Ron Paul's stance on Peak Oil?

[fatjohn]

Hi,

I was wondering what Ron's stance is on peak oil? Does he believe it's true and happening? And does he think the free market is going to lead the way from fossil fuel consumption to renewable energy fast enough and what are his arguments? Because some friends of me believe that a downside from a no government intervention/free market system would be that market responds to the problem when it's there and not yet when one can predict it causing it to react too late in some extend. What can i say to convince them that we'll have a setback in the form of global depression but that the best thing to do now is to let it up to the market to decide how much we should invest in renewable energy and when?

Thanks,
Greetings from Belgium.

 

[Paulitician]

Government is giving us corn based ethanol. Maybe the free market isn't perfect, but it certainly wouldn't be that stupid. I don't know if Ron Paul believes in peak oil or not. If he were president though, he wouldn't endorse one type of energy over another, but he isn't totally for a free market either because he'd give tax incentives to those who do invest in alternative fuels. So, yeah.

To say that the free market would only recognize the crisis until it's too late is a little dumb if you ask me. Since we already know that peak oil *production* exists before it has even happened, and there is a pretty good demand for alternative energy right now, do people believe the market would not react to that? How inane can people be?

Edit: so you're friends are probably right in thinking that we wouldn't be able to find a solution fast enough. However, I don't necessarily believe that's because of a free market or lack thereof. It has more to do with technology and its development. It's not going to be quick either way.

 

[jonahtrainer]

Wish I could find the YouTube but I remember him being asked the question about 'oil depletion' and he responded to the effect that "We should let the free market sort it out most efficiently and effectively." I do not think he is ignorant of the Peak Oil issue.

Of course, using gold as money would tie our economy to real things which would allow for a much more rational calculation of risk and efficient allocation of capital. I doubt we'd have this suburban living arrangement if we had stayed on a commodity based currency system.

 

[Allen72289]

Corn based ethanol is the wrong fuel.

Corn ethanol produces 400 gallon per acre.

Switch grass produces 1000 per acre with no chemicals, very little water, restores nitrogen content and grows back every year.

On top of this switch grass can be used as a feed after distillation.

The univeristy of tennesse is genetically altering switch grass and creating a high powered yeast which will be ready by 2010.

 

[fatjohn]

Well i looked a bit around and i found an interview with Ron Paul in which he had the following to say about peak oil:

"And then there is all the talk about "peak oil." I don't worry about peak oil as much as I do about geopolitics and inflation. If we had sound money, and if we were not provoking wars and oil supplies, and if peak oil all of a sudden not only arrived but the supply was decreasing much faster than we ever dreamed of, I wouldn't even worry about it, because I have such confidence that the price mechanism in the free market helps us decide what to do. If we had a truly free market and gasoline prices go to $5 per gallon, all of a sudden ethanol may be the answer. The last thing we want is the government to be doing this. If we let the markets handle this , we should never worry. We don't need to worry so much about a limited supply as much as how we mess things up after that with inflation and regulation and radical environmentalism and geopolitical intervention. That is where the real problems are."

http://www.321gold.com/editorials/taylor/taylor031706.html

So that's about how i thought his stance would be on this subject. But i'm not that confident as he is because the change to sustainable energy will be triggered by the free market, but it will take a long time until the infrastructure will be where it needs to be. So years after the break even between fossil fuels and alternative energy we'll be forced to use expensive fossil fuel plants for our electricity while cheap wind and solar farms will be still under construction. That's what bothers me.

 

[constituent]

w/out government intervention, the direct to consumer cost of maintaining our oil supply (through the means we presently use... force) would make it completely unaffordable. Imagine if we had to pay all those soldiers in iraq directly (rather than through inflation). We'd be off of oil tomorrow.

 

[Cowlesy]

The huge push to convert our food supply into our energy supply could potentially be one of the biggest follies of our government in recent history.

 

[Dr.3D]

The huge push to convert our food supply into our energy supply could potentially be one of the biggest follies of our government in recent history.

I tend to believe it is part a plan to starve many people.

 

[Fox McCloud]

I tend to believe it is part a plan to starve many people.

I agree whole-heartedly, Dr. 3D.

Hmm, it reminds me of Matthew 24:6-8 "You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. All these are the beginning of birth pains."

(bolded by me).

I find it very interesting that even the MSM is starting to talk about there being a "food crisis"...if we continue with our current actions (likely), then I can see a very logical, and self-destructive ending is ahead.

Anyway, ethanol subsidies, I think, personally, are about 10 times worse than oil subsidies...yeah, it lets us use an alternative fuel cheaper, but (1)it drastically cuts our food supply (2)some research has show that burning ethanol is more toxic than burning oil. Though, the food-draw down is probably what gets me the most about things.


It's really interesting what Ron says about the oil supply; it's more or less what I told some guy a while back (He's a socialist, by the by). At first he didn't say much, but finally responded with"well, even if that's the case, it's not excuse to use up all the oil". I'm not an economic expert, but I really hate arguing with people (especially socialists) who support their ideology blindly,and they don't even understand basic economics (I asked him if he understood any of it, to which he replied "no, I had it in school years ago, you think I'm going to remember that now?"

 

[Libertytree]

"yeah, it lets us use an alternative fuel cheaper, but "

It's not cheaper at all after you figure in the costs that take to produce it. I found this breakdown awhile back and have lost the information to back it up but I'm sure it's available.

I agree though that corn or most commodities could be put to better uses, like feeding people.

 

[HOLLYWOOD]

Corn based ethanol is the wrong fuel.

Corn ethanol produces 400 gallon per acre.

Switch grass produces 1000 per acre with no chemicals, very little water, restores nitrogen content and grows back every year.

On top of this switch grass can be used as a feed after distillation.

The university of Tennessee is genetically altering switch grass and creating a high powered yeast which will be ready by 2010.

Yes in a truthful American, but the CORN LOBBYIST ensured they would be favored and also but Tariffs on Ethanol Imports and line their pockets with BILLIONS in Subsidies!

http://www.acga.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=15&Itemid=35

http://www.ncga.com/ethanol/main/index.asp

Ethanol Type----- Yield Per ACRE ---- Greenhouse Savings % ---- Description
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Miscanthus ---------- 780 -------------- 37–73 **********Low-input perennial grass. Ethanol production depends on development of cellulosic technology.

Switchgrass ------- 330–810 --------- 37–73 **********Ethanol production depends on development of cellulosic technology. Even Higher Breeding efforts underway to increase yields.

Poplar -------------- 400–640 ---------- 51–100 **********Fast-growing tree. Ethanol production depends on development of cellulosic technology.

Sugar cane -------- 570–700 ----------- 87–96 **********Long-season annual grass. Used as feedstock for most bioethanol produced in Brazil. Newer processing plants burn residues not used for ethanol for electricity. Grows in tropical & subtropical climates.

Sweet sorghum --- 270–750 ---------- No data **********Low-input annual grass. Ethanol possible using existing technology. Grows tropical & temperate climates, highest ethanol yield assume multiple crops per year (only in tropical climates). Does not store well.

Corn ----------------- 330–420 ----------- 10–20 **********High-input annual grass. Used as feedstock for most bioethanol produced in USA. Only kernels can be processed using available technology LOWEST YIELDING & least beneficial to Enviroment!!!

 

[raiha]

According to Greg Palast in Armed Madhouse there is masses of oil. Mind you the way people make pigs of themselves over certain resources (Top Pig: USA) it doesn't help. How often do we stop and ponder, while our pump is on FILL, on the number of people murdered by Big Oil and live in war-torn mayhem so we can do wheelies down mainstreet?

The cost of grain has gone up 130% in the last 12 months. Philippinos can't afford rice anymore. It is being exported elsewhere. Haiti riots. Dear Lord. What a mess.

 

[Zippyjuan]

The biggest problem with any bio-fuel is that growing it will have to replace areas presently being cultivated for food- for man and animals. This will reduce the food supply and drive up prices as we are already seeing. The other is that we do not have enough land- even if we displaced all of our food crops- to be able to produce enough bio fuel to replace the amount of oil we consume - some 20 million barrels a day. We presently have 434 million acres of cropland http://www.ers.usda.gov/StateFacts/US.htm

Let's take switchgrass and the median figure for its yield or 570 gallons per acre. There are 42 gallons to a barrel of oil so you are getting about 13.6 barrels per acre and using 20 million barrels a day or 1.47 million acres a day times 365 days or 54 million acres of land converted to switchgrass. That is a big chunk of our food production gone. And that assumes normal yields. You can have weather impact your harvest so you would need more land to ensure enough supply. Corn- at least twice that. 90 million acres were planted in corn last year.
http://www.nass.usda.gov/Newsroom/2007/03_30_2007.asp That would mean converting the entire US corn crop to ethanol if you wanted to use that to replace our oil imports.

 

[Dr.3D]

The biggest problem with any bio-fuel is that growing it will have to replace areas presently being cultivated for food- for man and animals. This will reduce the food supply and drive up prices as we are already seeing. The other is that we do not have enough land- even if we displaced all of our food crops- to be able to produce enough bio fuel to replace the amount of oil we consume - some 20 million barrels a day. We presently have 434 million acres of cropland http://www.ers.usda.gov/StateFacts/US.htm

Let's take switchgrass and the median figure for its yield or 570 gallons per acre. There are 42 gallons to a barrel of oil so you are getting about 13.6 barrels per acre and using 20 million barrels a day or 1.47 million acres a day times 365 days or 54 million acres of land converted to switchgrass. That is a big chunk of our food production gone. And that assumes normal yields. You can have weather impact your harvest so you would need more land to ensure enough supply. Corn- at least twice that. 90 million acres were planted in corn last year.
http://www.nass.usda.gov/Newsroom/2007/03_30_2007.asp That would mean converting the entire US corn crop to ethanol if you wanted to use that to replace our oil imports.

Exactly, then what do they think they are going to feed chickens with? Eggs are going to go sky high. Chicken meat will go the same way. Any meat from animals that eat corn is going to get very very expensive to buy. Also, with the land being used for fuel, anything else that is grown is going to be very expensive, since the land it is grown on will be at a premium.

 

[kyleAF]

Yep. Biofuels are pretty much a dead-end. The only viable source of long-term energy at the level our species consumes it is solar. Oil will run out someday. Even if there's a whole bunch of it extremely deep in the earth, the moment that it requires a barrel of oil's worth of energy to extract just one barrel of oil from the ground, the process becomes useless in net energy terms.

We need a reliable and fully integrated solar method.

The laws of physics make that abundantly and perfectly clear.

 

[Paulitician]

The problem with solar is that it's spectacularly inefficient currently, and still pretty costly. We'll have to settle for clean liquid fuels for now. We have an electrical power problem, but the liquid fuel problem is much, much greater.

 

[Kalifornia]

Wish I could find the YouTube but I remember him being asked the question about 'oil depletion' and he responded to the effect that "We should let the free market sort it out most efficiently and effectively." I do not think he is ignorant of the Peak Oil issue.

Of course, using gold as money would tie our economy to real things which would allow for a much more rational calculation of risk and efficient allocation of capital. I doubt we'd have this suburban living arrangement if we had stayed on a commodity based currency system.

Wow, look what happened in '73... when we left the gold standard...

 

[Paulitician]

Wow, look what happened in '73... when we left the gold standard...

Before then you only need one person working to support a household. Now you need two, even three, plus taking on debt to make ends meat. The amount of inflation and therefore redistribution of wealth from the middle, working and poor class to the rich over the last 30 years has been amazing. Check out this video (and show it to everyone you know):

The Coming Collapse Of The Middle Class

 

[Allen72289]

Switch grass is the cheapest fuel.

Farmers could produce it at a bare minimum of what it costs to produce gasoline.

Costs of switch grass

are the seeding and establishing.

Assuming you have access to a lot of human or live stock manure the fertilizer to establish the grass is cheap.

After that your only cost is harvesting the grass and distilling it.

You may have access to forest debris like limbs which are just left over after logging.

Instead of wasting the BTU which the forest debris could provide by letting it decay which also contributes to green house gases you should collect it.

After distilling your left with the mash which can be used as a feedstock for cattle and in return using the cow manure to capture methane and grow larvae to feed tilapia.

Once the the larvae have reduced the manure mass and you have extracted the methane it can be used as fertilizer.

No waste, no cost.

On top of this ethanol distills at 172 degrees.

A black car's interior temp is 140.

So, all you need to do is increase your thermal efficiency by 32 degrees

If you were to design and engineer a still that had a high thermal efficiency you would need little or no fuel to distill the ethanol.

The downside of ethanol is the producers are wasteful not as efficient in producing it. Without farm subsidies they be have to streamline the process in order to compete.

People despise ethanol because the stills require more energy than you gain to produce the ethanol. Lol. That's because the still has a low thermal efficiency.




http://www.rmi.org < Amory Lovins an environmentalist who attended Oxford and Harvard at the age of 16 says we could be off oil with the private sector saving 1 million old jobs and creating 1 m,million new with profit in the hundreds of billions.

I recommend reading "Producing Your Own Power"



I have to agree, without the fiat money supply I would bet people would still homestead in large numbers.

With today's technology we are capable of engineering cars that would have a mpg of 500 with the use of thermoformed carbon fiber.

 

[fatjohn]

The problem with solar is that it's spectacularly inefficient currently, and still pretty costly. We'll have to settle for clean liquid fuels for now. We have an electrical power problem, but the liquid fuel problem is much, much greater.

Yes liquid fuel is a problem for now. But I think it won't be long until everyone will be making the switch to driving electric cars. If you don't know anything about it you should look for it, because the performance is way better then any other car except for range which is still stuck around 200 miles. Btw i'm just throwing a number but i think that's about it. And when that happens we will need to increase the electric grid enormously and I'm just wondering how this is all going to happen without a depression that will last for two decades. It's clear that with going bio fuel you link the oil price with the food price which without governments subsidies would be a free market phenomenon but still unethical in my view. I think that wind and solar will be ready to combat the declining oil production and the rising world demand within twenty years but until then the only solution i can think of is nuclear. I just hope governments will open their eyes and see that. (In Belgium they are thinking about closing all our seven nuclear reactors generating a big chunk of our electricity supply, those morons). The only other major sustainable form of energy is hydro-electricity but only in china that still seems to have a future. Nations like the US, Canada, Brazil and Russia are probably at their peak regarding that source.