Well, so much for scientific research in Antarctica…it’s about to be a war zone.
Wasn’t this in news cycles back in July? I feel like I’m going crazy here.
In before we deliberately start melting antarctic ice to more easily access oil deposits
What’s oil?
Solar is moving so fast, no way this will be economically feasible to draw up. Leave it in the ground!!
True, but we will still need it for plastic, just look at temu et cetera
If we stop burning it for energy I think there will be plenty left for plastic without needing to dig new wells.
Any chance the capitalists will just leave it in the ground? No? I didn’t think so.
Trump’s about to liberate Antarta… Aunt Tart… Antitartica… the place where the polar bears live!
Fun fact, though you may have known. Arctic basically means “of the bear” because of the northern position of Ursa Major (bear constellation, also the Big Dipper). Antarctic means “not of the bear”. Because of how words work, it’s also Arctic = “north” and Antarctic = “anti-north”.
Also pretty fun coincidence that the northern one is the only one with actual bears.
This comment just made me shudder, it sounds too real
Born too late to die in war over oil, born too early to die in war over oil, born just in time to die in war over oil.
Shhhh no talk only die
It’s amazing how we always find ways to speedrun our downfall.
We? Bring them behind the shed in my back yard and ‘we’ won’t have this problem.
I’d happily eat some long pig to reduce the overabundance of whiny bitches with money.
Now, see, this is what we are not allowed to talk about. But it leads to this.
Hey what is this we? Don’t bring me into this. It’s always the same few assholes at the top doing it all
Is it not incumbent upon the rest of society to stop a maniac when he threatens to burn everything down? Inaction in the face of evil is complicity. We all need to start organizing for the revolution.
Sorry, a lot stuff happens whether we want it or not. And it affects us all.
The issue with fossile fuels or more generally oil dependency isn’t the limited availability. It’s that they’re massive deposits of stored carbon and if we start burning them they get released to the atmosphere. With the oil deposits already known if we use them all, we’d have killed the planet long before the last drop of oil is used. We don’t need any new deposits.
You think Russia cares?
Show me a single country capable of extracting this oil who cares. There isn’t one. This is a capitalism problem, not a Russia problem.
A war to extract the oil from Antarctica would be difficult to win.
A war to stop extraction from Antarctica would be easy to win.
This title legit made me wanna not wake up tomorrow 😭
Death to Oil
Death
toby Oilfixed
Add this to the list of “problems the wealthy make sure we don’t solve.”
I fear it’s rather death for, or death by oil for us.
We should make a song, death…death to the O.I.L… Same tune as Bob Vylan did in Glastonbury.
FFS lets move on from trying to suck every last drop of oil out of the earth’s crust.
The year is 2070. Common daily temps are between 35-45°C. Only 200k humans survive globally, and barely.
They still use fossil fuels to generate electricity…
200K?
Hey everyone, check it out, this guy still has some optimism left!
A truce has been reached between the forces of AE-X11 Musk and the virtual consciousness of Jeff Bezos as they vow to unite against the tribal council of the former Russian Federation to secure the remaining oil reserves in the desert plains of the Antarctic continent
Doesn’t need a lot of oil to upkeep a population of 200k humans though.
If there’s only 200K people left, everything is going to be fine … for them.
The robots are relying on fossil fuel too
Human population
nowbeing only 0.00025% of its peak, their greenhouse gas emissions are now insignificant, so, the planet isnowfinally recovering, fast.Edit : obviously I’m not a writer.
A larger nation with a massive population like India or China will unilaterally employ some kind of geoengineering project long before it gets to that level of lost profits.
Likely it will be some kind of massively risky atmospheric particle seeding to reflect some percentage of sunlight, which could have unknown consequences down the line.
I have seen the Animatrix. We all know where this is going.
daily temps are between 35-45°C
Not in Russia. :D
They will one day.
Maybe, but look at that territory, it’s perfectly positioned to unlock more agriculutural land northward as the world further south burns. I bet the Russian ruling class is eagerly awaiting this scenario that would put them towards the top of the pile in world powers. They may end up in a position to pick and choose from waves of immigrants.
Problem is that it isn’t that simple. The general fact we do know is that the atmosphere will be more energetic and, on average, the globe will be hotter. The more energetic facet means more weather activity and changes to various currents. So local weather may be more impacted by a change in wind current temperature wise. The change in storm activity may be the bigger concern rather than temperatures. We don’t know how much viable agriculture will be possible or exactly where it will be. Also there’s the question of soil quality. It’s a dangerous gambit to assume a straightforward “Lots of snowy land now means lots of agriculture in a warmed globe”.
Just for context, the US uses around 7 billion barrels per year. Can keep the SUVs going for the better part of a century.
Assholes can roll coal for a century.
What’s weird is that Gale Banks, one of the godfathers of turbocharging and a huge name in diesel performance, is adamant that rolling coal is stupid. Especially in modern engines with lightening fast fuel control systems… more forgivable in older diesels with mechanical injection systems. But he says it’s money and horsepower literally blowing out your exhaust, being a internal combustion engine enthusiast myself I don’t understand wanting to leave performance blowing away in the wind; that’s YOUR unburnt diesel blowing away! In THIS economy!
No matter the advances, the Otto cycle will always be 25% efficient, at most.
Last I heard modern gas engines have reached a smidge over 30% thermal efficiency because the pure Otto cycle hasn’t been used in decades. Mazda(?) recently announced an engine over 40% efficiency using an Atkinson design I think. Superchargers and more Turbochargers boost efficiency more by recycling waste energy.
But I’m not sure any of that matters because diesels aren’t Otto Cycle.
diesels aren’t Otto Cycle.
Are they not four-stroke?
All Otto cycle are 4-stroke but not all 4-stroke are Otto cycle.
Such as Wankels, ok, just replace “Otto cycle” with 4-stroke in my original comment.
https://www.worldometers.info/oil/
There are 1.65 trillion barrels of proven oil reserves in the world as of 2016.
So another extra 30% or so.
Yeah, we already have more than enough to ruin the world.
