Earth Hour

[Emperor Harkonnen]

I don't know, that's the problem. But I think that if or when the climatic changes come, we will find a way to adapt to them.  ;)

[Khan]

Well if we got rid of the majority of our unnecessary comforts we could probably do with just wind and solar. As it stands nuclear is the only likely option. Besides wouldn't thinking up new ways of supplying energy take more time and resources than developing what we already have.

[lowzeewee]

Let's all kill ourselves then. Suicide pact, anyone?

[gunner154]

We'd probably cut down on energy consumption once the shortage makes it too expensive.

This event reminds me of Live Earth. Hmm...

[Emperor Harkonnen]

I am not prepared to cut down my living standards, and I think most people feel the same way. Since there is a large uncertainity to whether it would help or not, I do not want to sacrifice too much for the environment.

[Khan]

What is the uncertainty?  Western lifestyles use up huge amounts of natural resources. This greatly shortens the time we have before we need a fully capable infrastructure which doesn't rely on oil and gas.

[Emperor Harkonnen]

So you think it would be better if we just cut down our use of natural resources? It wouldn't, it would only make things worse. It is in the western countries that you find most new inventions which drives humanity forward. If we were to use less resources here, we would have less technological development.

And how do you propose we create a future without oil and gas? and I am not asking why, but I ask how? How is it possible to go through with such large changes, even though it is preferable?

[Khan]

I don't know either, I'm not a scientist after all. But the major change we could make would be to switch from Natural gas and coal plants to nuclear plants, but we've had that debate before.

So you think it would be better if we just cut down our use of natural resources? It wouldn't, it would only make things worse. It is in the western countries that you find most new inventions which drives humanity forward. If we were to use less resources here, we would have less technological development.

I'm not saying that we completely cut out modern western life altogether but we need to seriously look at what we've got and work out a way in which we can keep our modern comforts while still preventing the earth from becoming devoid of resources. Besides would you rather keep on using oil based products which will keep getting more expensive or would you prefer to see technology develop differently. It is only a matter of time before China and India (and others) catch up with the west in their demands for creature comforts and then the price of all those things you won't let go of will sky rocket. What will you do then? Demand new things without having put the demand and pressure on for those things to exist.

[Emperor Harkonnen]

I am acctually studying exactly the case with china's and india's growth, and how it will affect OECD countries. And China and India will not catch up with just, they will reach our salary-level yes eventually, just as Japan did. But did this reduce our living-standards? No, they have only grown, and they still will. Even though salaries will reach western levels, the OECD countries still own 90% of all capital in the world and that is not going to change.

The thing is that when labour becomes expensive in India and China, some other country with cheap labour will take over the production of labour-intensive industries, such as the textile industries. Japan also started out with that, before someone else took over.

[Khan]

But do you believe that increased salaries in china and India won't mean an increased demand for cars and other luxury items. All of that use of oil will surely push the prices up in this country. That was more my  point.

[Emperor Harkonnen]

Probably it will, and then we will adapt and find substitutes for oil as raw material. Most products can be produced in other ways. and the industry that needs the oil the most will be able to pay the most for it.

people from OECD countries will afford to pay for the expensive oil, people in China won't. They will reach our salary level in approximately 2060, and by that time maybe there will not be any oil left?

Other luxury items will just be produced in greater quantities. Most resources are far from used up  ;)

[Khan]

What will be the substitute for oil?

[Emperor Harkonnen]

That depends on the product. If you name a product where oil is an input factor, there will most likely be a substitute which can be but to the same use more or less.

[Khan]

Although usually where there are substitutes (to be honest aluminium for plastic is one of the only I can think of) there is usually a huge downside such as the increased cost of production. Not to mention the increased labour which costs natural resources in power anyway.

One of the big ones for oil is petrol anyway. Prices will keep on climbing as more people enter the wage bracket which allows them to buy cars. Especially if they are in emerging countries where the cars which are available are older and use more fuel anyway.

[Emperor Harkonnen]

Jepp, energy is one of the biggest challenges we face with the new-developed countries.

Aluminium for plastic? Then you would certainly get problems with power usage. I don't think you acctually have to use oil in order to produce plastic?

And there is of course the possibility of producing more oil from plants. Biofuel will be put to use in a larger degree, and it will also be possible since the farmers in China now will produce agricultural products more efficiently.

With the introduction of Hydrogen-vehicles, I think gradually people will substitute to this, when oil becomes too expensive. This will of course benefit the environment as well. So all in all, it is a good thing that we use up all the oil.  :P

[Khan]

But Hydrogen cars will be expensive and no good to people in developing countries. If we are relying on them for our cheap goods how will they move them about without Diesel for lorries and trucks.

[Emperor Harkonnen]

Costs will fall as there are large benefits to scale of economics within the vehicle-industry.

There will be enough fuel, as I pointed out you have biofuel.

If people in developing countries can't afford cars, then they don't need them enough. Cars are a luxury, which not everyone has. I, for example, cannot afford a car, and I manage fine without it.

Transportation will be afforded, as long as people are willing to pay for expensive transportation costs in addition to the products. The price will be included in the product price.

[gunner154]

That is if the benefits due to economies of scale are in time and enough to help cope with the oil shortage.

Biofuel? Aren't Biofuel and agricultural food production substitutes in production? More Biofuels means less rice. Which means rice prices rise. It's already happening, despite not being the only factor.

You cannot take major steps in the shift, because technology isn't necessarily going to catch up with the depleting oil supply.

[Emperor Harkonnen]

Yeah food prices will rise. But if people are willing to pay more for biofuel than for food, then the farmers are likely to produce biofuel.

Still there is no oil shortage, the remaining oil will be enough for many years to come.

Perhaps technology isn't going to catch up. There are hydrogen cars, but I believe that the expenses of producing hydrogen are to high, for it to be a commercial success. There might also be major break-throughs in some kind of energy technology.

[Khan]

The farmers may not mind producing biofuel but a lot of people will mind when they are not able to afford food. There are already billions unable to afford food. If food prices rise fewer people will be able to eat.

[Emperor Harkonnen]

The chinese farmers producing more efficiently will solve that problem. But a climatic catastrophe will probably make it even harder to produce food, so I am not sure what one should do. I am simply telling that if the invisible hand of the market rules, then what I told you will happen.

[Khan]

But if china is moving towards becoming an OEDC will that not mean they will move away from agriculture too industrialization, thus relying more heavily on food imports?

I'm actually asking it's been a while since I've seriously studied this but I'd assume china will begin to rely on other countries, such as african nations, for it's food. As will we.

[Emperor Harkonnen]

China will be able to produce the same or larger amount of food with fewer people, because they can afford new technologies. (People on the country-side are still very poor in China, so in order for this to happen, the government has to initiate measures to secure a larger income for people there)

And if the food-prices are high enough, it will be cheaper for them to produce food themselves. It is not the whole of China which is being industrialized, it is mostly the east-coast, the areas around Shanghai and Beijing. We see a large movement of people toward these areas. But over the years they will expand inwards in the country.

I haven't studied the food-thing were carefully, but I believe that the EU are self-provided when it comes to food. This is because of the subsidies farmers are given. We acctually have an overproduction of food in the EU, and this results in export, or dumping one could say. Often in the african countries, which is bad for the african farmers.

Europe is acctually very fertile compared to other areas. This could be one of the reasons for our success.