how it ends (1 Viewer)

[SylviaB]

dw, I think objectivist ethics (let alone ALL ethics) are a load of shit

i like atlas however because of the way it enables people to truly visualise the consequences of escalating statism in a way that, say, a book on economics doesn't

 

[thongetsu]

Dinosaurs will roam the EARTH once again. This time they will have guns and laser beams.

 

[Rothbard]

none of those things is possible on this scale without oil. there are no other realistic sources of plastics.

ftfy

 

[Rothbard]

The only possible way for humanity to end is some larger astrophysical phenomenon (vacuum metastability event, nearby star going supernova, aggressive aliens, etc) and even that's unlikely.

vacuum metastability events fucking TERRIFY ME.

I'm thinking gray goo, or bioengineered viruses, potentially.

 

[Graney]

The problem with peak oil is not the declining oil supply in itself, but the things that nations will do in their final days of petroleum dependency to secure reliable energy supplies.

Alternative energy sources may be possible, but they will need to become commercially viable within a relatively small time frame or terrible things may happen

 

[Richard Gilmore]

The problem with peak oil is not the declining oil supply in itself, but the things that nations will do in their final days of petroleum dependency to secure reliable energy supplies.

War churns through oil faster than anything else.

 

[Cinnamonster]

...the world won't end until the Sun engulfs it. None of those things will destroy the planet.

Exactly what I was going to say.
I actually once did a speech about the end of the world (I did a few speeches about the end of the world now that I think about it...). The topic was 'The Future Looks Bright'. Hah.

 

[Optimus Prime]

yeah it'll be really fucking bright.

Considering we have essentially unlimited energy from the sun we can make anything from anything.

 

[Slidey]

yeah it'll be really fucking bright.

Considering we have essentially unlimited energy from the sun we can make anything from anything.

Agreed.

 

[Richard Gilmore]

i mean, we've had success from the sun so far (42.5% record efficiency oooh yehhh) and it only took the earth however many million years of sunlight and immense pressure to make the energy we currently use.

it's gonna be EASY to make that ourselves!

 

[Slidey]

i mean, we've had success from the sun so far (42.5% record efficiency oooh yehhh) and it only took the earth however many million years of sunlight and immense pressure to make the energy we currently use.

it's gonna be EASY to make that ourselves!

OH WOULD SHUT UP you gloomy socialist. The world is doomed, yada yada, we get it.

That efficiency level is more than enough. Anybody with the slightest scientific background would be able to point out to you that comparing efficiencies accross incomparable technologies is an exercise in futility (apples vs oranges).

The average car's internal combustion engine only burns fuel at an average of 20% efficiency (thermodynamic limit is 37%). Can you perhaps see the abject stupidity of what you post?

The sun blankets the earth. You don't need 80% efficiency to capture sufficient amounts of energy to rival combustion even if that combustion might be 70% efficient (e.g. rocket engines).

 

[Optimus Prime]

42.5% is higher than for combined cycle coal.

and what slidey said, you can't compare.
We've only had electricity for ~130 years

 

[Richard Gilmore]

OH WOULD SHUT UP you gloomy socialist. The world is doomed, yada yada, we get it.

That efficiency level is more than enough. Anybody with the slightest scientific background would be able to point out to you that comparing efficiencies accross incomparable technologies is an exercise in futility (apples vs oranges).

The average car's internal combustion engine only burns fuel at an average of 20% efficiency (thermodynamic limit is 37%). Can you perhaps see the abject stupidity of what you post?

The sun blankets the earth. You don't need 80% efficiency to capture sufficient amounts of energy to rival combustion even if that combustion might be 70% efficient (e.g. rocket engines).

hmmm, you probably got me on that point (the efficiency one, not the solar being a pipe dream one)

apart from that post everything else i've posted in this thread has been rock solid

 

[Richard Gilmore]

Let's get back to some central questions

-Explain to me where 6 billion people are going to get what they need to feed themselves without synthetic fertilisers?
-Explain to me how nuclear power is going to replace oil when it's projected to last about a hundred years into the future at current consumption rates

etc
etc
etc

 

[SylviaB]

new technologies will emerge

existing technologies will be greatly improved


you can't simultaneously claim that capitalists are greedy AND that they won't find a way to supply the world's EXTREME demand for energy in the coming years

 

[Lentern]

Let's get back to some central questions

-Explain to me where 6 billion people are going to get what they need to feed themselves without synthetic fertilisers?
-Explain to me how nuclear power is going to replace oil when it's projected to last about a hundred years into the future at current consumption rates

etc
etc
etc

Genetic modification for foods will solve that crisis. Yes we'll whine and cry that "it's not unnatural" but ultimately when people are fed and well fed at that because we can grow crops faster, bigger and in a greater range of environments they'll stfo.

 

[Richard Gilmore]

no, they won't. they will not find a way to supply the worlds 6 billion people with another fuel, another petrochemical feedstock, and another

the fuel question is at least a little bit open (not really though). the other two are shut cases. the only arguments i've heard have involved slidey stamping his feet on the ground yabbering on about vastly inefficient, dead end processes for fertiliser production and pointing out that we can get ethanol from other places and hence the world is saved.

what a douche

 

[Slidey]

-Explain to me how nuclear power is going to replace oil when it's projected to last about a hundred years into the future at current consumption rates

[Citation needed]

Also you'd best be citing projections for thorium reserves as well.

And keep in mind known reserves != real reserves (magnitudes greater).

 

[Richard Gilmore]

Genetic modification for foods will solve that crisis. Yes we'll whine and cry that "it's not unnatural" but ultimately when people are fed and well fed at that because we can grow crops faster, bigger and in a greater range of environments they'll stfo.

dude you still need fertiliser. you can change a gene but a gene doesn't magically create nitrogen or phosphorus (another [separate] problem)

 

[Slidey]

Why are you still posting your uninformed drivel anyway? I thought you were meant to be banned, Neb?