How long until everyone move on to electric transportation, globally...

>bbc
idk user... i'll give it a go
Based

Attached: SNAP.png (300x300, 118K)

there is this recent ITER project led by the eu, which plans to make a way to generate energy via nuclear fusion which is much safer than nuclear energy we know today
currently it is not possible cause in the very complicated and expensive process it is, it doesnt generate more energy than it consumes

some people say that actually fusion is our only hope and that in time iter will make awesome affordable practically undepletable energy source for the future
some say that there is no hope and that we are in for a global economic collapse and apocalypse
some say that oil wont run out anytime soon (this one is probably bullshit, although i think climate change environmentalists are overexaggerating a lot and are corrupt)
some say that we will replace it with a mix of different energy sources in a gradual adaptation (this one is probably the most realistic)

what is a fairly big risk people often ignore is whether we will be able to find enough oil replacement before demand critically surpasses supply

who knows what the future holds

dunno
youtube.com/watch?v=VOMWzjrRiBg
this is the original from some animator
there are others if you look

Soon.

Attached: OurElon2.jpg (960x480, 42K)

There are replacements for oil, they are just expensive. The technology to convert coal into liquid petroleum products is a well understood example. Oil prices may just settle at $120/bbl in the near future.
There will probably be a mix, but market forces ultimately determine what will happen.
What is more serious is phosphorous scarcity and aquifer depletion since there are no conceivable solutions that do not involve unlimited sources of energy or massive depopulation.

>market forces
lol user you believe the system too much

of course there are energies to replace oil
neither will oil ever run out in the technical sense

however for something to be a good energy source it needs to generate more energy than it is used to get it out
as time goes by oil will get less and less efficient as the good wells are dried out and they go deeper and deeper under ground (remember that early wells practically poured out of the ground)
fracking is a pretty desperate shot by the us to maintain their policial and economic position in the world

just like "green" energy is much less efficient and it would take A LOT of political will, time and investment to replace the current system with
not to mention that practically all technologies today need oil in one way or the other to function (all the modern stuff we take for granted)

>What is more serious is phosphorous scarcity and aquifer depletion since there are no conceivable solutions that do not involve unlimited sources of energy or massive depopulation.
now that is yellowstone eruption tier im afraid

have you researched what happens to industries and entrepreneurs who attempt to challenge the oil industry?

they have a chance at survival unlike those who challenge the banking sector

The problem is most electricity is generated by burning fuel

lol wait a minute.... pretty sure we could follow the money back to the same fiat printing pockets. i’m still pissed about the Hindenburg

Attached: 94B6E1DF-EA29-4CC5-B5D9-120BA3B128C4.jpg (660x526, 90K)

This

Also charging takes too long. Most people I hear saying they woul t want an electric car until charging it is about as fast as filling a gas tank

Didn't thy try that in the 50s with the whole atomic age thing and then there were a bunch of nuclear disasters?

As soon as oil runs out look into hydrogen on demand generators that literally run off of water and a battery connected to a solar panel and get mad.

Fuck you, jewnigger with your electricity. I like my walks.

I didn't mean challengers. I meant the current players phasing out oil and bring in new technologies. But as our coratian friend itt explained that's probably not gonna happen soon, or at least until boomers die out

looking into nuclear power, one discovers that it is actually quite safe when compared with our other means- for instance, the pistons in the engine of a car are constantly “capturing” explosions but nobody seems to be bothered by how poorly that could go- almost like we’re smart enough to not blow ourselves up... all of those nuclear disasters start looking a little fishy

Reminded me of this heh
youtube.com/watch?v=NuH72G5qXow

Once it's cheaper and more reliable than combustion

at least 500 years. Petroleum is a fabulously consumable, transportable and monopolizable commodity, the kikes can always make huge gains from it. Electricity is less so.

solar panels are EXTREMELY ineffective, need to be replaced often and need dirty energy to be produced
now im not quite sure about hydrogen, jsut like im not that familiar with thorium so i cant tell for sure, but im fairly certain that theres a catch to them just like there is to everything
even wind turbines are environment harmful cause they threaten the bird population and leak toxic material into the land, polluting and poisioning it

>wind turbines = awful noise pollution

and we arent even mentioning how there are limited places where you can actually put renewables - solar can only be good in very sunny areas, wind only on windy areas, thermal only on thermal spots, hydro is an environmental disaster + most of rivers have already been dammed

Meant for

i also forgot to mention that renewables like soalr and wind vary in their output depending on what the year was like

wind turbines are actually the best solution of them - reasonably effective and relatively easy
if you had the choice between giving up your modern lifestyle and living like a 19th century farmer or tolerating awful noise i bet i know what you and 99.99999999% of people would choose

The only scary thing about a nuclear disaster is the radiation not the initial explosion

Hydroelectric?

for hydro, besides being bane of the environemnt as i said theres not much places to expand

They say nuclear fusion will be achievable in 50 years so yeah probably/hopefully

in 50 years oil price might as well jump 500% and then what
not to mention how long it would take to switch and adapt to it and how fucking new, untested and expensive as hell it is

fuck yeah! we’ve been taught horror stories of radiation all of our lives- however i do recommend looking into how safe different nuclear technologies actually are! it’s mindblowing- for most nuclear technologies some guy would have to deliberately fuck everything up to get the sorts of disasters we’ve had to date... which we also can’t rule out

never, semi-collapse, then patchwork then arcology

We've got at least a century. Right now we're still too dependent on gas and coal. Plus you start phasing out oil it will replace coal as an electric power source since it's easier to transport and denser.

Other problem is that relative to workers it's more worker-to-BTU efficient to use fossil fuels. Solar industry employs over 200,000 people (yeah I get many of them are installers) while the coal industry employs about 50,000 miners plus a few 10s of thousands of logistics workers.

Attached: eia 2017.png (433x661, 23K)

for oil company don't matter if you burn oil in the engine or in the turbine

>green tech
it is not about muh tech and patents, it is about the economy and eco system surrounding it

Actually Chernobyl was caused by some nuclear scientist being a hot shot and fucking around with the reactor and Fukushima was because some idiots put the fuel tanks for the emergency cooling on the shoreline where they got waged away by the tidal wave

and now humanity is scarred by horrific stories of radiation. how ideal for the oil barons!

Actually Israel committed a widespread act of terror against the nips.

Every fucking time. Don't let this memeflag peddle what the kikes want you to believe

jimstonefreelance.com/fukushima.html

Attached: 1527551445108.png (242x208, 7K)

Before electric happens, the Jews will probably find a way to get rid of the easily extracted under its own pressure/refine it/put in a combustion engine. Then replace it with a system in which;
- you take oil/uranium/gas/mostly coal then refine it
- burn it then inefficiently turn it into electricity
- transport that energy to some place for filling electric cars
- build said place
- all the R&D, (((lawyers))),(((consultants))), (((automotive giants))), (((stock market)))
-oh yeh and mining lithium which is one of the most horrible processes mother nature has had to endure

Or something along those lines. What you won't see though is those who want it paying for it. They will figure out a way to raise capital using skimmings of developed nations economys to pay for all this then take credit a la 2008 crisis.

>Create problem, sell solution

You're a Jew ffs you should know this.

What I would invest in big time is a final solution to some other big problem.

excellent link!!! one would have to be really fucking stupid to not follow the money in situations like this, it is fairly obvious usually (((cui))) bono

>jimstonefreelance.com/fukushima.html
Yikes...Sorry about that Nippon bros

The problem with electricity is you can't store it. First boundary of entry to a fully electric grid and mass transportation is securing cobalt.

Why do you think the US has special forces in Congo?

just spitballin here- if we’re on a giant spinning ball, shouldn’t there be a way to take from the energy that is constantly being exerted? then we wouldn’t even need to store it, just take what you want when you need it. tesla would slap me right now. but anyway- all those electrons bouncing around up there, you’d think we’d just string some wires and be done with it

Tidal power is the name for that.