collapse DIY

>>906607

No sane and intelligent person is eager for a permanent drop in their quality of life.

>>906607
It's part of why I do it. Also because diy is fun as fuck.

File: world-oil-consumption-by-source[1].png (82KB, 640x392px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 640x392px

>>906610
fuck man, who said anything about eager? It's math, not fantasy.

No. Based on the latest data I could find, I'll be 65 by the time the collapse starts in earnest. The development of fracking technology and the use of tar sands has pushed back peak oil by about 20-30 years (depending on how demand changes). By that point, I'm going to be too old to care about living on squirrels and wild onions.

Mostly, I just point and laugh at people who think drilling more is the answer, who think nuclear power is more dangerous then coal, and who think global warming means everything will just magically turn into a desert.

Oil energy density is fairly renewable with bio diesel and ethanol. It's more expensive, but achievable, so planes can keep flying.

Fusion research is coming along and it's the ultimate renewable. Lockheed Martin has promised its stock holders it will deliver a profitable fusion design this decade. That's a big commitment.

Global warming can also be totally curtailed with ocean mist spraying. All of the popular bogeymen are actually nothing.

The habbening is going to be from world war 3, or American force projection/foreign policy failing, which will cause the collapse of the dollar, which will cause our welfare-based society to collapse. More than half of america is under employed, we aren't woking hard enough to justify our standard of living, and we are going into debt to support that. Our debt is being supported by our overwhelming military force, no one will disagree with our debt because we could blow them up. We get to export our misery and work and trade imbalances to other countries. That misery and imbalance is what's going to come back. Not peak oil. Peak oil is approached naturally by the market. We already hit peak oil earlier this year. Canada started producing its oil shale in competitive amounts, the price started to go down a bit. OPEC didn't like that, so they crashed the market to drive Canada out of the business.

>>906649
sorry, within 10 years, not this decade. It might be 2026

File: 1442804964893.jpg (1MB, 789x3243px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 789x3243px

>>906607
Sort of. I believe technology can provide solutions to "hard life" to make it an "easy life" again.

Some people say what oil can do, hemp can do better. I don't know if that's true or not but I believe there are alternatives to oil.
Even so, oil can be condensed from gasses in the cosmos so there is no "peak oil".

Imagine 3d printing something literally out of thin air. We might be able to do that in the future.

Medical robots, vertical farming and aquaponics could take care of healthcare and food.

Actually, if there was a collapse we might have more opportunities to make things better without corporations, laws and regulations limiting our options.

>>906629
Its mathematical fantasy you mean. Did you not notice how televisions have been getting cheaper and how gas prices have been dropping?

>muh peak oil
There is more than one kind of oil. When they bitch and moan about oil scarcity theyre talking about the growth of a very specific type of oil field. The kind like in the beverly hillbillies intro where oil just gushes out of the ground.

It's not going to be in my lifetime. When it does happen, we'll figure it out. Remember when we had no nuclear bomb, then three years later we had a nuclear bomb because we wanted it to happen?

>>906665
The people throwing roadblocks up to keep us from developing alternatives are corporations. They don't want to spend the fucking money (anyones money) because it would upset their business model and reduce profits. Once the shit starts to to go down its gonna be exactly like you say. People are gonna go 'oh shit, this needs to happen now' and the resources will fall into place. I just hope the problems oil/coal is causing for the environment doesn't fuck us in the butt before we switch.

I used to think about it lots and preach to everyone.

There is nothing I can do as an individual to change too much. I'm enjoying the energy boom and so should everyone else.

YOHO You're only here once.

>>906607
We are already preparing ourselves. Portable technologies advances make our gadgets consume each time less power, making non-portable ones less energy consuming over time.

Just think in LCD technology. CRTs are really non-environmental friendly, and a pain in the ass to recycle. Thank god that technology is now obsolete.

However, the big manufacturers use really dirty processes, making our seemingly clean technologies have a huge carbon trail behind.

>>906730
CRTs really weren't the power hogs people make them out to be. They were very mature and efficient from a power use perspective. Your fucking cable box probably wastes more power a year then your old CRT ever did.

File: BBC-stockcheck-02[1].jpg (291KB, 977x1212px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 977x1212px

resource depletion is a lot more than just energy/oil... Even stuff like topsoil, fresh water, potassium is less than a century away from depletion.

Salvaging, scrapping, repairing and re-purposing are DIY skills that should come in quite handy

>>906736
>Salvaging, scrapping, repairing and re-purposing are DIY skills that should come in quite handy
Word.

>>90673>
>rainforests gone
>in a greenhouse
Okay.jpg this graph is totally reliable

>>906733
>CRTs really weren't the power hogs people make them out to be. They were very mature and efficient from a power use perspective. Your fucking cable box probably wastes more power a year then your old CRT ever did.

Yes, they were, no, they weren't, and no, it probably doesn't.

/g/'s fetish monitor (the FW900) drew fucking 170W when on. Poking around Newegg, and you can easily find monitors of similar size for under 20W. Even bigger ones pushing 30" top out at 40-45W, with 30-35W being common.

I mean shit you could run _two_ 40" LED LCD TVs and still come in under the FW900s power budget.

As for a cable box, I'd be surprised to find out those consume any more than your average monitor.

>>906747
>As for a cable box, I'd be surprised to find out those consume any more than your average monitor.

They are always on, even when they are 'off'.

http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/06/the-energy-costs-of-your-game-of-thrones-obsession/372950/

>>906741
Rainforests take a long fucking time to grow.

>>906809
The point is that high concentrations of CO2 increase the amount of biomass on the planet. Plants will grow MORE in a greenhouse environment, why do you think it's called greenhouse?

Desertification happens in some places but in many many more places there will be much more plants and biodiversity.

Rainforests are being destroyed because the local governments clear cut them to make a quick buck. There is no maintenance or stewardship because they are the government and they can do whatever they want without the locals being able to do anything but get murdered.

>>906632
Peak oil already happened though. We just won't see much happening for another 10-20 years because we are still near the top of the hump.

>>906849
It's almost like the high market prices are spurring development into new energy sources while simultaneously reducing demand for existing ones...

File: HAT.jpg (37KB, 520x622px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 520x622px

>>906809
That's just what the government wants you to believe.

You have to look behind the obvious to see the unobvious, then look behind the unobvious to see the unobvious unobvious. Then take two Paracetamol and lay back in a dark room.

>>906845
Désertification is not happening, satellite data consistently shows the forests expanding more than they're being cut bakc

>>906849
Of course it hasn't happened. Sure production has been held or reduced at most 1st world sites by choice - it's cheaper now to buy it from the 3rd world. Were nowhere near peak oil and there is no shortage.

Deep-water is only being looked at now, we know there's plenty there it's just expensive to get at

No one here will live long enough to experience global fossil fuel depletion.

I DIY to save money and have granular control of my stuff. It pays for quality tools and equipment which I get to keep instead of paying repeatedly for services at vastly higher prices. I have more disposable income and very low overhead, basically taxes, utilities and insurance.

>>906650
>sorry, within 10 years, not this decade. It might be 2026
Standard talking point from these types. 10 years is just close enough to be scary, but just far away enough to never get called on your bullshit when you're utterly and completely wrong. Sort of like how NASA says we'll land on Mars by 1998, then 2006, then 2017, then 2030...

>>907007
Its not an article in pop Sci or a laboratory articoe. They made their announcement to their stock holders. That's way different.

>>907007
Why are meatbags even needed on Mars? Why not play colony building on Moon and let robots play on Mars?

>>907007
>>907027
>"Evan, it’s 7 am. Currently there is food in the fridges of the nation for breakfast. But in two hours time that will be eaten, gone, there will be no more. Therefore everyone will die because NO BREAKFAST.”
http://www.adamsmith.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/The-No-Breakfast-Fallacy-ONLINE.pdf

>>906629
This is a dumbshit graph in that it calls hydro a different category than "renewable".

Oil and gas may run out this century, but coal and nuclear will be around another couple centuries.

>>907040
Well hydro had some very obvious limitations in the total amount of potential energy available.
Sweden has reached this limit (not counting a couple of rivers saved for ecology reasons) and I believe Norway is there to. While two small countries they are still pretty much perfect for using hydro (mountainous, decent rainfall) but Sweden is still only getting ~45% of its electricity from hydro.

>>906736
This.

Bone up on as many skills as you can. No one can take away your knowledge and experience. You'll always be able to start again anywhere you are. You'll be worth more to everyone around you for the knowledge and experience you have.

>>907033
That's a double fallacy. It is hard for 100s of millions people to get breakfast when there's no fuel for the trucks to bring breakfast to them. Most cities have something like 24-48 hours of food before people start to go hungry. Think of a city as a massive castle, but when there's a siege and nothing can get in, they don't have massive reserves of food to last years.

That paper is heavy-handed propaganda, fyi.

>>907040
Hydro isn't renewable. It relies on a finite resource.

>>907050
I don't want to insult your intelligence and cheapen the analogy, but breakfast is energy, fridges are energy reserves, and the farms, trucks etc. are the process of energy production.

Just as only having 48 hours of breakfast left doesn't mean we're all about to starve to death, having "10 years worth of oil left" doesn't mean we're going to run out of oil.

>>906607

OP, you have fallen for the collapse meme.

Right now oil is in the toilet, and commodity prices are as well.

Our economic problems are due to good old fashioned malinvestment and mismanagement.

I prepare for natural disaster/power outage/social collapse/oil crisis/whatever might happen.

I don't make much money, so at present I have 7 days worth of water (buying 60 more gallons on Monday) and about two months worth of food, as well as four months of food for the cat.

In the future, I plan to stockpile antibiotics and medical supplies, basic medications (asprin, benadryl) and to get a stethoscope & blood pressure cuff. I plan to start pre-med in 2016, so hopefully by the time anything goes wrong I'll be a doctor as well.

I think any responsible person who wants to live should make preparations. Any number of things could happen to disrupt the supply of heat, food, and water. Why leave your survival to chance?

>>907060

Oil / Fossil fuels (all types) are a non-renewable resource. They WILL run out. That's a fact. The only question is when. Which is a big question. For example US Peak Oil (US only production) happened in the mid 1970's. The discovery of a new oil resource (tar sands, exploitable via fracking) has allowed us to regain that peak as of 2014. This can't continue forever; there are not an infinite number of new resources waiting to be found. Once again, the only question is when.

Biofuel is not a suitable replacement because their production consumes almost as much energy as they put out. IRL, with current technology, it's actually a net loss.

Nuclear power is not a viable replacement, because uranium/nuclear fuel is also non-renewable. It is however a necessary stopgap measure to buy us time.

Which leaves solar, wind, hydro, as the only currently viable long term renewable energy sources, and there's no way they can meet our current energy demand.

By using the breakfast analogy, you're basically saying you believe in some kind of renewable energy tech that hasn't been invented yet.

I counter your breakfast analogy with the bottle analogy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-QA2rkpBSY

>>907082
Fusion is the most renewable source and as viable as solar/wind/biofuel which are all still have horrible ROI without irresponsible subsidies

>>907089
That still goes under the "hasn't been invented yet" category, since all existing fusion reactor techs operate at an energy loss.

>>907082
>Nuclear power is not a viable replacement, because uranium/nuclear fuel is also non-renewable. It is however a necessary stopgap measure to buy us time.


?do you even /sci/?
you can separate Uranium from seawater. All the exposed low grade ore worldwide has been eroding and dissolving into the ocean for all of eternity.

The cost is ~$300/kg, more expensive than mining ore, so this is not done. But we are not going to run out of uranium, if that becomes our primary power source.

>>907095
When you plant uranium seeds in a garden and they turn into uranium daisies I'll be impressed.

Captcha: Select all the images with flowers.

>>907106
Breeder reactor ... Look it up.

>>907109
Still not getting what the word "renewable" means, do you.

Abiogenic hydrocarbon production.
Pull your head out of the delision based Christian centric notion of "fossil" fuels and realize its naturally produced by the Earth.
Much less Fischer Topps for converting electricity and sea water into hydrocarbons. Run solar at 40% efficiency to convert at 50%+ and realize money don't matter for shit when you need something.

>>907145
we're not running out of uranium in any sort of worrying time frame, even if the whole world converted to it. It can be re-refined many times, and we can pull it out of the water.

all of the renewables you mentioned except for hydro are not cost effective, they are inflationary, they do not make energy, they may as well not exist either, they are smoke being blown up the asses of people that haven't researched them. The environmental impacts and cost of production far outstrip what they actually produce for energy.

>>907150
If it's about time frames, then say so. And if that's the issue, I'll return to the Bottle Analogy to explain why it's still a problem.

Bottom line, the free energy era will collapse some day. The question is when. At this point, I readily admit it will probably be beyond our lifetimes anyway. We're far more likely to have an energy shortage because a global-warming powered hurricane or three (goole: Hurricane Patricia 2015) take out multiple major shipping and population centers, slowing the transport of fuels to a crawl and inducing sudden scarcity everywhere that requires imports.

Let's hope that such disasters are spread out from each other enough that they can be recovered from.

>>906663
>Did you not notice how televisions have been getting cheaper and how gas prices have been dropping?

The price of a resource says nothing about its future availability.

>>907040
>but coal and nuclear will be around another couple centuries

Coal and nuclear energy isn't as accessible to the average consumer as gas. Do you see any coal or nuclear powered civilian vehicles right now?

>>907050
>Hydro isn't renewable. It relies on a finite resource.
what, rain? rain is finite now?

>>906610
What a ridiculous thing to say.

>>907220
Probably refers to the fact that the most practical places for hydro plants are already used.

>>906845
It's called a greenhouse because it traps heat. It's a metaphor, not a literally facsimile.

More plants have a limited amount of CO2 they can ingest per unit time. Fern-like plants are some of the few that don't have a restriction.

>>907044
turbines will always become more efficient

>>907501
That restriction is many times current atmospheric levels.

The time of earths greatest biodiversity was millions of years ago when co2 levels were much higher than they are today

>>906656

That's actually a really beautiful blade.

You can turn shit and compost into methane gas. (biogas)

Places like Germany and India are really into the tech. The USA is getting more and more turn key processing plants for it too.

>>907318
Correct.

>>907060
I was usurping the analogy. Meaning if there's a fuel shortage there's an almost instant food shortage. This is highly evident when fuel prices rise and food prices rise right along with them in tandem. The USA has already had to raid its own fuel "fridge" in the past a few times to keep things stable.

>>907082
Mate you have no idea what you're on about.

1) the tar Sands are in Canada, thus have no bearing on us peak oil.

2) tar Sands are not fracked. They are mined. Dug out. Quarried. Excavated. Not fracked. When they are exploited by Wells, they use Enhanced Oil Recovery where the steam makes the oil runny. No fracturing occurs because the sand is not competent.

Fraccing (correct spelling) is used for shale oil and shale gas.

>>907210
>>Do you see any coal or nuclear powered civilian vehicles right now?

Yup, volt/elr....

>>907210
>Do you see any coal or nuclear powered civilian vehicles right now?

Where do you think the power to charge electric vehicles comes from?

>>908385

In my state, primarily hydro. In my own case, rooftop solar panels. Why? You realize the national grid is only 39% coal and that EVS are still cleaner than gas vehicles with that energy mix, right?

>>908373
This guy knows.

Also biofuel doesn't just mean ethanol, biodiesel is essentially just burning cleaned, used cooking oil. The cost of manufacturing is null since it was manufactured to cook your McFries.

Nuclear is not truly renewable, no. However, as reactors become more advanced, they use materials more effectively and completely. As in newer reactors can run with the waste of older reactors. There is a limit on the amount of radioactive materials on earth, however, the energy density of it exceeds all of the oil that has ever existed.

Hydro is a poor replacement because there is a limited number of power generation systems you can put on a body of flowing water before it is useless. Tidal and coastal generators are the key here since it is energy that is much larger to tap into.

File: 1352398771074.jpg (50KB, 1000x900px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 1000x900px

I'm not too worried about the decline of fossil fuels/nonrenewable energy because any decline will be gradual. We won't wake up one morning with the news screaming "We're totally out of oil/coal/gas/etc.! Nobody saw this coming!!!"
BUT I am starting to prepare for a long (1-3 month) power outage. Solar flares have fucked up the power grid in the past, and an overload of the whole system could take a very long time to fix. And as always, once it happens it's already too late to get a generator, canned food, extra gas, etc.
I'm in the process of buying a home right now, and in a year I want to be able to survive a 1-2 month blackout with some dignity.

>>908421
Until you have to unload that toxic payload under the hood

>>906620
What this anon said, basically.

Crochetfag reporting in. I'm mostly in it for the fun of making shit for my friends and family. Being able to do that even if the "easy life" ends is just a minor potential perk.

>>906607
>Running out of oil.

The oil was always there in the form of shale, nobody really tried to harvest it.

>>906736
>Salvaging, scrapping, repairing and re-purposing
I'd also add green thumb to that list. Being able to know how to grow food or what wild shit is edible would be quite handy once foreign/far away food becomes scarce. Finding ways to use all forms of available energy would be great too. Heat from decaying organic matter can be easily used to keep a green house warm in the early spring/fall.

>>908832
Might be better to work your decaying matter into biodiesel/a burnable fuel. You might be able to get your car running or sell it.

>>906896
No doubt there is some sort of global conspiracy happening. It isn't all that hard to see that big oil will benefit off any new energy source though. They will decide when the fossil fuels become fossils again, and it will be when it is less profitable then the renewable options which is still a 2 or 3 decades away. I remember watching a doc on Saudi oil program, and their minister of energy/oil basically said they will easily convert to solar fields when they need/decide to.

>>908836
>their minister of energy/oil basically said they will easily convert to solar fields when they need/decide to.

yeah, right. like the daily trickle of sunlight is gonna make up for the concentrated result of millions of years of accumulated sunlight that is in oil and gas. (well, actually it can, but at a cost that's way way higher, which will collapse any energy-hungry economy.)

>>906955
I really think you should do some research into peak oil. It isn't directly related to amount of reserves but instead is also tied to the costs of recovery, transport, refining, and distribution. There is no doubt tons upon tons of oil at the bottoms of our oceans, but that means absolutely nothing if we can't get to it without making it uneconomical. Offshore oil is evidence of our desperate need for the stuff, and it will never be as profitable as land based reserves.

Peak oil has come and gone because we no longer have conventional reserves to discover and many conventional reserves are either used up or they're using advanced methods to suck out the last drops. We don't notice the peak, but we will notice the inevitable crash. The only way to ease our steep drop is to disconnect ourselves from the unnecessary drains on our electric grid now and not go cold turkey when shtf.

>>907106
>he's never heard of geraniums