skinnyflyer

on a related note here's some math that i threw together; your life vs someone from pre-industrial time; how many ghost slaves do you have? 20 000 000 barrels of oil consumed in the u.s. each day / 300 000 000 americans consuming =0.0667 barrels per person. 1 barrrel=42 gallons. 0.0667x42=2.8 gallons per person. 2.8 gallons x 500 hours human labour energy equivalent per gallon=1400 hours human labour equiv. 1400 hours labour / 24hours in a day = 58 ghost slaves. 58 ghost slaves working 24/7 without taking any breaks to eat, sleep or rest. extremely over simplified but interesting, no? "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

Question; Is peak oil a bigger problem than global warming? not to take away from how terrible global warming is but in terms of what is more likely to directly affect you and your life-and i suspect this is what concerns most people-peak oil dwarfs global warming many times over. yet somehow not many people want to talk about it or even know about it. although it is appearing in the msm more often; (strangely its dated june 25th,2007) http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_26/b4040074.htm From Peak Oil To Dark Age? Oil output has stalled, and it's not clear the capacity exists to raise production With global oil production virtually stalled in recent years, controversial predictions that the world is fast approaching maximum petroleum output are looking a bit less controversial. At first blush, those concerned about global warming should be delighted. After all, what better way to prod the move toward carbon-free, climate-friendly alternative energy? But climate change activists have nothing to cheer about. The U.S. is completely unprepared for peak oil, as it's called, and the wrenching adjustments it would entail could easily accelerate global warming as nations turn to coal (see BusinessWeek.com, 4/19/07, "Rx for Earth: Sooner Not Later"). Moreover, regardless of the implications for climate change, peak oil represents a mortal threat to the U.S. economy. Peak oil refers to the point at which world oil production plateaus before beginning to decline as depletion of the world's remaining reserves offsets ever-increased drilling. Some experts argue that we're already there, and that we won't exceed by much the daily production high of 84.5 million barrels first reached in 2005. If so, global production will bump along near these levels for years before beginning an inexorable decline. What would that mean? Alternatives are still a decade away from meeting incremental demand for oil. With nothing to fill the gap, global economic growth would slow, stop, and then reverse; international tensions would soar as nations seek access to diminishing supplies, enriching autocratic rulers in unstable oil states; and, unless other sources of energy could be ramped up with extreme haste, the world could plunge into a new Dark Age. Even as faltering economies burned less oil, carbon loading of the atmosphere might accelerate as countries turn to vastly dirtier coal. GIVEN SUCH UNPLEASANT possibilities, you'd think peak oil would be a national obsession. But policymakers can hide behind the possibility that vast troves will be available from unconventional sources, or that secretive oil-exporting nations really have the huge reserves they claim. Yet even if those who say that the peak has arrived are wrong, enough disturbing omens—for example, declining production in most of the world's great oil fields and no new superfields to take up the slack—exist for the issue to merit an intense international focus. The reality is that it will be here much sooner for the U.S.—in the form of peak oil exports. Since we import nearly two-thirds of the oil we consume, global oil available for export should be our bigger concern. Fast-growing domestic consumption in oil-exporting nations and increasing appetites by big importers such as China portend tighter supplies available to the U.S., unless world production rises rapidly. But output has stalled. Call it de facto peak oil or peak oil lite. It means the U.S. is entering an age when it will have to scramble to maintain existing import levels. We will know soon enough whether the capacity to raise production really exists. If not, basic math and the clock tell the story. All alternatives—geothermal, solar, wind, etc.—produce only 3% of the energy supplied by oil. If oil demand rises by 2% while output remains flat, generation of alternative energy would have to expand 60% a year. That's more than twice the rate of wind power, the fastest-growing alternative energy. And all this incremental energy would somehow have to be delivered to transportation (which consumes most of the oil produced each year) just to stay even with the growth in demand. Nuclear and hydropower together produce 10 times the power of wind, geothermal, and solar power. But even if nations ignore environmental concerns, it takes years to build nuclear plants or even identify suitable undammed rivers. There are many things we in the U.S. can do (and should have been doing) other than the present policy of crossing our fingers. If an oil tax makes sense from a climate change perspective, it seems doubly worthy if it extends supplies. Boosting efficiency and scaling up alternatives must also be a priority. And, recognizing that nations will turn to cheap coal (recently, 80% of growth in coal use has come from China), more work is needed to defang this fuel, which produces more carbon dioxide per ton than any other energy source. Even if the peakists are wrong, we would still be better off taking these actions. And if they're right, major efforts right now may be the only way to avert a new Dark Age in an overheated world. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

considering that 1 gallon of oil represents the energy equivalent of about 500 hours of human labour i would say that even at 5$/gallon it is still dirt cheap. the fact that we can buy so much value for so little and exploit it efficiently with technology is responsible for our standard of living. experts have been predicting supply shortfalls for some time now and continue to predict worse and worse shortfalls in the futur. the people complaining about price gouging are simply uninformed. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

i smoked for about 8 years and was up to a pack and a half a day. i quit cold turkey, although it took me 4-5 serious tries (two weeks or more) before i got it. in august it will be 4 years since i quit. i don't have any cravings, even when i'm with friends who smoke heavily the idea of having one doesn't enter my mind. quitting was one of the hardest things i've ever done. i found this website helpfull; http://whyquit.com/ i was the smoker in the group that you would bet money on that i would never quit. edit; the being in a bar and especially being really full were the worst and probably took well over a year to go away. good luck "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

just who exactly is making money, the researchers, cmon thats just silly. if they're so desperate for research money then why not get it for something thats real or something that they care about? The idea that thousands of scientist are falsifying research just to get research money is absurd. if anyone is motivated by money its the people in power who might lose money if our wasteful society wasn't so wasteful. here in canada the government made sure to make exceptions for the tar sands operations from the new environmental laws. otherwise they would have lost money. so there is a clear and strong motivation to deny global warming. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

A friend of mine suggested i watch" the great global warming swindle", so i did, with an open mind. I then decided to watch "Scam the great global warming swindle". http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-1656640542976216573&q=the+great+global+warming+swindle this video brutally exposes how the makers of "the great global warming swindle" manipulated and misrepresented data and that the basic premises of the film completely fall apart under scrutiny. it became comedic when he showed the final 20years of the sun spot/ temp graph that were missing in the real film. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

If global warming is not caused by humans then what is the motive for so many scientists to claim that it is caused by humans? Or are they simply mistaken? "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

maybe try one of these; honda's new offer for new riders; 125cc w gear for something like 3300$ new. http://www.mc.honda-eu.com/uk/en/mc/125cc/cbr125r/introduction/introduction.jsp "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

gasoline consumption has continued to grow despite rising prices so what makes you think rising prices will curb growth let alone reduce consumption? Obviously there is a price at which people will reduce consumption but I don't believe we are anywhere near that point. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

Searing Summer of Gasoline Shortages By Matthew Simmons http://www.evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=1252 article found at; http://www.theoildrum.com/ "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

electric car burns ferrari and porsche, badly; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqqtJpfZElQ "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

http://www.nothingtoxic.com/media/1179137892/Total_Nutcase_from_Vanuatu_Bungee_Jumps_Using_Vines "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

I find this surprising. when i went bungee jumping i searched for fatality/injury statistics and could not find anything other than the location i had chosen, which claimed 150000+ jumps incident free. so if you have some statistics or references i would like to see them. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

there is no need to argue people, everything is explained clearly right here with a little british comedy; http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7374585792978336967&q=The+End+of+Suburbia&hl=en friggin hilarious "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

http://www.nothingtoxic.com/media/1174818438/Incredible_Base_Jump_into_a_Cave_in_Oman "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

i wasn't sure were to post this. i was just reading skydiving magazine and came accross this; "The new focus on student training reportedly is a consequence of five fatal accidents involving students that occurred at one Canadian drop zone over a six-year span in the 1990s." "A CSPA official said the accidents occurred at a non-CSPA facility run by a man "who thumbed his nose" at the organization and the government." being canadian i would like to know which dz/operator this was so i can avoid it and him. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

that number seems kinda small so i googled it and found; "On any given day, more than 87,000 flights are in the skies in the United States." source: http://www.natca.org/mediacenter/bythenumbers.msp "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9050474362583451279&q=money+as+debt "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

i googled iraq death toll and found estimates ranging from 30 000 to 655 000. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

what % of deaths in iraq as a result of coalition forces actions or insurgent actions are innocent civilians.excluding coalition forces from total deaths number. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

Finally stating the obvious; http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17080934/site/newsweek/ "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7374585792978336967&q=The+End+of+Suburbia&hl=en funny and educational "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

it is not an assertion it is fact. just go look at any of the projections for where future oil production will come from. you completely missed the point of the video linked at the beginning or more likely didn't watch it. the point is that even if we did find massive new oil deposits or opened up restricted areas it would do nothing satiate our exponentiel demand. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

actually this is exactly the point we are at now. the point when we start depending on massive increases in the production of tar sands oil production, with a questionable return on energy invested, just to offset the decline in conventional oil production. "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs

here is the overall trend in oil prices since 1988. http://www.oilnergy.com/1obrent.htm#since88 "Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs