What would society be like if we didn't use petroleum-based fuels?

Simply, today our society is so dependent on petroleum based fuel, that we will risk anything and everything, including our lives and the sanctity of the Earth, to obtain it.

Spills and unstoppable flows, like the Exxon & BP disasters, while infuriating to many, are largely considered by society to be "par for the course," inevitable accidents that are regrettable, yes, but unavoidable.

Our modern civilization has been molded by the advent of petroleum-fueled vehicles.

My question is: What do you think our civilization would be like if this wasn't the case? I can think of ramifications to lifestyle, economics, politics, etc. Would like to hear your thoughts.

(I put this thread on the Peak Oil board because, whether or not we're running out, people are starting to envision a world free of the chains of oil.)

[edit on 23-7-2010 by MarkusMaximus]

[edit on 23-7-2010 by MarkusMaximus]

wede stil be organic! lawn fertilizers, even the evil monstantos seeds, were at one point, used/derived from petroleum ingredients. We wouldnt have modern day engine oil, the 5w, 10w30 ect, is becuase of plastic polymers added to engine oil, thus causing them to 'chain out' when hot, therfore creating Viscosity. we prob would have never invented any from of plastic at all..wede all be shopping with wicker baskets, bread baskets, bags made from hemp. wede never have invented the silicone chip, 'computers'. cars i am sure would have been invented, but using alcohol and perhaps peanut oil as lubrication. The coal industry would have boomed ten fold..

oh lol and toys obvisouly, would still be made of carved wood, glass..toxic and BPA free!!!

reply to post by MarkusMaximus


Whales?

Unfortunately I think we might be breeding them for the purpose of fuel...knowing us.

For now the oil is all we have. It is like a currency.
Black gold. Texas Tea.

Some people believe alternative energy technology is already there and being with held although it is never clear why, or by whom.


Either way we need to think harder and mix it up a little.

I believe that if we hadn't discovered how to use petroleum to propel us around, our society would be much different.

Clearly, we would be more confined to localized geographic areas.

Migration to city/urban living as a standard probably wouldn't have happened.

An agrarian way of life would proably be commonplace, since traveling to a market would be arduous.

i think it would be something like this.www.youtube.com...

Take a look at the Amish. They don't even use deodorant. What? They're not going to be reading this.

I've often thought about living off the grid and growing my own food and generating my own electricity. I think it would be very liberating, and very difficult. You'd still have to have a job to pay taxes.. ah yes, taxes. Can't escape those, can you.

MMM that thought never crossed my mind..whale fat to make candles : X
that is sick and viscously cruel to me. good point though

Originally posted by AwakeinNM
You'd still have to have a job to pay taxes.. ah yes, taxes. Can't escape those, can you.

Taxes serve two purposes:
1. "Infrastructure building"
2. To keep you a part of the system. Even if you don't have income, you've got taxes.

it'd be a Steampunk world!! how cool would that be!!??


en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 23-7-2010 by Totalstranger]

Originally posted by MarkusMaximus

Originally posted by AwakeinNM
You'd still have to have a job to pay taxes.. ah yes, taxes. Can't escape those, can you.

Taxes serve two purposes:
1. "Infrastructure building"
2. To keep you a part of the system. Even if you don't have income, you've got taxes.

What I was getting at is that if you had a piece of property in the middle of nowhere and you were totally self-sufficient on it - you worked the land as your job, you'd still need to pay taxes even though you would not benefit from infrastructure. Assuming you stayed there your entire life. So #2 is valid. I guess you could always be a squatter.

There wouldnt be no problem, in fact, it would be better than what it is now. no oil spills, no taking resources, wouldnt have companies or governments making profit, killing for oil,stealing land for oil,etc

There's just too much alternatives that can be use for all our every day oil products. We just depending on it because we are condition and programmed to accept it as the only thing around. All it takes a few hours,do some research and you'll see for yourself and one alternative that can knock out oil products is illegal almost all around the world esp in the USA, only if it wasnt illegal.... sigh.. life would have been better for all of us.

We would all be:

DANCING RABBITS

www.dancingrabbit.org...

Sri Oracle

everything derived from oil can also be made from hemp.

infact you can make more things from hemp than you can from oil at only fractions of the cost. . so essentially life wouldnt be much different, we would all just have more spending money. and hemp doesnt run out, it continues growing quite well in just about every climate on earth.

and i guess more farmers would have hemp feilds. oh the humanity. *faints*.

we wouldnt even need to change our technology, as most hemp fuels are compatible with current tech (including cars, generators, etc...)

its a weed folks. think about it. all YOU would have to do is vote, everything else would fall into place on its own.

reply to post by MarkusMaximus

Hi MarkusMaximus.

You asked

What would society be like if we didn't use petroleum-based fuels?

This is what I think:

We yould NOT have been developping the stupid internal combustion engine
for 100 years !

We would have developped: electrical stuff, anti-gravity stuff,
CLEAN energy stuff. . .for 100 years !

Imagine, after ***100*** years of study on gravity, speed of light,
quantum physics. . .etc. . . where we would be???

____! ! WE would (maybe) ALSO be a civilisation
travelling between stars ! !____

Blue skies.

Originally posted by C-JEAN
reply to post by MarkusMaximus

 

Hi MarkusMaximus.

You asked

What would society be like if we didn't use petroleum-based fuels?

This is what I think

We yould NOT have been developping the stupid internal combustion engine
for 100 years !

We would have developped: electrical stuff, anti-gravity stuff,
CLEAN energy stuff. . .for 100 years !

Imagine, after ***100*** years of study on gravity, speed of light,
quantum physics. . .etc. . . where we would be???

____! ! WE would (maybe) ALSO be a civilisation
travelling between stars ! !____

Blue skies.

I agree that it would have been beneficial for society.

Also neither World War would have happened.

Originally posted by MarkusMaximus
Simply, today our society is so dependent on petroleum based fuel, that we will risk anything and everything, including our lives and the sanctity of the Earth, to obtain it.

Spills and unstoppable flows, like the Exxon & BP disasters, while infuriating to many, are largely considered by society to be "par for the course," inevitable accidents that are regrettable, yes, but unavoidable.

Our modern civilization has been molded by the advent of petroleum-fueled vehicles.

My question is: What do you think our civilization would be like if this wasn't the case? I can think of ramifications to lifestyle, economics, politics, etc. Would like to hear your thoughts.

I think it would be Exactly like today.

Except we would not have any pollution or health problems caused by pollution.

We would have Cars, Airplanes, Trains, Subs/boats, Computers.. in short.. we would have everything we do have today.. only made by different materials and we would have been using clean energy resources. Wind, Water, Solar, Batteries etc.

There is NO Reason why we cannot have all these things without oil and oil byproducts.

The implications would be profound if we did not have oil. Here are a few items I can think of. By no means is this an exhaustive list and I tried to exclude obvious items like people not driving SUV's.

1. No Suburbs.
The growth and existence of suburbs in the US (an other parts of the world) depends on the automobile and fuel. Take fuel out of the equation and people will no longer live in the suburbs in large numbers. People would be concentrated in cities.

2. Less imports and exports.
Fossil fuels make transporting freight cheap. If there were no fossil fuels, transporting freight would be expensive. This means people would buy less imports use more local products. Conversely, people will export less. When I speak of imports and exports, I am not necessarily referring to goods from a foreign country, but goods from far away. For example, a person living in Seattle is more likely to buy goods made in Vancouver than goods made in Florida.

3. Less travel.
Fossil fuels enable us to cheaply travel. Many people of modest means, including myself, have had the opportunity to travel not only around our own countries, but to lands on the other side of the planet. We also have the opportunity to interact with people from all over the world who come to visit us. Without fossil fuels, only a few people would get the opportunity to leave their immediate vicinity.

This is all I could think of for the moment..

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
The implications would be profound if we did not have oil. Here are a few items I can think of. By no means is this an exhaustive list and I tried to exclude obvious items like people not driving SUV's.

1. No Suburbs.
The growth and existence of suburbs in the US (an other parts of the world) depends on the automobile and fuel. Take fuel out of the equation and people will no longer live in the suburbs in large numbers. People would be concentrated in cities.

2. Less imports and exports.
Fossil fuels make transporting freight cheap. If there were no fossil fuels, transporting freight would be expensive. This means people would buy less imports use more local products. Conversely, people will export less. When I speak of imports and exports, I am not necessarily referring to goods from a foreign country, but goods from far away. For example, a person living in Seattle is more likely to buy goods made in Vancouver than goods made in Florida.

3. Less travel.
Fossil fuels enable us to cheaply travel. Many people of modest means, including myself, have had the opportunity to travel not only around our own countries, but to lands on the other side of the planet. We also have the opportunity to interact with people from all over the world who come to visit us. Without fossil fuels, only a few people would get the opportunity to leave their immediate vicinity.

This is all I could think of for the moment..

How can you claim any of that? If we would not have had oil over the last 100 years we could have built our cities another way..

Why is lack of oil equal to no other way to progress technologically?

Your post assumes we could have not grown any other way than through oil.

The original post does not exclude that possibility.. it is not asking what would the world today be like if there was never any oil AND if we didn't use other means of power and production?

There was Tesla. He did not have to use anything made by oil or oil products to do his experiments that could not have been made other ways.

Oil was just a tool of production. We could have had electric powered cars trucks and planes that would have built us just as large cities and suburbs as we have today.. possibly bigger.

That technology could have flourished giving us a whole new utopia today. It would have been much cleaner than energy from oil.

[edit on 23-7-2010 by JohnPhoenix]

reply to post by JohnPhoenix


You are right in that society could base itself off other types of energy like nuclear, wind, or solar. However, if oil were to abruptly disappear, this is what would happen.

We also have to consider that while alternative energies are or can be viable, they were not viable a few decades ago. Fossil fuels have been viable and cheap for decades and our society has developed around cheap fossil fuels.
To give an example, it would be difficult to say that suburbs would have developed after WWII if there were no cheap fossil fuels as nuclear energy was still in its infancy.