Hacker News Reader

"Peak oil" simply means the year when the maximum amount of oil is extracted; the implication is (was) that if demand > supply when this happened, this would cause a spike in prices. As it happens, it's pretty likely we did hit peak oil in 2019, before COVID reshuffled everything and oil prices hit historic lows in 2020.

Same for "peak CO2": energy consumption is growing and will continue to do so, but if we're swapping out coal and gas for solar and wind, the amount of CO2 generated can still decline overall.

> As regards, climate studies. Where have we heard the term "peak" something-or-other before. Ah yes, "peak oil". Well that didn't happen: we found more oil, we substituted gas, ... "Peak CO2": I nearly choked on my morning biscuit. Please tell China and India and Africa to stop developing and remain underdeveloped. Come on man, are you on drugs? Maybe, when a few billion have been displaced from their homes and invaded our comfortable lifestyles, we all might decide to stop driving and generating power with coal, oil and gas.

It's more plausible than it sounds. I had the same initial reaction as you, but it's worth keeping in mind that:

1.) China is quickly moving away from manufacturing. If you look at province-level GDP, manufacturing has been flat, or even fallen, in many/most provinces over the last couple of years.

2.) China and India are oil constrained. Although they have large coal reserves, at current mining rates, those reserves (at least, in China), will be used up in the next 30-40 years, with all of the policy implications that come along with it.

3.) People there, especially now, are far more environmentally conscious than generally given credit for.

We know how to generate essentially limitless amounts of energy without producing CO2. There is no need to turn off switches, we just need to build enough solar panels, wind turbines, batteries, power-to-gas reactors, and, if we like, nuclear power plants.

(*) CO2 caused by manufacturing and maintenance not included

You get enough energy out to sequester that CO2 back.

I'd prefer pointers to non-handwavy estimations of energy surplus/EROI of solar+batteries+sequestering system.

The effort, in terms of time and money, required to move to greener power generation will continue to be substantial as evidenced by this extract from the Berkshire Hathaway 2020 Annual Report:

"[O]ur country’s electric utilities need a massive makeover in which the ultimate costs will be staggering. The effort will absorb all of [Berkshire Hathaway Energy's] earnings for decades to come. We welcome the challenge and believe the added investment will be appropriately rewarded. Let me tell you about one of BHE’s endeavors – its $18 billion commitment to rework and expand a substantial portion of the outdated grid that now transmits electricity throughout the West. BHE began this project in 2006 and expects it to be completed by 2030 – yes, 2030. The advent of renewable energy made our project a societal necessity.

Historically, the coal-based generation of electricity that long prevailed was located close to huge centers of population. The best sites for the new world of wind and solar generation, however, are often in remote areas. When BHE assessed the situation in 2006, it was no secret that a huge investment in western transmission lines had to be made. Very few companies or governmental entities, however, were in a financial position to raise their hand after they tallied the project’s cost.

BHE’s decision to proceed, it should be noted, was based upon its trust in America’s political, economic and judicial systems. Billions of dollars needed to be invested before meaningful revenue would flow. Transmission lines had to cross the borders of states and other jurisdictions, each with its own rules and constituencies. BHE would also need to deal with hundreds of landowners and execute complicated contracts with both the suppliers that generated renewable power and the far-away utilities that would distribute the electricity to their customers. Competing interests and defenders of the old order, along with unrealistic visionaries desiring an instantly-new world, had to be brought on board.

Both surprises and delays were certain."

https://www.berkshirehathaway.com/

As of 2019, oil, gas and coal were still king. They provided 84% of the world's energy needs. There were some exceptions: France: used nuclear for 38% of its needs; Canada: hydro for 24%; and Denmark: wind for 18%.

See graphs from

https://bourne2learn.com/math/energy/consumption-totals.php

https://bourne2learn.com/math/energy/consumption-fuels.php

using data from

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/energy-consumption-by-sou...

Say hello to my little friend, entropy.

Earth is not a closed system. You might have noticed the giant miasma of incandescent plasma that regularly makes an appearance in the sky.

In the context of collecting pollutants, entropy is huge. Big light in sky is source of juicy low entropy energy, true, and the big win is the flux of infrared out. Ten times as many photons to carry away the same energy.

Perhaps it isn't visible at the moment.