The global economic impact of an alternative energy source would be devastating.

Considering that the US dollar gets ALL its value from maintaining it's Petrodollar Status, their economy would collapse very quickly indeed. Socially, imagine a nation of people unemployed and hungry for the first time since the Depression but also armed to the teeth.

If there are still a billion barrels of oil left underground, at $100 per barrel, then that's 100 billion reasons that nobody wants to change things.

That also applies to coal.

Thanks Lexi almost every one will know more about this than me.
We have some very bright and informed posters.
In the past I have followed every link such post and links that leads to.
I truly feel we will find answers, but my understanding of self interest is strong.
I sorry if it offends anyone, truly think the messy debate on climate change is in part started and funded, on both sides, by self interest.
Any one know what world war two Germany made it fuel out of?
If war came about sad but true we would develop a fuel within weeks.
I think if this or anything produced a fuel that cost less governments and profiteers would still charge us too much.
But if we halved fuel tax , deep hole in the budget, but the economy would boom.

Ah the old tech that imitates plants through the use of a catalyst.

How wonderful it hasn't progressed past creating minute portions of H2 and O efficiently in over a decade.

This is just another article trying to sway peoples opinion on alternative energies which by the way don't work in the real world!

There's another one were a young chap from MIT I think, was working on converting water directly from sunshine into H2 and O using parabolic collectors and a catalyst made up of palladium.

The problem with all these techs is the A: The catalysts(Extremely expensive energy and money wise to produce) B: The energy required to store both gasses far outweighs the energy they produce.

These techs are not new, man has been trying to efficiently convert water and sunshine to H2 and O for over a hundred years and we're no closer so I wouldn't be holding my breath!

There's a reason why PV cell tech is so popular, because it's the cheapest, easiest way to convert solar energy to electricity otherwise these techs would already be rompin' it in!

Belly commented;
Bazz I think it is known you have little faith in the future without Petroleum.

Not quite true, you see the problem is with all the suggested
alternative fuels is that they are replacing a fuel that has very
high energy content.
That together with a poorer Energy Return on Energy invested (ERoEI)
makes them, in comparison very poor substitutes.
Because of that very much larger quantities of the alternatives have
to be produced to get the same result.

Rache said;
The global economic impact of an alternative energy source would be devastating.

Did you mean that it would have adverse affects ?
If so and it could replace 18 Million barrels a day in the US at near
that same cost it would be a bonanza, as the US could save
9 Million x $95 a day in foreign exchange and solve most of
their debt problem.
Unfortunately there is no suggested alternative energy that is cheaper.
There is still about the same amount underground as we have used
since 1900, but the increasing cost of discovery and development is
ruling out most of it.

Belly asked;
Any one know what world war two Germany made it fuel out of?
Yes, coal using a process called Fischer-Tropsch and this process is
used in Sth Africa by SASOL. I don't know how more expensive it is
or indeed if it is more expensive these days.

So to sum up, alternative systems if they are implemented will result
in a reduction of our disposable income because energy will cost more.
As I said earlier, we have the option to use our coal and gas while
we work like mad to find an alternative that will not send us broke
using it.

Already the 200% price increase in oil since 2000 has deprived us of
the means to grow our economies. From around 2003 we have run mad on
borrowed money by governments and individuals and it has now caught
up with us.

Lexi said;
- and all these things happen - where is human society headed?

That is why we should use what resources to which we currently have
access to our best advantage as the cost of the transition is going
to be very great.
That is why I have advocated that we stop export of coal and gas as
we have no idea how long it will take to find viable alternatives.
If we run out of of energy before we find an alternative we will go
back to the 17th century very fast.
That will not worry most of us but it will be so for our grandchildren.
The amount of cheap energy we can produce will set the world population level.
More energy, more food, more population.

Which leads me to our current problem, which is the poor growth we are
seeing around the world except in Chindia. Until the politicians and
economists realise that geology and physics do not obey the laws of
economics we will continue to bungle our way along.
Since the start of the modern industrial age growth has been the
result of cheap energy. It has enabled everything we know about our
civilisation but the increasing cost of energy is reducing our GDP.
Our excess of GDP over costs has been used to pay back loans and pay
the interest on those loans and the loans enabled growth.
The reduction of that excess of GDP because of increased energy costs
was never recognised by economists so they thought growth could go on forever.
That is why all governments are worrying about poor growth.
No increase in energy, no growth, it really is as simple as that !

Ah Belly puts his thunking cap on to address “peak oil” and finds it not scary at all

Wonderful, I am so pleased.

I don’t worry either because I agree with hasbeen

Any advancement in technologies which alleviate fossil fuel reliance will be the product of one persons

idea

Diligence and Faith to see it through to benefitting consumers

Preparedness to take the risk

Motivated by commercial reward

(in short the libertarian capitalist way)

Of course, It will never be achieved by

Government

Throwing taxes (be they sourced from income, GST, capital gains, stamp & other duties or carbon theory)

And paying their "socialist mate" bureaucrats who fill the hallowed halls of Canberra

To “pick rank outside Winners” ready for the next election

(in short – the socialist way)

Whatever the politics, the reality will be the same

Depleting natural resources

Now I saw this vile video thrown up by Greenpeace featuring some scruffy kid whining on about how things were going to be tough in the future

Then I thought…

You ungrateful little sock-puppet for watermelons

Two hundred years ago the oceans were plentiful but

He stood a much better chance of being still born or dead from diphtheria or to lose his life getting stuck up a narrow chimney with his brush.

And before that… when the earth was new…

A 30% chance of death below school age (if they had schools) either by being fed as a sacrifice to or just caught by a dinosaur

A pox on greenpeace and all the other luddites and levelers who just cannot deal with the realities of life and expect government levying additional taxes to “fix the problem”