I think you are going to run into issues with this. The reason that you get so many conflicting reports and different answers on this topic has much more to do with economics than what's in the ground.
For example, let's look at oil.
Basically, when an oil field is produced, it has to be profitable. Well, as demand growns and supply drops, price increases and fields that were unprofitable become profitable. For example, the Albertan oil sands and Utah/Colorado oil shales are now being investigated for production, and 10 years ago that was unimaginable.
There are vast reserves of organic material that have petrolium potential. The problem is, all the easy fields are gone, and it gets harder and more expensive. Basically, anyone's 'peak oil' estimate is not much more than that, a guess. It's impossible to know how the market will react in the future and how many unprofitable fields will be opened in the future. Take any estimate with a grain of salt.
Below are some American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG) links to these issues. If you look at their site more, you may find more info you need. Good luck!
Source(s):
http://www.aapg.org/explorer/2006/07jul/peak_oil.cfm
http://www.aapg.org/explorer/2000/05may/cassandras.cfm
2007-04-17 06:25:04
·
answer #1
·
answered by QFL 24-7 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
No one really knows--we keep finding more all the time. You have to assume that there is only so much oil, etc. in the earth, but no one really knows how much.
I don't think you'll find a big lifestyle shift. As those fuels get harder to find, other energy sources will become more popular. Unfortunately, coal and oil are still the cheapest way to boil water--advances in solar and wind technology may change that, but they are still not economically effective. I checked out what it would cost to build a solar power farm on the cheapest land I could find in the continental US--if my maintenance costs were zero, it would take sixty years to pay for itself. The technology needs to get better.
2007-04-17 06:25:08
·
answer #2
·
answered by wayfaroutthere 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Well if u study plants and photosynthesis u should know that this good earth is recycling our air and fossil fuels . The plants take in the CO2 and give us back the O2 and the plant holds on to the C . The c is in the leaves and they fall off and go down the rivers to the delta where it deteriorates into gas ,oil , and the oil will eventually turn to coal. It has been doing this for millions of years .
2007-04-17 08:12:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by JOHNNIE B 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
you're precise... a million. Renewable preduce rubbish quantities of electrical energy 2. definite, non renewable are 'undesirable' for the enviroment yet...in the event that they are understanding, via the time they have surely ran out, in approximately 50 years, international warming is basically no longer that a variety of of a topic nevertheless and there'll be not extra fossil fuels to make a contribution to the subject 3. additionally, enable's be honest, those factors are gonna run out. making use of renewable isn't sufficient, we are nevertheless gonna want non renewable. non renewable are gonna be used up, it is not a question of if, it incredibly is a question of while. why the hell can we worry with international warming in ordinary terms to maintain some years becuase ultimately it incredibly is all gonna be used up, like it or no longer. we are actually not making this international any extra advantageous we are basically increasing the time scale till it ***** up.
2016-10-22 10:27:54
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is renewable but may take millions of years. We will run very low on fossil fuels in 20-50 years that it will become too expensive to use.
2007-04-18 03:00:14
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋