy or economic resources to build renewables -> Back to the medieval ages for the next 3000 years.

>> No.1974600
Quoted by: >>1974610 >>1974626

I think that we should look into, you know, not dying of food shortage due to overpopulation first.

>> No.1974610
Quoted by: >>1974644

Screw it, as long as some of us survive. Yes I know I won't be one of them.

>> No.1974619

There is one thing that is throwing energy at us, the sun.

>> No.1974624
Quoted by: >>1974645

I understand what you're saying but I think that, regretfully, we're not going to see the kind of change in infrastructure you need to make coal (i.e., electricity from coal) work until it starts getting our collective arses. People are very stubborn about changing their habits so they won't support anti-oil policy. If we had a compatible substitute it would be much easier but, alas, we don't (and don't get me started on corn diesel).

Peak gas is to come around 2030, too, which doesn't help.

>> No.1974626

i dont think we should focus on that as much as more probable issues, like a zombie apocalypse or an alien invasion

>> No.1974644
Quoted by: >>1974667

That's taking a very stupid risk. If we fail at building a techno-utopia, we just might never recover. Taking care of our planet before we try to venture into space makes it much more likely that our species continues its existence, you know.

>> No.1974645
Quoted by: >>1974656 >>1974666

Damnit, I'm trying to be optimistic and feel like I have a life that isn't constant pure shit ahead of me here. Stop raining on that parade.

>> No.1974656

Man up faggot you live in a universe that doesn't care what happens to you. Do what you can and don't sweat the rest.

tl;dr: Deal with it.

>> No.1974666

I'm not. I think that we'll recover and hopefully be better off when we're done (not to mention, wiser), but you do have to expect some years of clusterfuck somewhere in our lifetime and to prepare for it. I mean, even George Bush Jr.'s home has enough solar panels to go off the grid. You might want to get on the bicycle today.

>> No.1974667
Quoted by: >>1974687

I never said anything about a techno utopia. The environment is arbitrary, it's sager and more economical to ditch planets completely. Far better to start our journey into space and continue our merger with technology......

>> No.1974678
Quoted by: >>1974696

Peak oil alarmist version:
Peak oil strikes, two days later we're at $1 000 000 000/barrel.

Peak oil reality:
Peak oil strikes, oil goes to $150 per barrel over a few years time and stays there, because at point "expensive" oil deposits becomes viable to extract. Also, various other methods for oil equivalent generation becomes profitable(think biodiesel)

Oil is just portable energy, we could just as well use nuclear energy and carbon sequestration with some fancy chemistry to synthetize oil, more expensive oil but oil nevertheless.

>> No.1974687
Quoted by: >>1974695

As I was saying, we are faced with the risk of crippling ourselves forever as a civilisation / dying out if don't do the right thing about the energy in the nearest future. Can we ditch Earth right now? No. So we have to deal with it.

>> No.1974695
Quoted by: >>1974713

Yes we can ditch earth now, and so what if we die out we were never meant to conquer the star, and we won't cripple our civilization that's impossible.

>> No.1974696

Extracting "harder" oil would take more oil, though. I don't think the price would stop at $150 barrel, at least not initially.

>> No.1974713
Quoted by: >>1974727

>Yes we can ditch earth now
What's just not true. We are not prepared to build a spaceship to reach the nearest inhabitable plant.
>what if we die
Well, for one thing, I think many people would mind.
>we won't cripple our civilization that's impossible
If the world economy goes under and doesn't recover, that's a goodbye to all our dreams of space.

>> No.1974727
Quoted by: >>1974754

Yes we can go into space, we waste a tremendous amount of resources, on trivialities. You are also assuming we would need to find another inhabitable planet. I'm not saying that it's bad to work on alternative energy. I'm just saying we should keep on moving forward. Some sort of humanity will survive and sing songs, and be happy.

>> No.1974754

In any case it would be easier to persuade the people of the world people to stop wasting that many resources and use them more efficiently on themselves than it would be to persuade them to use these resources to unselfishly realise a great big space project instead. We don't have a unified world government, so that won't work.

What I believe is that in order to go on forward we need to make an effort to correct our course. Cause, you know, we're going for a something that looks very much like a crash.

>> No.1974760

* for something

>> No.1974767
Quoted by: >>1974770

Nobody cares. I'm not saying that everybody is going to work together. I'm just saying we will evolve or we will perish.

>> No.1974770
Quoted by: >>1974784

>I'm just saying we will evolve or we will perish.
Fair enough.

>> No.1974776
Quoted by: >>1974786

Nobody is going to stop wasting those resources, we live in a free society. Second it's all about keeping up this illusion of civilization.

>> No.1974784

I was never against you, bro.

>> No.1974786
Quoted by: >>1974797

>it's all about keeping up this illusion of civilization
All too true, unfortunately. Well, at least it's never too late to start an anarchist permaculture commune.

>> No.1974797
Quoted by: >>1974809

Now you are thinking like a dirty trans-human.

>> No.1974809
Quoted by: >>1974824 >>1974867

Really? What's transhuman about an anarchist permaculture commune?

>> No.1974824
Quoted by: >>1974862

The anarchist part...... the only way will into trans-humans is if we give up the rhetoric of the state.....

>> No.1974825

More books on the subject?

>> No.1974858
Quoted by: >>1974873


implying humans won't adapt. get an education (non-soft) and help the rest of us to save the 99% tard population

>> No.1974862
Quoted by: >>1974932

If so, we can agree on that, although my reasons are very different. I think that small, mostly self-sufficient and self-reliant local communities are the best way to attain sustainability.

>> No.1974867
Quoted by: >>1974888 >>1974905


Hey there, can I have your email?

I'm interested in making a safe survivalist base somewhere, but first I want to find some like-minded people.

>> No.1974873
Quoted by: >>1974884 >>1975156

99% of population could start reading the threads before they post. Also, if we'll find a solution, it's not going to be a purely technological one; we need policy to make a non-oil world work.

>> No.1974884
Quoted by: >>1974895


implying you've made a succinct argument on any level.

>> No.1974888 [DELETED] 

While I'm somewhat like-minded, I live in Ukraine. I assume that you're do this in Canada?

>> No.1974895


not that i have, and fuck off

>> No.1974899
Quoted by: >>1974916 >>1974917

The thing people regularly find most implausible about what I've told them is the idea that consumption goes /up/ following the war.

Your grandkids will enjoy a standard of living so opulent it will disgust you.

And it seems impossible to you now for the same reason your lifestyle seems impossible to someone living prior to the industrial revolution. Or more recently during the oil crisis of the 1970s, you should go read about the bleak, apocalyptic world they imagined 2010 would be.

>> No.1974905

While I'm somewhat like-minded (more "farming community" than survivalist base), I live in Ukraine. I assume that you're doing this in Canada?

*fixed, I really need to get some sleep

>> No.1974916


YUP, sad but true. the only downside of oil is pollution

"only" NOT EQUAL TO "small"

>> No.1974917
Quoted by: >>1974984

It's different than it was in the 1970s because the reason is not economical but geological. Consumption going up each year is exactly what got us where we are.

>> No.1974932
File: 6 KB, 239x239, bloo_in_sunglasses_204.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

No problem bro.

>> No.1974984


>>It's different than it was in the 1970s because the reason is not economical but geological.

The oil panic of the 70s was not the sole rationale behind the doom and gloom predictions. We were also facing mass starvation because at the yields farms were producing back then population was set to outstrip supply within ten years or less.

Then Norman Borlaug came along, revolutionized farming, multiplying yields overnight and thwarting the malthusian doomsayers.

Fast forward to the postwar cleanup, Gerard Silverton of Google is handed a dumptruck full of money by the government to rebuild farming infrastructure. Like Borlaug before him he's a radical thinker, and he seizes the opportunity to commit to a new type of farming; automated farming towers. Solar powered for the most part, recycles everything that can be, harvested crops are processed in the ground floor and dispensed neatly washed, chopped and wrapped. The only way to resume feeding such a large population on relatively short notice and without any farmers (most sided with the redshirts).

Likewise with oil. Solutions will come along. By 2010 you were already witnessing the third wave of electric cars. Soon after they become automated ("driverless") supplemented by ultracap buses, then personal rapid transit. Automated thorium reactor clusters pop up as America's new energy backbone, all new buildings are solarized, all new factories employ robots almost exclusively and refugees that the state put up in airports, malls and business towers found the arrangement agreeable enough that similar large multizoned buildings followed, a cheaper way to house, feed and employ those displaced by the war than rebuilding burnt out cities and suburbs.

It gets better. They always show up when things look grim and tell you it's the end, but it never is. It gets better, and those types scurry into the shadows to wait for the next disaster so they can go back to hollering about the end of days.

>> No.1975029
File: 17 KB, 320x240, doesnotworkthatway.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I think its written by somebody without a degree in Geology who doesn't understand the differences between, proved, known, and estimated recoverable reserves.

The Hubbard Peak Decline Curved does not work that way!

>> No.1975109
Quoted by: >>1975112

The only reasonable option is to scale back our daily power usage to the amount that we can get from sunlight each day. Anything else is unsustainable. Aside from nuclear plants (which are sort of like oil 2.0, we'd eventually run out of nuclear fuel and have another crisis), every fuel source is derived from solar energy.

>> No.1975112
Quoted by: >>1975116

Like we won't leave.

>> No.1975116
Quoted by: >>1975130

What do you mean "leave"?

>> No.1975130
Quoted by: >>1975175

The planet.

>> No.1975156
Quoted by: >>1975195 >>1978535

>Also, if we'll find a solution, it's not going to be a purely technological one; we need policy to make a non-oil world work.

This bullshit. This bullshit right here. This is why I hate the social sciences. "Techno-fixes are a useless 20th century mindset, they won't work in our world any more. We need policy to enact positive change in the world."

Policy hasn't fixed ANYTHING since the NINETEEN SIXTIES. The U.S. republic is a joke at this point, just a vehicle for the rich to rob the rest of us along with the world. Rapidly through the Republicans, and slowly through the Democrats.

We are not going to have any sort of policy improvement for this situation. The ONLY fixes will be technological ones for the above reasons.

>> No.1975175
Quoted by: >>1975182

And where do you propose we move to? Mars?
So basically you'd leave a planet with dwindling resources, to live on a planet with *no* resources?

If you're suggesting we leave the solar system, you're probably a couple hundred years too early, and even then it'll probably be even longer before we've got the infrastructure set up for some sort of mass migration.

This is all assuming we ever leave earth for good, which I doubt. We're suited to all the complexities of this environment; when it dies, we probably will too. If anything sentient ever leaves this solar system, it won't be human.

>> No.1975182
Quoted by: >>1975196

First off mars, has a lot of the resources earth does, and second no we shouldn't go to another planet.

>> No.1975195

You seem to assume that I'm American. I'm not. I regret that your political system is so inert but it is not like that everywhere, e.g., policy has certainly work for Europe. It's also a very peculiar reason to hate the social sciences. (You also seem to assume that I'm a social scientist; I'm not.)

>> No.1975196
Quoted by: >>1975233

So you're saying we'd float around in spaceships, then?

Well goddamn, then it looks like we'd have to
>scale back our daily power usage to the amount that we can get from sunlight each day

>> No.1975233
File: 15 KB, 614x604, pleasedface.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
Quoted by: >>1975242

>scale back our daily power usage to the amount that we can get from sunlight each day

>implying O type stars won't be superior in this regard

>> No.1975242
Quoted by: >>1975255

Good thing reaching them will be easy.

>> No.1975255
Quoted by: >>1975262

Anything worth doing was never easy bro.

>> No.1975262
Quoted by: >>1975276

Not on this scale.

>> No.1975276
Quoted by: >>1978427

Yeah it's crazy. I never thought we would be able to fly or you know atomic energy or computers. Entering space is impossible.....

>> No.1975395
Quoted by: >>1978664

>>solar on every house
fucking retard, the only people who have materials to make any appreciable amount of those is china and its a LIMITED supply a well. we would be far better off to use them where they would be most effective and could be easily stored and used to heat up water instead of ambient worthless electricity.

>> No.1977525


>> No.1978427


>> No.1978460
Quoted by: >>1978630

Tell that to the fall of Rome leading into the Christian dark ages.

>> No.1978507 [DELETED] 


That's not going to happen. Environmentalists and moralfags have INCREASED in number and power, they're strangling fucking EVERYTHING. No more nuclear power, hydrocarbon technology, stem cell or fucking ANYTHING except for global warming.

This is exactly what's going to lead to another dark ages. The whole of industrial society is based on fossil fuel consumption and now we are witnessing the decline of industry EVERYWHERE (yes even in China) so in short we are FUCKED. Industry has been declining for the past 30 years since the end of WWII and now we are finally beginning to feel the effects as the prices of EVERYTHING is increasing whilst everyone is becoming poor because of lack of employment.

tl;dr the whole world is going to go back to the dark ages gg bitches

>> No.1978535

I think you need to read some Yudkowalski on why the singularity is really really dangerous unless we ensure any transhuman beings created are "friendly"

You think so because you're American, but here inAustralia our keynesian economics has ensured we avoided the recession that came with the GFC, and it won't be long before we break dollar parity.

>> No.1978630

And yet everything turned out fine. Or at least no worse.

>> No.1978664

>fucking retard, the only people who have materials to make any appreciable amount of those is china and its a LIMITED supply a well

how can you possibly think silicon is rare

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.