Is Resource Depletion a serious threat in the next 50 years? (1 Viewer)

[128shot]

I think so. Specifically speaking oil and natural gas. Not to mention land resources which is becoming smaller.


So...whats your answer and why?

 

[Kandahar]

When oil and gas become rare, they'll become expensive. This will encourage people to develop alternatives. So no, resource depletion isn't a threat.

As for land, there is plenty of it. There are vast tracts of unused land in the USA, Canada, and Russia. Global overpopulation will never be a problem.

 

[Morrow]

When oil and gas become rare, they'll become expensive. This will encourage people to develop alternatives. So no, resource depletion isn't a threat.

As for land, there is plenty of it. There are vast tracts of unused land in the USA, Canada, and Russia. Global overpopulation will never be a problem.

That isn’t entirely true. We use fossil fuels at an ever increasing rate. There could be a big gap between oil becoming expensive and use developing a replacement and upgrading our infrastructure. Even starting now, which we are, we may not have a replacement ready in time.

I would say timber is going to be the most felt resource in the next 50 years. It is already really expensive, and it is going to get even more so. Russia has opened up Siberia for lumber, but they aren’t sustaining that tree population, and neither are we in all actuality. It is going to make owning a home a lot more expensive.

 

[128shot]

When oil and gas become rare, they'll become expensive. This will encourage people to develop alternatives. So no, resource depletion isn't a threat.

As for land, there is plenty of it. There are vast tracts of unused land in the USA, Canada, and Russia. Global overpopulation will never be a problem.

So These alternatives...whats going to develop them? Thin air?

as for overpopulation....well, 6 1/2 billion people isn't sustainable without intensive oil and natural gas based agriculture. Its not so much were to put the people as how you feed the people.

just a slight disruption in this will kill millions.

 

[Morrow]

As for land, there is plenty of it. There are vast tracts of unused land in the USA, Canada, and Russia. Global overpopulation will never be a problem.

That isn't true, all arable land in the world is currently in use. And global warming is going to shrink grain belt through desertification. Permafrost in Canada and Siberia will not become arable land.

We grow several times what we need to feed the world now, but our logistic network prevents even distribution, as does our economic system.

 

[Kandahar]

So These alternatives...whats going to develop them? Thin air?

No, economic pressures and/or government grants. My point is that there is no danger of "running out of oil" because it will become more and more expensive as the supply drops. We'll never use the last barrel.

as for overpopulation....well, 6 1/2 billion people isn't sustainable without intensive oil and natural gas based agriculture. Its not so much were to put the people as how you feed the people.

just a slight disruption in this will kill millions.

There's nothing unique to oil/natural gas in terms of agriculture. This underestimates our technological capabilities, in the face of economic pressure.

 

[Kandahar]

That isn't true, all arable land in the world is currently in use. And global warming is going to shrink grain belt through desertification. Permafrost in Canada and Siberia will not become arable land.

My point is that we aren't going to run out of places for people to live. We could fit the entire world's population into Texas, and it wouldn't be any more dense than NYC.

We grow several times what we need to feed the world now, but our logistic network prevents even distribution, as does our economic system.

Agreed. Distribution is the problem, not lack of food. This was true when there were 1 billion people, it's true now that there are 6 billion people, and it will be true when there are 10 billion people. Hopefully we'll have solved the distribution problems by then, but nevertheless we won't run out of food.

 

[Saboteur]

When oil and gas become rare, they'll become expensive. This will encourage people to develop alternatives. So no, resource depletion isn't a threat.

As for land, there is plenty of it. There are vast tracts of unused land in the USA, Canada, and Russia. Global overpopulation will never be a problem.

Land yes, trees? Not so much. The Amazon rain forest accounts for over 80% of the earth's air. Deforestization has become a problem as well as a social taboo... No one wants you to think about it so they don't talk about it. But every day a few miles are destroyed in the way of progress, housing development and farming for the ever increasing population.

Didn't you ever do the closed environment experiment in school?

You take some sugar and fruit fly eggs, seal it all in a tube and incubate for 24 hours. You get a bunch of fruit flies eating the sugar, using the air, excreting waste and laying more eggs... because they can't go anywhere and there's less and less food, air and more and more fruit flies and excriment they die. I don't think it will happen in 50 years but...

You know of any new planets capable of supporting human life as we know it?

 

[Cassandra_Temptress]

I think so. Specifically speaking oil and natural gas. Not to mention land resources which is becoming smaller.


So...whats your answer and why?

No, I dont see this as a threat. Im counting on the erruption of the Yellow Stone National park volcano to wipe out most of mankind, maybe leaving up to a meer 2,000 people on the planet, after the Ice Age. With that, it will give the planet some time to recoup from all of the "toxic waistes" that mankind has fed it for years. During this time, its all time for the gods to rule the worlds all over again.

 

[Cassandra_Temptress]

You know of any new planets capable of supporting human life as we know it?

Have you ever heard of an actual "new planet"?

 

[Saboteur]

Have you ever heard of an actual "new planet"?

Well no, but I think you know what I meant. But okay, do you know of another planet capable of sustaining human life as we know it?

 

[Kandahar]

Land yes, trees? Not so much. The Amazon rain forest accounts for over 80% of the earth's air. Deforestization has become a problem as well as a social taboo... No one wants you to think about it so they don't talk about it. But every day a few miles are destroyed in the way of progress, housing development and farming for the ever increasing population.

This is true, and definitely represents a problem. However there is no fundamental reason that we can't have lumber, agriculture, AND a thriving rainforest. South American and African governments need to learn to practice sustainable development instead of just sending in the bulldozers to harvest as much as they can in as little time as they can.

Didn't you ever do the closed environment experiment in school?

You take some sugar and fruit fly eggs, seal it all in a tube and incubate for 24 hours. You get a bunch of fruit flies eating the sugar, using the air, excreting waste and laying more eggs... because they can't go anywhere and there's less and less food, air and more and more fruit flies and excriment they die. I don't think it will happen in 50 years but...

The earth is a much more "open" system than a sealed test tube. Also, fruit flies can't develop technology to adapt to their situation.

 

[The Mark]

Well no, but I think you know what I meant. But okay, do you know of another planet capable of sustaining human life as we know it?

No.

But we have various technologies, and can develop more.

We can adapt a planet to our use. Even the moon might work.

Granted, it wouldn't be as nice as earth, but there ARE options if required.

 

[Saboteur]

No.

But we have various technologies, and can develop more.

We can adapt a planet to our use. Even the moon might work.

Granted, it wouldn't be as nice as earth, but there ARE options if required.

I agree but why continue to make it so that they are required?

 

[Saboteur]

This is true, and definitely represents a problem. However there is no fundamental reason that we can't have lumber, agriculture, AND a thriving rainforest. South American and African governments need to learn to practice sustainable development instead of just sending in the bulldozers to harvest as much as they can in as little time as they can.

Exactly, but I'm arfraid governments might think it's unnecissary or too costly. Unfortunately I think too many people in power thinkk to themselves; "Why should I care? It won't happen in my lifetime and I have fun to have" or "God just won't let it happen".

The earth is a much more "open" system than a sealed test tube. Also, fruit flies can't develop technology to adapt to their situation.

True enough but we're a long way from even sending a person to go look around on Mars much less turn it into a life supporting environment.

Like The Mark and you say, we have technology, but then we should be getting ready not just waitng for somebody to think about doing so.

 

[128shot]

No, economic pressures and/or government grants. My point is that there is no danger of "running out of oil" because it will become more and more expensive as the supply drops. We'll never use the last barrel.

of course, we won't use at least 500 billion barrels because its simply unattenable.

Economic pressure? its already here. Government grants? haven't seen any lately.

To make alternatives work, it will take oil, it will take natural gas. If its part of any of the energy chain, have we really created an alternative?

 

[DeeJayH]

resource depletion is a VERY serious threat
the middle east will dry up, and we will still have our reserves in Alaska, the Gulf, and the Oil Shale in the midwest

the middle east will fall in on itself, and we will keep going strong
there is no problem looming unless you live in the desert (ME)

 

[128shot]

resource depletion is a VERY serious threat
the middle east will dry up, and we will still have our reserves in Alaska, the Gulf, and the Oil Shale in the midwest

the middle east will fall in on itself, and we will keep going strong
there is no problem looming unless you live in the desert (ME)

...why aren't we now?


by 2040, which is a high estimate, most if not everyone agrees oil (conventional, including sea and ice sealed) will be depleted to such a level that will not be worth the effort to find more.

each way is just 20-40 years away.

which leads me to the next point..


So, in all oil SHALE plans, which is really what you're depending on obviously, it would take at least 20 years to produce 3 million barrels let alone doubling the amount enough to equal the 126 Mb/d you'd need to sustain the world at even under estimated growth rates.

See the problem?

 

[Kandahar]

Economic pressure? its already here.

Not nearly as much economic pressure as there will be when the prices start going up, because we start running out of oil and/or the government does the sensible thing and implement a gasoline tax. I guarantee you that the speed at which alternatives are developed is directly related to the price of oil.

Government grants? haven't seen any lately.

That's because we have an incompetent White House. The next administration - Democrat or Republican - will almost certainly make this a top priority.

To make alternatives work, it will take oil, it will take natural gas. If its part of any of the energy chain, have we really created an alternative?

Why would oil and natural gas have to be part of the chain?

 

[DeeJayH]

no I dont
I am concerned with america first, which reduces the demand on our resources dramatically.
our bases will be covered
and the existing technologies and future technologies will come online as needed

 

[128shot]

Not nearly as much economic pressure as there will be when the prices start going up, because we start running out of oil and/or the government does the sensible thing and implement a gasoline tax. I guarantee you that the speed at which alternatives are developed is directly related to the price of oil.



That's because we have an incompetent White House. The next administration - Democrat or Republican - will almost certainly make this a top priority.



Why would oil and natural gas have to be part of the chain?

Top priority? I sure as hell hope so.

As for why it would be...why wouldn't it be? Everything, one way or another depends on an oil mechanism, or something that comes from natural gas, to work, or be produced.

Wind turbines for example...


Name me one thing that is built without using something related to oil or natural gas. Quite the task.

 

[128shot]

no I dont
I am concerned with america first, which reduces the demand on our resources dramatically.
our bases will be covered
and the existing technologies and future technologies will come online as needed

based on what evidence? cornucopian fantasy not withstanding.

 

[Kandahar]

Top priority? I sure as hell hope so.

As for why it would be...why wouldn't it be? Everything, one way or another depends on an oil mechanism, or something that comes from natural gas, to work, or be produced.

Wind turbines for example...


Name me one thing that is built without using something related to oil or natural gas. Quite the task.

But that's the point. As oil/gas becomes more expensive, we'll CREATE those energy industries that are completely independent of oil/gas. As of now, they aren't economically profitable, but one day they will be. Examples: Hydrogen fuel cells, nuclear fission, nuclear fusion, solar power.

 

[128shot]

But that's the point. As oil/gas becomes more expensive, we'll CREATE those energy industries that are completely independent of oil/gas. As of now, they aren't economically profitable, but one day they will be. Examples: Hydrogen fuel cells, nuclear fission, nuclear fusion, solar power.

how do you build a nuclear powerplant? oh yeah..


oil run construction vehicles!

Hydrogen? currently from natural gas or coal powered eletricy...which is harvested with...vechiles made from oil based manufacturing processes

Solar? the film they sit on is oil based.

...so? when ARE they going to be economically profitable when oil factors into all of them?

 

[RightOfCenter]

how do you build a nuclear powerplant? oh yeah..


oil run construction vehicles!

Hydrogen? currently from natural gas or coal powered eletricy...which is harvested with...vechiles made from oil based manufacturing processes

Solar? the film they sit on is oil based.

...so? when ARE they going to be economically profitable when oil factors into all of them?

They'll be profitable when oil is expensive enough to make developing alternatives cheaper.