Global warming world famine

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
…Do you predict a sudden end to oil supplies?
..…

Of course not. Rather a gradual but disastrous (if we haven’t adapted sufficiently) decline in production.

….I come from Zambia and can assure you that most of Zambia is open bush and could be used for crops and a lot would be if the price was right.
...…

Zambia may be one of ...[text shortened]... onally I fear what would happen when our supplies of natural gas drop by 99% and our oil by 90%[/b]

ridiculous. as long as oil remains important enough and rises in prices under conditions of shortage,t he incentives will exist to increase output, production, substitution, efficient use of oil, etc before oil gets even close to a 90% drop.

Example: how many miles per gallons do you think cars used to get?
how many miles per gallon do cars get now?

oil used to come from whales... we found a way to get it from the ground. some oil wells "peaked" and now we found new wells in new countries, and even in the ocean. Ocean oil reserves are vast, oil sands are plentiful, they're just more expense and not currently worth the money.

That's not even gettign into examples of alternatives... economics.

Originally posted by eljefejesus
ridiculous. as long as oil remains important enough and rises in prices under conditions of shortage,t he incentives will exist to increase output, production, substitution, efficient use of oil, etc before oil gets even close to a 90% drop.

Example: how many miles per gallons do you think cars used to get?
how many miles per gallon do cars get now ...[text shortened]... tly worth the money.

That's not even gettign into examples of alternatives... economics.

…INCENTIVES will exist to increase output, production, substitution, efficient use of oil, etc before oil gets even close to a 90% drop.
..… (my emphasis)

“INCENTIVES” exist now; my fear that the incentives to adapt may not necessarily be matched by the ability for us to adapt fast enough.

….Example: how many miles per gallons do you think cars used to get?
how many miles per gallon do cars get now?
...…

Sadly, according to the laws of physics, there is a fundamental physical limit to how much fuel we can save that way:

http://physics.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_second_law_of_thermodynamics

-there is a fundamental limit to the energy efficiency of a combustion engine that we can bump up against but not go over.

Also, has this most recent increase in the energy efficiency of cars resulted in our fossil fuel consumption decreasing?
Isn’t our fossil fuel consumption still increasing? -answer; yes!:

http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/refpages/RefArticle.aspx?refid=761586407&pn=5

“…Total worldwide energy consumption is expected to grow at about 2.2 percent per year until 2015.…”

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
Zambia may be one of the exception:

http://www.globalchange.umich.edu/globalchange2/current/lectures/food_supply/food.htm

“…Nearly all of the world's productive land is already exploited. Most of the unexploited land is either too steep, too wet, too dry or too cold for agriculture….”

I can find other links that confirm this.

You need to dig deeper.
Whatever source of statistics that website used probably listed much of Zambia as being either cropland or pasture. (Except for the national parks I hope) But the issue is not the quantity of land with crops or cows somewhere on it, the issue is how well the land is being utilized. For example my sisters farm is more than 50% unused land and this is the case for almost every farm I know in the region.

Also note that the article you cite says that there is still room for a 20% increase in Asia. It says it in a scary way which implies that Asia is the worst case ie there is even more capacity available elsewhere.

Also note that there is currently 24 times more 'meadows and pastures' than cropland and 34 times more forest than cropland. Much of both those categories could be converted to cropland if required.

Agreed -and how quickly WILL we be persuaded to adapt? -it sometimes seems to me very hard to convince some people of the urgency of the situation.
Its all about money. When food prices rise people will adapt. Until then, its business as usual. That has already happened and some countries have already started making contingency plans.
The same applies to alternative energy sources, until the price of oil went up, nobody did anything.
American cars will always be gas guzzlers until the US puts on a fuel tax.

I have been convinced by my sister that the solution to both the food problem and the global warming problem lies in better farming practices that result in much higher soil carbon and much lower soil degradation- thus reducing CO2 in the atmosphere, reducing the need for fertilizer, reducing the amount of soil erosion (soil erosion leads to loss of arable land), and raising the production capacity of the land.
In Zambia our biggest output of CO2 is not from cars or oil but from bush fires and soil degradation.

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
Sadly, according to the laws of physics, there is a fundamental physical limit to how much fuel we can save that way:

http://physics.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_second_law_of_thermodynamics

-there is a fundamental limit to the energy efficiency of a combustion engine that we can bump up against but not go over.

But we can move to electric cars - perfectly feasible right now - which would significantly reduce consumption while also allowing the use of other sources of energy. For example in Zambia all our electricity is hydroelectric.
However there is more money to be made selling oil driven cars so it will take government intervention or the Chinese to get electric cars properly kick started.

Originally posted by twhitehead
But we can move to electric cars - perfectly feasible right now - which would significantly reduce consumption while also allowing the use of other sources of energy. For example in Zambia all our electricity is hydroelectric.
However there is more money to be made selling oil driven cars so it will take government intervention or the Chinese to get electric cars properly kick started.

….For example in Zambia all our electricity is hydroelectric.
...…

That is good news for Zambia, but this isn’t the case in most of the rest of the world with the highest energy consumption. Currently, in most of the world, most of the electricity is generated by burning gas/oil/coal and my fear is that is not going to change anytime soon thus, for most of the world, converting to electric cars would just mean the electricity for the cars would come mainly from burning gas/oil/coal.

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
Currently, in most of the world, most of the electricity is generated by burning gas/oil/coal and my fear is that is not going to change anytime soon thus, for most of the world, converting to electric cars would just mean the electricity for the cars would come mainly from burning gas/oil/coal.

Actually according to Wikipedia 14% of the worlds electricity comes from Nuclear power and 20% from hydropower.
Here in South Africa I think our power is mostly Nuclear and Coal.

Electric cars can be far more efficient than fossil fuel cars.

We can also do much more at power plants in terms of cleaning up the emissions than we can at the tail pipe.

The advantage of switching to electric cars is that if oil supplies do run low as you suggest we can switch to say nuclear power relatively easily, whereas with the current fleet of gas guzzlers oil is the only option.

I must also add that in SA we make about half our fuel from Coal.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Actually according to Wikipedia 14% of the worlds electricity comes from Nuclear power and 20% from hydropower.
Here in South Africa I think our power is mostly Nuclear and Coal.

Electric cars can be far more efficient than fossil fuel cars.

We can also do much more at power plants in terms of cleaning up the emissions than we can at the tail pipe. ...[text shortened]... ers oil is the only option.

I must also add that in SA we make about half our fuel from Coal.

…Electric cars can be far more efficient than fossil fuel cars.
..…

Yes, I knew that. And, I think they would be a generally a good thing in the long run.
I suppose what I am just trying to say here is merely that they won’t solve the problem of our dependence on gas/oil/coal by themselves for most parts of the world because for that to work we still need to stop producing electricity from gas/oil/coal which, partly because of political reasons and partly economic, would be easier said than done for many countries like the UK and USA etc.

I don’t disagree with much of what you say here.

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
Yes, I knew that. And, I think they would be a generally a good thing in the long run.
I suppose what I am just trying to say here is merely that they won’t solve the problem of our dependence on gas/oil/coal by themselves for most parts of the world because for that to work we still need to stop producing electricity from gas/oil/coal which, partly ...[text shortened]... for many countries like the UK and USA etc.

I don’t disagree with much of what you say here.

Our dependence on fossil fuels has a lot to do with the fact that it is the cheapest source of energy available. Your claim is that it will run out and leave us stranded. My point is that if we convert our cars to electric cars then we can transition to other sources much easier when the time comes. Also it will take longer to run out as we will be using less of the resource in the first place. A fear of a resource running out is not a good reason to stop using it, so I would not propose that we stop using fossil fuels for that reason alone. The secret would be to start slowly raising the price as it starts to become scarce thus encouraging alternatives without causing a sudden bottleneck.
We could also switch between fossil fuels relatively easily ie use coal instead of oil for our power plants.

In fact, in Zambia, fossil fuels are not the cheapest source of energy. The electricity needed to run an electric car would be about one tenth the price of fossil fuels. The reason for this is:
1. We have a reasonably cheap source of electricity (three hydroelectric power plants).
2. Our fuel must be transported vast distances over land from the coast.
3. We have about a 100% tax on petrol.
It would also be good for the economy as the electricity is produced locally and the fuel is imported.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Our dependence on fossil fuels has a lot to do with the fact that it is the cheapest source of energy available. Your claim is that it will run out and leave us stranded. My point is that if we convert our cars to electric cars then we can transition to other sources much easier when the time comes. Also it will take longer to run out as we will be using ...[text shortened]... ld also be good for the economy as the electricity is produced locally and the fuel is imported.

I agree totally with everything you just say in that post.

Originally posted by divegeester
Good grief. Please tell us you are not serious?

Can you imagine a randomized 80% loss of population: the loss of knowledge, infrastructure, law enforcement, government, food production, sanitation, transport etc.

Even if you were lucky enough to survive, life as you know it would be over and instead of sitting in the warm of your Mum's spar ...[text shortened]... he next best thing to suck on since the local Maccy Dees staff didn't turn in for their shift.

You obviously haven't seen "The Bunker", bristling with armaments and heavy laden with enough Aquafina, rice cakes, and other consumables to last through the "next" global disaster.