Basically bollocks.
Yes, oil is running out - yes - this is an issue.
But.
If oil hits $300/bbl - lots more oil becomes 'affordably' extractable.

And when electric bills hit three times their current amount - suddenly the politicians blocking new nuclear decide that actually - it's not such a bad idea at all.
Might we have severe issues for 10-15 years while new nuclear is getting built - yes.
But there is no real technological reason we can't basically increase nuclear 30-fold over our current amount, and replace all gas and oil for heating, and go over to electric vehicles.
Will it be expensive - sure.
But once you take transportation, heating, and electricity generation out of the equation - we can live with _lots_ higher prices for oil.
(speedevil, Thu 25 Apr 2013, 16:53, 2 replies)

Hopefully they'll get nuclear fusion sorted out soon enough,
South Korea hope to have a working commercial reactor by the 2030s, and the Japanese are investing in it since Fukushima.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Thu 25 Apr 2013, 16:56, closed)

We've already got a working nuclear fusion reactor: the sun.
I'll be seriously impressed if they can get it working on any scale smaller than a star.
( The Mock TurtIe ™ --- Thinks you are a cunt, on, Thu 25 Apr 2013, 21:23, closed)

they already have done,
the problem is getting it to output more power than is put in. They've managed it in short bursts.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Thu 25 Apr 2013, 21:58, closed)

What speedevil said.
We in the UK can look forward to rolling blackouts and brownouts in the next 5 to 10 years though. That'll be fun.
(Me, I'm not... in any way intoxicated, Thu 25 Apr 2013, 17:13, closed)

also you've got to take into account
the energy cost of oil. If it takes more energy to extract the oil than you'd produce by burning it, it won't be worth extracting anymore no matter how high its price goes. (At least not for energy production anyway, you might still want it to make plastics.)

This is interesting:
www.theworld.org/2012/11/the-energy-costs-of-oil-production/
For oil from tar sands, the energy payoff is already down to 5 to 1.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Thu 25 Apr 2013, 17:36, closed)

Personally I think we need nuclear for power.
Then we an use the oil for rubber and the like.
The problem is the UK needed nuclear about 10 years ago, now we're reliant upon shipments of gas to feed an infrastructure that won't be able to cover our energy needs in the next decade.
(Me, I'm not... in any way intoxicated, Thu 25 Apr 2013, 17:42, closed)

we certainly need something new,
but nuclear fission is still kind of dodgy, for various reasons that we don't want certain other countries doing it. But Iran must want to do it for a reason, even though they're a major oil producing country.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Thu 25 Apr 2013, 17:48, closed)

Iran knows that we're itching to invade and fuck them,
to get their oil stocks.
(Pookie Bear had some very shiny foez, Thu 25 Apr 2013, 19:38, closed)