The Business of Climate Change Conference 2009
• Related • Filed Under
Jeff Rubin, the former Chief Economist of CIBC World Markets and the author of Why Your World Is About To Get A Whole Lot Smaller built his reputation as one of Canada‘s top economists based on a number of successful predictions including the housing bust of the early 90s and the rise of oil prices. In his recent book, Mr. Rubin predicts $225 per barrel oil by 2012 and with it the end of globalization, a movement towards local sourcing and a need for massive scaling up of energy efficiency. www.thebusinessofclimatechange.com
Heya i am for the first time here. I found this board and I in finding It really helpful & ...
Very beneficial/helpful information..for what its worth you have my 0k anchored in my loud yes. 
Its like you read my mind! You appear to understand a lot about this, such as you wrote the e-book ...
Nice post. I used to be checking constantly this weblog and I'm inspired! Very useful info specifically the ultimate section ...
Wow, wonderful weblog layout! How lengthy have you ever been blogging for? you made running a blog glance easy. The ...
Comment by deonnamalbroughkgh on 14 December 2010:
keep me warm baby *rockmycity.info*
Comment by splashy9 on 14 December 2010:
Very interesting.
Comment by GeoffreyRahl on 14 December 2010:
@mark2073 Tell me how will we produce the electrecity running these cars? Burning fossile fuels? So unless every household buys solar pannels or windmill to reload its electric car batteries this is gonna be useless
Comment by MediaCryptix on 14 December 2010:
Every year 2,500,000 people die of car exhaust. And car exhaust is destroying the nature! We know how to stop it!
youtube.com/watch?v=sHw7XSz2OGI
Stop the global warming !!!
Comment by MrEnergyCzar on 14 December 2010:
He explains PO very well…. the only thing you need to know is that economic growth’s ultimate limit or demise is that growth is limited by the natural world.
Comment by snuggy2000 on 14 December 2010:
One of the best speakers on peak oil! Unfortunately this only gets around 45K views while some stupid cat video or dancing flight attendant gets 7+ million views. The world indeed is going to hell in a hand basket.
Comment by TurnKeyOil on 14 December 2010:
@johntconover couldn’t agree with you more. This guy is a cash cow =]
Comment by TheMyHP on 14 December 2010:
Good one Jeff
Comment by kingzfan1 on 14 December 2010:
@mark2073
Jeff Rubin was interviewed by Allan Gregg (of CBC) last year. Gregg asked him specifically about electric cars like the Volt. The only problem is that if everyone plugged in their Volt, the lights will go out because we don’t have the BTU’s of energy needed to power them. A battery is not a form of energy, it stores energy. That energy needs to be created somewhere.
Comment by nota2cdtime on 14 December 2010:
@mark2073 Think of the conversion of infrastructure and supply of lithium ion. Conversion will require oil and there’s not nearly enough lithium ion as there is oil. Liquid fuel is the problem, but you have a very good idea. Check Clifford J. Wirth.
Comment by mark2073 on 14 December 2010:
This is a good talk, but he doesn’t mention electric cars. They are very cheap to drive ($25 a month). They will explode in popularity very soon. The electricity needed to run them would almost be met by no longer refining crude oil anymore, and because they would be charged overnight when demand is low. The only issue is that it will take 20 years to get enough of them on the road to eclipse gasoline powered cars, well maybe not if hardly anyone drives anymore because of expensive gasoline.
Comment by bf718 on 14 December 2010:
According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the worlds volcanoes combined generate about 200 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) annually, while our automotive and industrial activities cause some 24 BILLION tons of CO2 emissions every year worldwide. So, the Icelandic volcano doesn’t begin to compete with us!
Comment by jubbyjubber on 14 December 2010:
Surely the Icelandic Volcano must have spewed out at least two decades worth of Carbon over the last two weeks, what difference will we make?
Comment by jjrglobal on 14 December 2010:
Agree with the affordable peak oil theory, but all the carbon emission taxes will do is hurt the countries that implement the tax by growing the size of government. IF the free market is allowed to work the shock to our economies in the west wont be nearly as brutal as it will with a carbon tax added onto higher oil prices. We cant do anything about emerging markets emissions and even if we could it wouldnt make a difference in the overall scheme of things
Comment by MrEnergyCzar on 15 December 2010:
we replaced whale oil, coal and now we can’t replace oil with something that give more energy returned on the energy invested….going backwards to tar sands, shale, heavy oil, artic oil does nothing….
Comment by ductonius on 15 December 2010:
Economically, nuclear power is expensive to build (capital costs), but fuel costs are low and maintenance costs are only marginally above that of any other thermoelectric plant type. Currently in the US, the decommissioning costs are built into the construction costs at the time of construction.
Decentralized power is a good supplement where it works, but it requires the same power grid we have without benefiting from economies of scale that centralized power production has.
Comment by ductonius on 15 December 2010:
The oceans contain 4.5 billion tonnes of uranium, about 1000x that of land-based sources. Thorium can be used as fuel and is 5 times as abundant as uranium. Reprocessing spent fuel can extend the supply roughly 50x.
“Nuclear waste” is a misnomer and is called waste for political purposes. Anything radioactive enough to harm a person is actually useful as fuel. Storage of “waste” is unnecessary, but again, is done for political purposes.
Comment by knobcreekfarms on 15 December 2010:
um, uranium is also a finite resource. It to will peak and it’s supply decline. It is not “unlimited.”
If you think nuclear is so safe can we count on you to house the waste at your home?
Comment by sabianmonk on 15 December 2010:
*insure, not ensure,
Comment by sabianmonk on 15 December 2010:
In terms of mechanics, yes, we do have the fuel and the technologies to produce enough nuclear power to supplement our current electrical needs in the U.S. But we also must take into account the huge increase in electricity demand if our cars go electric. Economically, nuclear power plants are also expensive to build, maintain, replace, decommission and especially to ensure. It would be much better to have a decentralized power system: wind, solar, biofuels, etc.
Comment by however3000 on 15 December 2010:
very much worth the 45 minutes. this is a ‘must see’ speech.
Comment by phrozeninSK on 15 December 2010:
what about the margins on the products we buy. Price doesnt have to go up if greed goes down.
Comment by ductonius on 15 December 2010:
Geothermal is a good supplement and should be used where possible, but the main limitation is it is not feasible in most places. Geothermal requires abundant underground heat close to the surface and most places where people live do not have enough. Drilling deeper to find hotter rock increases costs massively. The energy density must also be high enough.
Nuclear power works anywhere there is a source of cooling water and people tend to live near lakes, rivers, seas and oceans anyway.
Comment by Jibberyerkibber on 15 December 2010:
@ductonius
Geo-thermal energy is the future of this planet. Cheap. Inexhaustible supply.
Comment by ductonius on 15 December 2010:
Your arguments are all strawmen.
There is nothing that says we need to encourage or allow the use of nuclear technology in unstable countries, which tend to not be industrialized and thus have low CO2 outputs and oil usage anyway.
Similarly, there’s no reason any county not already industrialized and stable would need breeder reactors.
Nuclear terrorism concerns are nothing but a mix of alarmism and ignorance.