What happened to that peak oil thing? Why are we producing more oil than we were in the 80s?

>we producing more
What do you mean by "we", Peasant?

this but it's not going to happen
when the ice melts we're gonna take that as an opportunity to wreak more havoc until it's far too late

Another hysterical environmental "science" theory BTFO

Did you even read the thread?

>more excuses to prop up a theory already on life support
it wasn't a lot to read user

>implying a finite resource isn't finite

>shifting the goalposts this hard

What do you propose will happen, user?

The same thing that happens with all le sky is falling claims
Gradual technological improvements while the effects are lessened until replaced by new tech entirely

>lets just turn a blind eye and hope future magic technology fixes everything

best plan

you asked what will happen not what I hope will happen
>lets keep shifting the goalposts
you do know what the concept of peak oil actually is, right user?

i'm not that guy, i think releasing all CO2 sequestered in the ground for the past 100s of millions of years is retarded
peak oil happening sooner would be good in the long run

>peak oil happening sooner would be good in the long run
Sure, why not
Your feelings about it don't take away from the hysterical dystopia it's proponents loudly asserted would DEFINITELY happen tho

>lets just release upwards of 10 billion tons of CO2 in the atmosphere every year
>don't you worry about it, nothing bad could ever happen
>science? experiments? logic? pah, just ignore all that, the evil scientists are trying to exploit you

ok, guy

why are Veeky Forums autists incapable of comprehending incentives and basic economics

Since all you can do is strawman and seem to not understand the concept whatsoever, please explain what you believe 'peak oil' means

To be fair, I was the same before I turned 18

peak oil extraction, when the amount of extracted oil reaches maximum and begins declining after because we can't find any new deposits
probably won't happen soon if we're using all available and new technology for extracting it

I'm impressed that only took you 15 minutes to google
So now that you've done the minimal amount of research you should have before you even posted in this thread, and recognize it's an economic problem rather than a scientific one, do you realize how fucking stupid and unrelated your questions were?

sorry, i'm not here following this shit constantly
also
>don't worry, the omnipresent and omnipotent MARKET wouldn't let anything bad happen

riiiight

>sorry, i'm not here following this shit constantly
A basic understanding of the topic of conversation is required on this board
>don't worry, the omnipresent and omnipotent MARKET wouldn't let anything bad happen
That's a weak statement even for a poor strawman, which makes it obvious you weren't alive when le hysterical peak oil omg was happening

REKT

Incentives and economics don't magic fix problems you're blind sided with, or worse, problems you intentionally ignore over the pursuit of short term profits.

What? Are you retarded? Your ignoring of economics and price and viability etc is the reason why your peak oil predictions keep being wrong and put back. What does magically fixing problems have to do with anything? I hope you're just pretending to be retarded, consider refraining from commenting on things you don't understand.

eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=mcrfpus2&f=a

There's only been a small uptick in the last few years due to a new method: fracking. Fracking is going to have it's own peak as well, and it will come much faster than normal drilling. We're never going back to the 70s peak though.

>What happened to that peak oil thing?
It was always a malthusian meme.

>Why are we producing more oil than we were in the 80s
Same reason why we have more trees than we did in the 1800s. Technologies change. What was infeasible became feasible.

In theory we can run out of oil on Earth but chances are very slim since by that time it is very likely we'll have an even better energy source (e.g. fusion) and we can use that to create fuels from CO2 in the air. Carbon neutral gasoline, imagine that. Even if fusion reactors aren't practical for *grid power* it could still see use in producing hydrocarbons. Very interesting. The future is a strange place.

>US

Good explanations

... but I would add that long chain hydrocarbons are used as a starting material in a lot of chemical manufacturing processes that produce products vital to modern civilization. Even if someone did develop a fusion technology that was efficient to a point way beyond break-even, you'd have to hope that they did so before we ran out of petroleum or else you'd have to find a new source of hydrocarbons/develop and integrate technologies that use different starting materials (the second of which would take a huge investment of capital to pull off).

As for using atmospheric CO2 to create fuels from air, plants already do this way more efficiently than we can (think wood). Any chemical process that turns molecules of CO2 (an incredibly stable molecule) into long chain hydrocarbons (incredibly unstable molecules with high potential chemical energy) would be astronomically expensive energetically and probably not economically feasible.

We're boned.

youtu.be/sI1C9DyIi_8

>Even if someone did develop a fusion technology that was efficient to a point way beyond break-even, you'd have to hope that they did so before we ran out of petroleum or else you'd have to find a new source of hydrocarbons/develop and integrate technologies that use different starting materials (the second of which would take a huge investment of capital to pull off).
you can make hydrocarbons if you have surplus energy that was the whole point of my response on carbon-neutral fuels

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrofuel

batteries to store electrical power are memes and utterly filthy and if environmental activists had even one third of a brain they'd stop shilling for electric everything, hydrocarbons are nature's battery

Doomsday predictions have a 0% track record to date. But we keep on buying into them.

Meanwhile whatever gets us will come as a total surprise.

We don't have to run out of oil, if it becomes scarce enough it'll also become extremely expensive and not convenient, people will tend to gravitate towards alternatives that might now not make economic sense at the current price.

>10 billion tons
That sounds like a lot, with no context or anything. Anybody know the weight of the atmosphere as a whole?

>A basic understanding of the topic of conversation is required on this board
Being this new...

It already became scarce enough to be extremely expensive and not convenient. Instead of redoing our infrastructure and implementing new methods, we decided to develop the technology to squeeze hydrocarbons out of the earth's crust like Jim Beam's Devil's Cut whiskey.

To your credit, if that happened now we wouldn't have any other objection. EU countries have already begun setting things up for when that time comes.

>EU countries have already begun setting things up for when that time comes.
From what I understand, EU countries are burning coal and drilling for oil at unprecedented rates.

Where did you get that from? Coal isn't even a real thing in most of Europe except for Poland as far as I know.

>EU countries have already begun setting things up for when that time comes.
europeans actually believe this, like two countries have the geographic privilege of going "renewable" the rest are sucking Russian farts or using nuclear like a sensible nation

>mfw france is the most reasonable euroscum nation
>mfw I have no face for something this unexpected

using algae as fuel seems to be a pretty solid idea.
it constantly re-grows itself and as global warming increases becomes quite plentiful

It was a meme to jew the goyim by stocking up in oil to sell it overpriced, you can look up how oil trading volume went so high just in time when peak oil was a thing just to crash years later. Dumb goys

word vomit ahead. I'm not cleaning that shit up. TLDR, bruh.

...therefore, why do stuff, right? We're all gunna died, so why healthy life food running? We gone died. I got muh kale enemas, runninged 5 mi/day, yoga fu sportsball. then I got hit by bus...surprise, muthafukka!

Another problem with doomsday predictions? Sometime we do stuff about shit....so all of those hysterical ppl are stoopid. 0% predictive. I'm smarter.

And there's the history of humans and the doomsday shit that is a matter of record. Yep, some of it was a come as a total surprise, but some of it was predicted and debated by the affected citizens and leaders. On the other hand, the classic 'end is nigh' religious nut meme is ancient and persists for a reason. ;0

And how about that airline food...it's terrible, haw haw haw. You can see localized doomsday in amazon now. also see it in some of the 'stans' in asia. irrigation and salinity fail.

I guess the point, if there is one, is that I agree that surprise and we can't prepare for or affect everything gwine get us. On the other other hand, being incorrect informs posterity and, it is hoped, leads to refined techniques.

Year 2000 computer bug. planes didn't fall out of sky, power grid didn't destroy, and bank still count money good. Waste of time to worry, plan, and intervene? Hardly. at least 100 billion spent in muh america on Y2k. Shit got fixed, yo. Also, better awareness of IT in infrastructure. "whew, that was close! Where where else are vulnerable?" So who can say how much that help society overall?

how does apply to fossil petro carbon shit? we know about endocrine disruption from shit leeching outta plastic. We know about ocean PH as CO2 dissolves in ocean and fucks with coral and sea life that do the calcium carbonate. We know about things getting bigger when they get warmer. warmer bigger ocean makes many problem. oh shit.. TLDR. /book

Umm... what about Germany?

Gold was right...
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin

One of the largest sources of electricity in Germany

Kill yourself.

Can't we simply switch to canola oil? It sure as hell ain't no good for eating!

But seriously, could we burn less oil without it seriously affecting peoples ways of life? Are we doing as much as we can to move towards that technology? I feel like with all the memeing about it, we probably are.

>we have more trees than we did in the 1800s
US Forest Service data says otherwise, user.

Attached: us-forested-area.png (780x640, 119K)

You know when a person who really underestimates their attractiveness/desirability ends up a widow and they reenter the dating scene they learn that their deceased spouse wasn't just a one off fluke and they had game all along?