Peak Oil energy crisis - The End of Suburbia

http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/Introduction.html

http://www.hubbertpeak.com/

http://www.oilcrisis.com/summary.htm

50~100 years after the depletion of petroleum, it is estimated that over half of the world's population will die off, unless another source of cheap energy can be found/invented.

 

On the issue of peak oil, you could look into the advances that are being made possible by nanotechnology. Solar energy will be made viable by huge reductions in manufacturing costs of PV systems and battery technology will increase in capacity and fall in price. Along with the development of electric cars, these developments could actually encourage sprawl. Decentrallized solar energy systems are not conducive to compact communities.
I realize that there are opinions expressed here but in my own searches to learn about these topics, this is the direction I have come. There are several topics and opinions here that you can seek to prove or disprove. All of the topics and links found above are pure opinion supported by debatable facts. Separating out the opinions in your search will not be possible.

Also, the issues are not globally applied. Each culture and geographic region will have it's own unique problems and solutions to the coming crisis. To the well prepared, it will not be a crisis at all but just another evolution of our culture, not unlike the changes that occured in the last century. We are no better prepared to see into this next hundred years than those from a hundred years ago were able to predict the 20th century.

 

To be sure, cheap oil helped push the Suburbia sprawl. But especially in the United States, low mortgage interest rates and being able to deduct mortgage interest were at least as important, if not more so.

You also have government agencies like Fannie Mae (Federal National Mortgage Association Charter Act 1968) and Freddie Mac (Federal Home
Loan Mortgage Corporation Act 1970) that have guaranteed and purchased tens of millions of home mortgages.

Here in Canada, recent housing booms have been caused by the spatial distribution of the population and by cheap land 30-60 mins from major urban areas. Many consider the spatial distribution of population the primary reason for Canada using twice the energy per capita as Europe, and 40% more energy per capita than the United States.

I agree with Ray that innovative and unique technologies like nanotech will burst onto the scene and completely change how we consider the production and distribution of energy.

I also agree with senna4ever that if the oil wells run dry, we're screwed. One thing that few people know or understand is that petroleum is used to make most fertilizers. Take away the fertilizer and at least 1/3 of the global population expires.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(\"jayman\";p=\"81330\")</div>

Jay- I thought that was because of the 40 below zero temps that ya'll survive each winter. It could have to do with the fact that Canada is a net exporter of oil. Burn it if you got it.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jayman\";p=\"81330)</div>

It's not just fertilizer. It's the mechanized harvesting of crops. No fuel to power the big machinery, not as much yield as currently harvested. Hence, less efficient production of food.

The article I read said that 50~100 years after petroleum runs out, the global human population will go back to roughly the same as it was just before the Industrial Revolution. Of course, this is a worst case scenario. Scary to think about it, though.

 

That wouldn't occur simply due to oil depletion. We are not going to simply lose out on all the technological gains and go back to subsistence farming. The articles that take the discussion in that direction completely ignore huge parts of the picture in order to paint a dark and scary picture. They do their cause no good. It's like GM spreading vicious rumors about the Prius but on a grand scale. Things will not be the same but they never are. Oil depletion will be a significant factor in the future of human evolution. It may take a back seat to disease. There are far too many variables and unknowns to make accurate predictions but it is safe to say that post oil depletion, we will not forget everything we have learned. If you said that some of us would go back to that way of life, I would agree. There are always the privileged ones that are insulated by wealth and that will insure that we will not only maintain a modern lifestyle but continue to advance it in the face of world wide crisis. The energy picture will tighten but the sky will not fall. Beware of the chicken littles as they only hurt the credibility of our cause.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ray Moore\";p=\"81354)</div>

Ray:

Studies have been done on this and transportation eats up a lot of energy here, just like everywhere else in the Western Industrialized World.

For example, once you leave Winnipeg, and the bedroom communities that have sprung up within 30 mins drive of Winnipeg, you have a long lonely drive before you encounter anything resembling civilization. Hard to believe for folks in Europe but you can easily drive 2-4 hours before seeing more populated than a truck stop.

The cold winters don't help though. Since I've also lived in a very hot climate (Mesquite, NV) I wonder if summer A/C energy use and winter heating energy use aren't roughly equal?

That is, homes around here have +80,000 BTU furnaces but rarely over 1.5-2 tons cooling. Same size home in a place like St George, UT or Mesquite, NV, would need 3-3.5 tons minimum. And the cooling season down there easily lasts as long as the heating season up here.

As far as "use it if you got it," for a long time now Canada has had relatively high fuel costs. Not all of it can be explained by taxation, as it sure as h*** isn't being spent on roads. You can "thank" Trudeau for that one, his energy policy that served to fully alienate and disenfranchise the Western provinces.

There also aren't any programs to encourage folks to purchase fuel-efficient cars, front loading washing machines. and the like. Sure, little giveaways but nothing serious. All PM Dithers (Paul Martin) could come up with is the "one tonne challenge."

The "one tonne challenge" is simply what it implies: the government challenges you to reduce your CO2 emissions by one metric ton or 1 tonne. Sounds like a threat to me: hey we f***** up with this Kyoto thing so you taxpayers better save our fat a**!

Jay

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(senna4ever\";p=\"81426)</div>

You got it. To fully appreciate the problem, consider the modern tractor. You need gobs of petroleum to make the stupid thing, the tires need oil to make them, oil in the crank, oil in the TDH sump, diesel fuel in the tank, etc etc etc.

A lot of folks think of fuel when they think of crude oil. They can't even imagine things like plastics (Nylon, Rayon, PVC, etc), medicines, pesticides, fertilizers, herbicides, roads, tires, etc etc etc.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ray Moore\";p=\"81432)</div>

Ray:

Geez, yesterday I had the radio on and according to the Winnipeg-based National Microbiology Laboratory, they had received from Meridian what was supposed to be an "ordinary" flu strain.

Turns out it was in fact the deadly H2N2 flu that caused a 1957 pandemic, and if released again could have caused another pandemic. The National Microbiology Lab immediately informed the CDC, and took proper steps to destroy the mislabeled sample.

Ever wonder just how close we routinely come to catastrophe?

Jay

 

Stewart Brand has a nice summary article in the current Technology Review. See http://tinyurl.com/6n4wu

A few more points:
Hydrocarbons are great feedstocks for chemical industries and energy storage for vehicles. When necessary we can make hydrocarbons from air using our favorite energy input.
Nuclear fission power is an excellent near-term solution but will last only for a few centuries; Solar power collected in low Earth orbit will take decades to build but can supply us forever.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jayman\";p=\"81451)</div>

not even close. even in the mild winters where i live, the cold uses much more power than the air conditioning did last year. and although our summers are just as mild, the only thing i have to go by is the hottest summer i have ever seen in Western Wa last year. hot as it was, its no where near as bad as most southern tier states. but temp is a killer and you have to look at logistics really.

how cold does it have to be before you want some heat? in the grand scheme of things... not very.

our comfort zone is simply much closer to the hot end of things. if its 100º F we want it to be 70º F a difference of 30ºF. now if its 20ºF we still want it to be 70ºF then its 50º difference. so you see, cold comfort simply uses more because it has farther to go.

couple that with high efficient air conditioning and you will find that the hit for air conditioning is only 2-3 mpg in 100ºF from what i got last summer. in the winter, i easily double that hit for what is considered "indian summer" weather for most people on this forum.

 

Dave:

Up here with electric baseboard heat, you can expect a power bill of $250-$350 in January. I know folks in St George, UT (Temps up to 105-110) and Mesquite, NV (Temps 110-115) who can expect a power bill that high (After currency exchange to even it out) in July and August.

It's also ironic that the very things that make a house easy to heat up here, such as nice south and west facing windows, make it almost impossible to cool in summer. Proper overhangs help with the south windows, a full exterior shade helps with the west window.

Of course, if you have appliances in the house that dump a lot of heat (Cooking, dryer, lights and TV, etc), that only helps heat the home in winter. The "waste" really isn't going to much waste. But in summer when you have to cool, that comes back to hit you.

Jay

 

ya and dont forget the gas money it will cost you to drive back and forth between winnipeg and utah.

 

Dave:

I've made that drive at least 10 times and keep saying Never Again. At the very least, I prefer to fly. Even better would be to just settle down in one place and be done with it.

Jay

 

what's the R insulation value of a home in Mesquite compared to Winterpeg? I would hazzard a guess that it's higher in the Peg. My mom's house in the southern interior where it get's into the hundreds and the minus 30's had R120 in the roof and R60 walls, would that compare to the Peg?

 

Frank:

Code here is R40 roof, and I think you're still allowed to use 2x4 walls which will only hold R12.

Most homes in Mesquite have 2x6 with icynene or fiberglass insulation, with minimum R50 roof. A lot of folks ask the roof to be increased to R60.

Your Aunt has a home with R120 roof and R60 walls? I didn't think such a beast was possible! It sure would be easy to heat and cool though.

How do you make an R60 wall? Double Wall system?

Jay

 

it was my mom's former house, she's in assisted care now, yup custom built 2/6 offset walls with styrofoam outer and fiberglass inner and insulated vinyl siding. I forget the actual makeup of the roof layers but I do know that it was styrofoam. In Princeton and it had a 85,000 btu medium efficency furnace and a window hanger for cooling. I remember that her energy bill was way less than mine in Vancouver.

 

Winterpeg!! LOLOL

 

Frank:

That is *very* impressive. Imagine how much energy this country would save if every new home was made that way. Though unless that home was huge, the 85,000 BTU furnace was probably *way* oversized. Maybe 40,000 BTU would have worked just fine.

My hobby farm home is around 1450 sq ft and has a 60,000 BTU Bryant Evolution networked variable induction furnace. Even at -40, high fire rarely is needed. The vast majority of the time it heats just fine on low fire, around 25,000 BTU.

On a typical 1500 sq ft bungalow around here, going from R40 to R60 roof adds around $400. If you just price the materials, going up to R120 from R40 would add around $1,100 to the finished price of the home.

On a mass-produced scale the extra cost to building a double-wall system would really come down. I do know a few folks who have built homes with double-wall 2x4 and 2x6.

It adds around 25-30% to the material cost of the home. Like you said, the heating and cooling costs become trivial. I would imagine the house would also be *very* quiet too.

The biggest problem? You have a wall that is at least 8 inches wide, 12 inches with a double 2x6. Plus add 1/2 inch for interior drywall and at least 1 inch for exterior cladding (Siding or stucco). So it's hard to find a jambliner that fits and works. You usually end up making a custom PVC jamb extension.

With my hobby farm, I went with ICF walls that have a finished width of around 12 inches. All Weather Windows makes a custom line of PVC windows with jambliners that will work in that application. They even had a drywall return clip on the inside jambliner.

A lot of folks would balk at spending - overall - around $2,500 to more than triple their home R value. These same folks have no problem dropping $4,000 for a custom dining room table and hutch. Whatever floats their boat!

Jay