Hydropower has the same problem . . . most of the good places are already damned up.

However, that Stu guy is wrong about solar power. They don’t use more up in energy than they will generate during their lifetime. If that was true they would be ridiculously expensive and you would never make you money back with them. But you do make your money back with them.

“…Patzek and Croft are warning that after 2011, global production rates for coal will begin to decline—sinking to 1990 levels by 2037 and dropping to half of peak production by 2037…”

Either it’s a typo or the production rates in 2011 are predicted to be double that of 1990?

So Goethermal is the answer. Please tell me how the planet will be affected when several billion holes are punched into the ground?

Has anyone studied this? Geothermal is effectively an energy transfer. With enough holes in the ground, it will not be insignificant.

Giant

So Goethermal is the answer. Please tell me how the planet will be affected when several billion holes are punched into the ground?

Has anyone studied this? Geothermal is effectively an energy transfer. With enough holes in the ground, it will not be insignificant.

Giant

Solar panels……same thing…….mine the ultra high quality sand…….transport that……refine it……..make silcon…….build plants to make panels…….mine aluminium……billions of tonnes of glass……..blah blah blah……then you have panels that used more energy to create then they will ever put out in their life.

Wind power……..geothermal……etc etc…….if you study them……they can’t exist without a fossil fuel base. In other words……when the fossil fuels are gone…..all the power from all these sources won’t be enough to keep all the factories and maint opperations going to maintain the base of renewables and have enough power left over for all the other things we use it for.

Bottom line everyone…….we are going back to the days when your average house used electricity for a fridge……and some lights……and a few other small things and thats it…….and even if we are going to be able to build and maintain that standard of living……we better get cracking cutting our use and building the system now……..if we don’t…….we’ll end up back in the stone age.

I for one don’t have a problem with what is going to happen. I see our current civilisation breeding stupid useless entitled selfish human trash. We teach everyone that they are special even though they do absolutely noithing to benefit society and don’t even carry their own weight. Each generation of human that live oin this earth will be less intelligent and more irresponsible as long as our current entitlement system and political correctness keep supporting and encouraging this belief that you can get everything for nothing at someone elses expense…..that the world owes you……that crying victim is the way to get everything instead of hard work. These things alone will cause our civilisation to collapse in the end……even without peak oil…..or peak coal…..or climate change.

During the Bush administration, CO1 was forgot about because Bush oil, that he convinced people that we are too addicted to to get away from, produces the CO1 and he figured that if he didn’t mention it, people would forget it…and they did.

We will never hear people like you, Ed, mention CO1 because Bush has blinded and convinced you, and the greatest majority of the Republicans, that CO1 does not exist.

Geothermal is not an alternative, temporary energy that will be here today and gone tomorrow, …and it can produce all the clean, cheap, and renewable energy the world will need for the next million years. To finance one coal burning power plant or one nuclear power plant, you can build four or five geothermal power plants. So why is everyone down on a power source that is so clean, safe, and cheap as geothermal?

These folks’ press release on utexas.edu in the dept of PETROLEUM is scientific sounding one minute, very unscientific and hysterical the next minute by calling others “hysterical” for thinking about the need to limit CO2…they have, in short, an agenda. Peak coal is very real. Whether their numbers are, I don’t know. Even if correct, they miss the boat with their ‘spin’ against action on climate. Why? Simple:

Yes, peak oil (which I’ve been following for 10 years) and peak coal,
ceteris paribus, would make CO2 levels lower than otherwise projected
by IPCC.

At the same time however, it’s also true that positive feedbacks that
were either not known just a few years ago, of which were known but
due to political pressure by China, U.S., Saudi Arabia or others, was
excluded from IPCC analysis, mean that, ceteris paribus, we can expect
CO2 and other GHG levels to be HIGHER than IPCC predicted when it
excluded those considerations.

So n inconvenient fact is that, all other things are not equal
(ceteris is not paribus) ..you have to adjust downwards for peak
oil/peak coal reasons, and you have to adjust upwards, due to omitted
positive feedbacks which could unleash massive increases in CO2,
methane etc, in positive feedback from natural system, responding to
initial actions by humankind.

Now, it couldn’t possibly be that oil-addicted folks in the
oil-industry-$$$ linked Texas area, might possibly want to look at
ONLY the former and NOT the latter, could it?

“It’s difficult to get a man to understand something if his salary
depends upon his not understanding it.” -Upton Sinclair