Electric cars are a pipe dream

[spidergoat]

7.7 is not 70% of 35, it's more like 21%.


Petroleum is 35.268 quadrillion BTUs vs. 7.744 quadrillion BTUs for renewables (2009).
Source: http://www.eia.gov/aer/txt/ptb0103.html

 

[Billy T]

It's NOT a character attack Billy, all you do post is DOOM and GLOOM.

True, if you remove the word "all" - I give typically several reasons why actual facts indicate that is what appears to be coming. Why don't you try to show how it is not a problem that China is locking up oil supplies in long term contact and very much more able than the US to bid high for what oil the marked has to sell?

Hell, by dumping its bonds China can economically destroy the US when ever it choose, but it is not yet to its economic advantage to do so. First it must develop its internal market, increase its trade with other Asian nations and spend down more of its dollar reserves on more purchases of things it will need. All of this it is doing ASAP now. For example 511 billion dollars from reserves for 245 new nuclear power plants from western suppliers, who would be hard pressed to make a few for the US also, if the US were to get serious about adding nuclear power (Two now being built by Southern Electric are the first and only new ones in 35 years! - a token step, not serious). China is by far the dominate market for wind machines. World's largest maker will only sell there now. etc. and China has a 736 billion dollar budget for alternate energy systems. See details here: http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2671237&postcount=362

Are you not predicting a MASSIVE depression?

Yes. Going into debt in excess of 1 trillion dollars / year guarantees that (not to mention trillions more in unfunded liabilities). The US's debt to GDP ratio will soon be more than 100%. No nation has recovered from more than 90% in history with two exceptions that were the only country with significant manufacturing capacity.(England at start of industrial revolution had borrowed a lot to build factories for its captive empire markets and US at end of WWII.)

Have you not talked about armed men in the streets going house to house for food in the US?

Yes. Food prices are already at history highs, as are the number of Americans getting food assistance but when dollar collapses that will become much worse. Then is when, as always when the case when masses are hungry, that food looting happens. In the US's case it will be a greater problem to control as there are so many guns in the hand of so many.

...China has over ONE BILLION more people than we do, so selling more cars than we do is not that big of surprise in a rapidly industrializing nation. Arthur

Of course not, that is my point. China's need for oil will exceed the US's and they can pay for it at prices the US can not afford, assuming China ceases lending the US the money needed to buy it. The whole point of China sending US into deep, long-lasting depression is to reduce the US demand for things like oil that China needs.

You seem, to me, to think that technology (much of which we also buy from Asia) will some how save the US. You seem not to understand that a couple of decades are required to change over to a non-oil based economy, plus a huge amount of capital that China will not lend to the US when its economic interest is to see US & EU competitors for costly oil, etc. collapse.

 

[adoucette]

My bad.
I was looking at Production, instead of Consumption.
But that number still proves your assertion was wrong.
Clearly they aren't just "possible, theoretical or prototypes" as even 22% of our energy from Oil from renewables is a HUGE amount of energy, and it's set to grow more each year.

Arthur

 

[adoucette]

Billy,
There is no point arguing with you since none of your predictions have happened.

Like this piece of BS:

Food prices at already as history highs, as are the number of Americans getting food assistance but when dollar collapses that will become much worse. Then, as is always the case when masses are hungry, that food looting happens. In the US's case it will be a greater problem to control as there are so many guns in the hand of so many.

Billy, the US can feed itself, doesn't matter what happens to the Dollar.

Arthur

 

[Billy T]

There is no point arguing with you since none of your predictions have happened.

All have if there associated date or condition has passed. Name one that has not.
Many of my predictions apply after the dollar has collapsed and for years that cutoff date has been Halloween 2014.

...
Billy, the US can feed itself, doesn't matter what happens to the Dollar. Arthur

Yes the US has that capacity but there is much more to feeding Americans in the modern age than rain fall and abundant fertile land. Just the fact that the average food on your table traveled 1200 miles to get there should give you a clue. Plenty of parts of the world with starving children also have that capacity to feed themselves - that mean nothing if the required infrastructure either never existed or collapsed. (I am speaking mainly of the financial infrastructure that for example gets fertilizer's critical imports paid for and shipped, etc. Yes the tractors will still work, if they have gasoline.)

 

[adoucette]

Billy,
If the price of transporting food went up a lot it would change where it is grown.
We have plenty of land, water and ability to feed ourselves regardless of the price of oil.

Consider the following;

Those studies use distance to Terminals for specific products (mostly coming from long distances) but there is plenty of local produce that does not travel that far:

WASD = Weighted Average Source Distance

Local WASD distances ranged from 20 miles for broccoli and sweet corn to 75 miles for potatoes. (for 16 common fruits and veggies)

The average WASD distance for locally grown produce to reach institutional markets was 56 miles

My market lists origin of produce and YES I can buy tomatoes and grapes year round if I want, but then again I can buy them part of the year when they are grown locally and are cheaper.

Arthur

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

Plenty of parts of the world with starving children also have that capacity to feed themselves - that mean nothing if the required infrastructure either never existed or collapsed. (I am speaking mainly of the financial infrastructure that for example gets fertilizer's critical imports paid for and shipped, etc. Yes the tractors will still work, if they have gasoline.)

Yeah just look at the 'Bread Basket of Africa' that Zimbabwe (Rhodesia) used to be.

 

[spidergoat]

My bad.
I was looking at Production, instead of Consumption.
But that number still proves your assertion was wrong.
Clearly they aren't just "possible, theoretical or prototypes" as even 22% of our energy from Oil from renewables is a HUGE amount of energy, and it's set to grow more each year.

Arthur

Well, I can't help wondering why you want to compare it just to oil consumption and not total energy usage. Total percent is about 11, which is hardly encouraging. The largest renewable alternative source is biomass, which unfortunately through petroleum-based fertilizers is derived from oil to a great degree. There are no solar-powered tractors.

 

[adoucette]

Because we have no shortage of the others, so the only one we are talking about being an issue in the near future is Oil.

Being that we are the largest manufacturing economy on the globe, nearly twice the size of China, the fact that we get 11% from renewables is actually a LOT of energy, and it is growing each year.

And NO, we don't make fertilizer out of oil.

We use Natural Gas (or sometimes coal)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haber_process

Yes, there are no solar tractors, but they could run on Bio-diesel.

Arthur

 

[Billy T]

... And NO, we don't make fertilizer out of oil. ...
Arthur

I never suggested fertilizer was made from oil, although energy is required to produce it – for example to make the hydrogen for the NH3 (ammonia) electrolysis once was used, but in modern times the H mainly comes from CH4, natural gas.

Certainly the US need not import water (from which hydrogen can be obtained) nor nitrogen (80% of the air) so Ammonia nitrate, the first of three major fertilizer components, i.e. the N of N-K-P is not much directlyeffected by a weak dollar but even it would be effected by more costly transportation infrastructure that a collapsed dollar would cause.

The main fertilizer problem with a collapsed dollar would be with the P (Potash K2CO3) not NH3 or K:

“… The U.S. is a large importer of potash, with their production representing only 31% of U.S. imports. The majority of muriate of potash imports come from Canada. In 1996/97, imports rose by to reach 4.9 million tonnes K2O, and increase of 18% since 1991/92. The major sources of offshore potash to the U.S. are Israel and Russia. U.S. producers in 1996/97 exported 484,455 tonne K2O of potash, about one-third of its production.* From: http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1179252532274&lang=eng#a3.8.2 but here is more recent 2008 data:

China and US are largest user and both must, or at least currently do, import…”…Production, in millions of tonnes is: US =1.2 & China = 2.1 with Canada making 11 annually, mainly for exports, increasingly to China who is major reason priced at the Vancouver port has gone from $200 a few years ago to US$872.50 per tonne in 2009, which is a record high,” and still climbing rapidly.( As in other things, China can out bid the US.) quoted part from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potash

Potash Corp stock has doubled in 6 months: from $84.60 on 6 July 10 to $169.10 on 6 Jan 11** because food prices are at record high, so farmers are using more potash trying to boost the yield from their farms AND China is buying more from Canada.

-----------
* I don't think the US exports any now and that it imports more than 3/4 of its needs.
** And that is after BHP dropped it efforts to buy them.

 

[Billy T]

Yeah just look at the 'Bread Basket of Africa' that Zimbabwe (Rhodesia) used to be.

Thanks. Yes that shows my point that the supporting infrastructure, especially the financial infrastructure, is extremely important even if your country is blessed with rain and fertile soil.

Years ago (at least 25) I read a newspaper report that had head line something like "Idaho potato is 85% oil." The study the article was based on showed that the cost of one eaten in NYC was 85% due to the cost of oil, when all costs like pesticides, production energy cost, etc. were back-up to their oil inputs. The “oil cost" of one in NYC must be more than 95% oil now as oil was much cheaper back then.

This also makes my point: With a collapsed dollar, food prices will soar, much more rapidly than they are now. Many, if not all, inner city food stores will close as their customers cannot pay for that expensive food. A shocking and embarrassing percent for the world's richest country already cannot afford to buy the food they need.

When that (Inner city food stores closed) is the case, your head is in the sand if you don't expect looting for food in suburban homes.

 

[Stoniphi]

Apoologies for intruding on this...dialogue, but

...P (Potash K2CO3) not NH3 or K..

N P K is N = Nitrogen P = Phosphorus and K = potassium

and most of the US supply of phosphorus comes from either Florida or China.

Phosphorus can be easily obtained from human and animal waste sludge, if we were to bother removing it from that.

Carry on.

 

[adoucette]

I never suggested fertilizer was made from oil, although energy is required to produce it – for example to make the hydrogen for the NH3 (ammonia) electrolysis once was used, but in modern times the H mainly comes from CH4, natural gas.

Didn't say you did, that was directed to Spidergoat.

Certainly the US need not import water (from which hydrogen can be obtained) nor nitrogen (80% of the air) so Ammonia nitrate, the first of three major fertilizer components, i.e. the N of N-K-P is not much directlyeffected by a weak dollar but even it would be effected by more costly transportation infrastructure that a collapsed dollar would cause.

Again, you presume the dollar will collapse, but even if it did, we have plenty of energy to run our transportation system from within the US. Yes prices would be a somewhat higher, but we could do it.

I agree that if the Dollar was to collapse it would be a bad thing.
What I don't agree with is that you can presume that the Dollar WILL collapse.

Arthur

 

[Billy T]

... What I don't agree with is that you can presume that the Dollar WILL collapse. Arthur

Two questions then:
(1) How many years more can greater than trillion dollar deficits be sustained?
(2) How high can the Debt to GDP ratio go before collapse of the dollar is un-avoidable?

I don't expect you to give exact answers but more something like "For at least a decade more." but if you can be more accurate with a range (at least X but not more than Y) that would be better reply.

I remind you than only when England was the only country with factories and when US factories had not been destroyed by WWII, but greatly expanded, has any country in history ever recovered from Debt/GDP ratio > 0.9 and US is already at that ratio now.

 

[adoucette]

I remind you than only when England was the only country with factories and when not US had not destroyed by WWII, but greatly expanded factories has any country in history ever recovered from Debt/GDP ratio > 0.9 and US is already at that ratio.

England is gone?
I must have missed that newscast about Brits maurauding in the streets and looting food....

 

[spidergoat]

Because we have no shortage of the others, so the only one we are talking about being an issue in the near future is Oil.

Being that we are the largest manufacturing economy on the globe, nearly twice the size of China, the fact that we get 11% from renewables is actually a LOT of energy, and it is growing each year.

And NO, we don't make fertilizer out of oil.

We use Natural Gas (or sometimes coal)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haber_process

Yes, there are no solar tractors, but they could run on Bio-diesel.

Arthur

You are correct about the fertilizer, but it makes no difference. Coal and natural gas all have their own production peaks as well, it's not just oil we have to be concerned about. You can't run the agricultural industry on the same vegetable oil it has to produce for consumption, there isn't enough arable land. There simply aren't any scalable energy sources that could meet our needs in time to prevent a contraction of the economy.

 

[adoucette]

You are correct about the fertilizer, but it makes no difference. Coal and natural gas all have their own production peaks as well, it's not just oil we have to be concerned about.

Yes they do, but much further out than our production peak for oil.
Yes it will eventually become an issue, but not anytime soon, and so its real difficult to determine how my kid's kids will deal with this.

Again, I have to ask, are you worried about Global Warming?
Because if you are, then you are subsribing to a belief that our use of fossil fuels will go up over this century.

The belief that there is going to be a shortage of fossil fuels and there is also a need to curtail the use of fossil fuels to prevent global warming are mutually exclusive.

You can't run the agricultural industry on the same vegetable oil it has to produce for consumption, there isn't enough arable land. There simply aren't any scalable energy sources that could meet our needs in time to prevent a contraction of the economy.

It's really hard to get down to this level of usage, the record keeping just isn't that precise, but one can get an idea.

First, ~18% of our Oil becomes Diesel fuel

But, 75% of Diesel is used for highway Transportation, leaving just 4.5% of our diesel oil for other uses.

And ~75% of farm equipment is run on Diesel

But then consider that nearly all semi-trailer trucks, delivery vehicles, buses, trains, ships, boats, barges, farm, construction, and military vehicles and equipment have diesel engines, so farm use as a percent of that 4.5% of our oil use has to be pretty small.

So, yes, I do think farming can easily raise sufficinet bio-diesel to be self sustaining.

Arthur

 

[Billy T]

England is gone?
I must have missed that newscast about Brits maurauding in the streets and looting food....

No their >90% debt/GDP ratio did not destroy them as the debt was borrowing to build the world's first industralized society at the start of the industrial revolution - They not only were the only country with looms for cloth etc but had an Empire no one else could sell to, so that debt was a very wise investment, quickly repaid.

In contrast the US's current debt has been for consumption - living beyond it means - and factories have closed as those in Asia were built (many more modern than in the US's, where some still stem from the WWII era in many basic cases like steel production.)

The harsh conditions for the workers, often young children, in England did give rise to some literary protest (Perhaps other forms too - I'm not well versed on that period of English history.) especially Charles Dicken's books and of course, Karl Marx's books and communism as he was living in England then.

 

[adoucette]

No their debt/GDP ratio did not destroy them

Then you admit that a high debt/GDP ratio doesn't have to result in ruin.

Arthur

 

[spidergoat]

The economy is barely growing as it is, can you imagine what would happen if there were any perturbation in our supply of light, sweet, crude? We know there are other sources of energy out there, we even have a lot of coal, which we will inevitably use, but, all indications are that no combination of things will allow our pattern of growth that has occurred for the last 100 years or so of dirt cheap, easily transportable, easily transformable, energy. Capitalism is based on growth, if we aren't growing, we are stagnating, and it's a recession. I have no doubt it's physically possible to run form of society on the energy sources available, but it won't be like anything we know now. So, we are in for the long emergency, a scenario predicted by James Howard Kunstler. He predicts the end of suburbia, a contraction of society towards urban areas and small towns with local economies based mostly on agriculture, and efficient public transportation in the form of trains. But the path from here to there seems to get more difficult every day.