Jump to content

SUBIECTE NOI
« 1 / 5 »
RSS
Smartphone 500 lei

Cine sunt candidatii la sefia DNA...

Isus

Placa video geforce 1030
 Restaurantele din Romania

Azile de batrani Bucuresti

Ford EcoSport

Acte necesare inmatriculare auto
 Vreau sa conectez o consola sony ...

Masina de spalat care invarte mai...

Sfat achizitionare laptop multi-p...

Cum credeți ca ar arata lumea dac...
 Calorifer aluminiu pe orizontala ...

Gresia noua suna

Traim timpul ”jumatați...

De ce romanii din diaspora urasc ...
 

Viata fara petrol II

- - - - -
  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
244 replies to this topic

#1
jormungandr

jormungandr

    Junior

  • Grup: Members
  • Posts: 253
  • Înscris: 13.12.2008
Banuiesc ca multi sunteti destul de plictisiti de subiectul "peak oil", pe seama caruia s-a aberat la greu in ultimii ani.
Iata insa ca a aparut si un semnal foarte serios de alarma din partea unei surse serioase si anume din partea Agentiei Energetice Internationale. De data asta nu mai e vorba de povesti conspirationiste difuzate pe iutub ci de date rezultate din niste cercetari serioase.
Cateva fragmente dintr-un articol din "The Guardian":


When will the oil run out?
George Monbiot puts the question to Fatih Birol, chief economist of the International Energy Agency - and is both astonished and alarmed by the answer

Can you think of a major threat for which the British government does not prepare? It employs an army of civil servants, spooks and consultants to assess the chances of terrorist attacks, financial collapse, floods, epidemics, even asteroid strikes, and to work out what it should do if they happen. But there is one hazard about which it appears intensely relaxed: it has never conducted its own assessment of the state of global oil supplies and the possibility that one day they might peak and then go into decline.

If you ask, the government always produces the same response: "Global oil resources are adequate for the foreseeable future." It knows this, it says, because of the assessments made by the International Energy Agency (IEA) in its World Energy Outlook reports. In the 2007 report, the IEA does appear to support the government's view. "World oil resources," it states, "are judged to be sufficient to meet the projected growth in demand to 2030," though it says nothing about what happens at that point, or whether they will continue to be sufficient after 2030. But this, as far as Whitehall is concerned, is the end of the matter. Like most of the rich world's governments, the UK treats the IEA's projections as gospel.

...

So the IEA had better be right. In the report on peak oil commissioned by the US department of energy, the oil analyst Robert L Hirsch concluded that "without timely mitigation, the economic, social and political costs" of world oil supplies peaking "will be unprecedented". He went on to explain what "timely mitigation" meant. Even a worldwide emergency response "10 years before world oil peaking", he wrote, would leave "a liquid-fuels shortfall roughly a decade after the time that oil would have peaked". To avoid global economic collapse, we need to begin "a mitigation crash programme 20 years before peaking". If Hirsch is right, and if oil supplies peak before 2028, we're in deep doodah.

So burn this into your mind: between 2007 and 2008 the IEA radically changed its assessment. Until this year's report, the agency mocked people who said that oil supplies might peak. In the foreword to a book it published in 2005, its executive director, Claude Mandil, dismissed those who warned of this event as "doomsayers". "The IEA has long maintained that none of this is a cause for concern," he wrote. "Hydrocarbon resources around the world are abundant and will easily fuel the world through its transition to a sustainable energy future." In its 2007 World Energy Outlook, the IEA predicted a rate of decline in output from the world's existing oilfields of 3.7% a year. This, it said, presented a short-term challenge, with the possibility of a temporary supply crunch in 2015, but with sufficient investment any shortfall could be covered. But the new report, published last month, carried a very different message: a projected rate of decline of 6.7%, which means a much greater gap to fill.

More importantly, in the 2008 report the IEA suggests for the first time that world petroleum supplies might hit the buffers. "Although global oil production in total is not expected to peak before 2030, production of conventional oil ... is projected to level off towards the end of the projection period." These bland words reveal a major shift. Never before has one of the IEA's energy outlooks forecast the peaking or plateauing of the world's conventional oil production (which is what we mean when we talk about peak oil).

But that is as specific as the report gets. Does it or doesn't it mean that we have time to prepare? What does "towards the end of the projection period" mean? The agency has never produced a more precise forecast - until now. For the first time, in the interview I conducted with its chief economist Fatih Birol recently, it has given us a date. And it should scare the pants off anyone who understands the implications.

Birol, the lead author of the new energy outlook, is a small, shrewd, unflustered man with thick grey hair and Alistair Darling eyebrows. He explained to me that the agency's new projections were based on a major study it had undertaken into decline rates in the world's 800 largest oilfields. So what were its previous figures based on? "It was mainly an assumption, a global assumption about the world's oil fields. This year, we looked at it country by country, field by field and we looked at it also onshore and offshore. It was very, very detailed. Last year it was an assumption, and this year it's a finding of our study." I told him that it seemed extraordinary to me that the IEA hadn't done this work before, but had based its assessment on educated guesswork. "In fact nobody had done this research," he told me. "This is the first publicly available data."

So was it not irresponsible to publish a decline rate of 3.7% in 2007, when there was no proper research supporting it? "No, our previous decline assumptions have always mentioned that these are assumptions to the best of our knowledge - and we also said that the declines [could be] higher than what we have assumed."

Then I asked him a question for which I didn't expect a straight answer: could he give me a precise date by which he expects conventional oil supplies to stop growing?

"In terms of non-Opec [countries outside the big oil producers' cartel]," he replied, "we are expecting that in three, four years' time the production of conventional oil will come to a plateau, and start to decline. In terms of the global picture, assuming that Opec will invest in a timely manner, global conventional oil can still continue, but we still expect that it will come around 2020 to a plateau as well, which is, of course, not good news from a global-oil-supply point of view."

Around 2020. That casts the issue in quite a different light. Birol's date, if correct, gives us about 11 years to prepare. If the Hirsch report is right, we have already missed the boat. Birol says we need a "global energy revolution" to avoid an oil crunch, including (disastrously for the environment) a massive global drive to exploit unconventional oils, such as the Canadian tar sands. But nothing on this scale has yet happened, and Hirsch suggests that even if it began today, the necessary investments and infrastructure changes could not be made in time. Birol told me: "I think time is not on our side here."

When I pressed him on the shift in the agency's position, he argued that the IEA has been saying something like this all along. "We said in the past that one day we will run out of oil. We never said that we will have hundreds of years of oil ... but what we have said is that this year, compared with past years, we have seen that the decline rates are significantly higher than what we have seen before. But our line that we are on an unsustainable energy path has not changed."

This, of course, is face-saving nonsense. There is a vast difference between a decline rate of 3.7% and 6.7%. There is an even bigger difference between suggesting that the world is following an unsustainable energy path - a statement almost everyone can subscribe to - and revealing that conventional oil supplies are likely to plateau around 2020. If this is what the IEA meant in the past, it wasn't expressing itself very clearly.

So what do we do? We could take to the hills, or we could hope and pray that Hirsch is wrong about the 20-year lead time, and begin a global crash programme today of fuel efficiency and electrification. In either case, the British government had better start drawing up some contingency plans.


Sursa: guardian.co.uk

Sper sa nu se supere acum moderatorii pe mine pentru ca am mai postat aceleasi citate si pe alt topic si sa considere lucrul asta ca fiind vreo incercare de spam, dar acolo contextul era altul. :peacefingers:

#2
ndc74

ndc74

    Junior

  • Grup: Members
  • Posts: 312
  • Înscris: 13.03.2007

View Postjormungandr, on Dec 16 2008, 13:57, said:

Sper sa nu se supere acum moderatorii pe mine pentru ca am mai postat aceleasi citate si pe alt topic si sa considere lucrul asta ca fiind vreo incercare de spam, dar acolo contextul era altul. :peacefingers:
Sigur o sa se supere :coolspeak: ca ai redeschis acesta tema fiebinte ce a fost inchisa brusc acum cateva luni.  
In mareata lor viziune, scaderea actuala a pretului titeiului a rezolvat criza care se preconizeaza peste 1-2 decenii.

Edited by ndc74, 16 December 2008 - 14:55.


#3
jafpefata

jafpefata

    Active Member

  • Grup: Banned
  • Posts: 3,700
  • Înscris: 26.09.2007
Presimt că o să vină și 3 și 4..

#4
ndc74

ndc74

    Junior

  • Grup: Members
  • Posts: 312
  • Înscris: 13.03.2007

View Postjafpefata, on Dec 16 2008, 15:03, said:

Presimt că o să vină și 3 și 4..
Da, va fi un contor care sa contorizeze anii scursi de la PO (care apropos cica a avut loc in vara asta). :D
Subiectul asta e ca o cutie a Pandorei. :rolleyes:

Edited by ndc74, 16 December 2008 - 15:33.


#5
turbo trabannt

turbo trabannt

    gogule, probleme mah? no, stai sa termin berea asta

  • Grup: Senior Members
  • Posts: 20,519
  • Înscris: 18.05.2006
sunteti dusi cu pluta daca ati redeschis aberatia aia de topic.

#6
ndc74

ndc74

    Junior

  • Grup: Members
  • Posts: 312
  • Înscris: 13.03.2007

View Postturbo trabannt, on Dec 16 2008, 15:54, said:

sunteti dusi cu pluta daca ati redeschis aberatia aia de topic.
:lol:  :lol:  :lol:

#7
Mosotti

Mosotti

    Geniu umil

  • Grup: Senior Members
  • Posts: 31,391
  • Înscris: 21.04.2004
cind moderatoru nu-i acasa joaca ticnitii pe masa, ziceau bunicii

#8
jet li

jet li

    Active Member

  • Grup: Senior Members
  • Posts: 2,828
  • Înscris: 26.08.2006
Il stiti pe asta ?
[ http://dofb.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/jeremy_clarkson_top_gear.jpg - Pentru incarcare in pagina (embed) Click aici ]

Intre timp a devenit mare doomer :)
http://www.timesonli...icle5292547.ece

Quote

The binary dots and dashes that fuel the entire system will flicker and die. And without money there will be no business. No means of selling goods. No means of transporting them. No means of making them in the first place even. That’s why another friend of mine has recently sold his London house and bought somewhere in the country . . . with a kitchen garden.

These, as I see them, are the facts. Planet Earth thought it had £10. But it turns out we had only £2. Which means everyone must lose 80% of their wealth. And that’s going to be a problem if you were living on the breadline beforehand.

Eventually, of course, the system will reboot itself, but for a while there will be absolute chaos: riots, lynchings, starvation. It’ll be a world without power or fuel, and with no fuel there’s no way the modern agricultural system can be maintained. Which means there will be no food either. You might like to stop and think about that for a while.

Quote

The Clarksometer
Vauxhall Insignia 2.8 V6 4x4 Elite Nav
ENGINE 2792cc, six cylinders
POWER 256bhp @ 5500rpm
TRANSMISSION 258 lb ft @ 1900rpm
FUEL 24.4mpg (combined)
CO2 272g/km
ACCELERATION 0-60mph: 6.7sec
TOP SPEED 155mph
PRICE £28,280
ROAD TAX BAND G (£400 a year)
RELEASE DATE On sale now

Clarkson’s Verdict Who cares? We’re all doomed anyway


#9
geo_contact

geo_contact

    Junior

  • Grup: Members
  • Posts: 255
  • Înscris: 10.07.2005
Intre toate scumpe si bani prea putini        si        toate ieftine si fara bani, ce ati prefera !  Consider ca este unul si acelasi lucru.

#10
Valentine

Valentine

    Un Mosotti mai serios.

  • Grup: Senior Members
  • Posts: 4,279
  • Înscris: 30.11.2003

View Postjormungandr, on Dec 16 2008, 03:57, said:

Banuiesc ca multi sunteti destul de plictisiti de subiectul "peak oil", pe seama caruia s-a aberat la greu in ultimii ani.
Iata insa ca a aparut si un semnal foarte serios de alarma din partea unei surse serioase si anume din partea Agentiei Energetice Internationale. De data asta nu mai e vorba de povesti conspirationiste difuzate pe iutub ci de date rezultate din niste cercetari serioase.
Sigur. Fix de acuma nu mai sunt masonii de vina, sunt cercetari stiintifice :)

#11
m3th0dman

m3th0dman

    ¡ɹǝʌo uɹnʇ

  • Grup: Moderators
  • Posts: 9,265
  • Înscris: 03.01.2007
Eu acum mi-am dat seama că criza economică a fost declanșată de închiderea primului volum al vieții fără petrol.

#12
biciclistu

biciclistu

    Junior

  • Grup: Members
  • Posts: 56
  • Înscris: 10.08.2007
Catre mosoti, valentin, picard, trabant, vali vijelie si toti care va mai simtiti in forma psihiatrica incompleta pe forumul asta... bai nene, nu mai putem de voi, auziti? Faceti-va pierduti, dispareti o perioada, insurati-va, copii, hobby in aer liber, cantarstraic, dansuri bretone, orice v-ar relaxa acceleratia neuronala!!!
Chiar nu se mai poate discuta despre cel mai evident si cumplit adevar din istorie fara ca frustrati ca voi sa va pisati contra vantului si/sau sa inchideti topicurile??? Huuo, rusine softpedia!

#13
Valentine

Valentine

    Un Mosotti mai serios.

  • Grup: Senior Members
  • Posts: 4,279
  • Înscris: 30.11.2003

View Postbiciclistu, on Dec 16 2008, 15:37, said:

Chiar nu se mai poate discuta despre cel mai evident si cumplit adevar din istorie fara ca frustrati ca voi sa va pisati contra vantului si/sau sa inchideti topicurile??? Huuo, rusine softpedia!
Gresesti amice. Cel mai cumplit adevar din istorie este ca evreii nu au fost ucisi in WW2, ci au fost rapiti de aliensi ca sa fie supusi experimentelor cu Gadrasil, in timp ce privesc de pe hubloul OZNului cum oilul picuieste. Iar masonii rad intr-un colt.

#14
cardinal

cardinal

    Active Member

  • Grup: Senior Members
  • Posts: 3,127
  • Înscris: 28.06.2006
de cel mai cumplit adevar din istorie va veti lovi in curand :)
si e posibil sa nici nu stiti ce v-a lovit :drac:

#15
jafpefata

jafpefata

    Active Member

  • Grup: Banned
  • Posts: 3,700
  • Înscris: 26.09.2007

View Postbiciclistu, on Dec 17 2008, 01:37, said:

Catre mosoti, valentin, picard, trabant, vali vijelie si toti care va mai simtiti in forma psihiatrica incompleta pe forumul asta... bai nene, nu mai putem de voi, auziti? Faceti-va pierduti, dispareti o perioada, insurati-va, copii, hobby in aer liber, cantarstraic, dansuri bretone, orice v-ar relaxa acceleratia neuronala!!!
Chiar nu se mai poate discuta despre cel mai evident si cumplit adevar din istorie fara ca frustrati ca voi sa va pisati contra vantului si/sau sa inchideti topicurile??? Huuo, rusine softpedia!
Care din ăștia crezi că poate închide acest topic, din moment ce niciunul nu e mod. pe aria asta?

#16
ndc74

ndc74

    Junior

  • Grup: Members
  • Posts: 312
  • Înscris: 13.03.2007

View Postbiciclistu, on Dec 17 2008, 01:37, said:

Catre mosoti, valentin, picard, trabant, vali vijelie si toti care va mai simtiti in forma psihiatrica incompleta pe forumul asta... bai nene, nu mai putem de voi, auziti? Faceti-va pierduti, dispareti o perioada, insurati-va, copii, hobby in aer liber, cantarstraic, dansuri bretone, orice v-ar relaxa acceleratia neuronala!!!
Chiar nu se mai poate discuta despre cel mai evident si cumplit adevar din istorie fara ca frustrati ca voi sa va pisati contra vantului si/sau sa inchideti topicurile??? Huuo, rusine softpedia!
Ei sunt precum Toma Necredinciosu'.
Dar si cand ii va lovi, or sa creada ca i-a lovit trenul. :D

#17
Valentine

Valentine

    Un Mosotti mai serios.

  • Grup: Senior Members
  • Posts: 4,279
  • Înscris: 30.11.2003
M-a lovit oil picu asta rau de tot. De la 5$ pe galon platesc acuma 1$ pe galon. Cred ca e mai scump sa cumperi un litru de benzina in romanica decat sa cumpar un galon (4 litri) aici. Nu mai pot, nu mai stiu ce sa fac cu atatia bani extra :lol:

#18
jormungandr

jormungandr

    Junior

  • Grup: Members
  • Posts: 253
  • Înscris: 13.12.2008

View PostValentine, on Dec 16 2008, 19:52, said:

Sigur. Fix de acuma nu mai sunt masonii de vina, sunt cercetari stiintifice :)

Pai e cam ca in povestea cu Ionica si lupul. :) Atata au tot strigat unii "lupul!", pardon, "peak oil!", ca acum cand a aparut intr-adevar si un semnal de alarma din partea acelei agentii internationale care se ocupa fix de problemele energetice globale, putini il mai iau in serios. :)

Anunturi


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Forumul Softpedia foloseste "cookies" pentru a imbunatati experienta utilizatorilor Accept
Pentru detalii si optiuni legate de cookies si datele personale, consultati Politica de utilizare cookies si Politica de confidentialitate