Reply #9: Ok, I will give you some more info.

[galileoreloaded]

This is for both reply posters. The LARGEST myth promulgated by people who misunderstand the population/commodity problem is by believing that we can step back into 1750 or 1850, because there was no oil and less people. While this should be a model for a possible future outcome, it is not feasible for one very important reason. Lack of natural resources. See, remember when I was talking about EIEROI, well that applies to commodities, or resources as well. Metal ore mined starting in the bronze age was about 30% assay by volume, by 1750 it had dropped to 20%, in the parts of the world that were accessible and able to be efficiently extracted by the technology at the time. Today that is about 0.8% by volume. That means it requires a exponential amount of energy, (BTU=work, doesn't matter whether it is horse, human or tractor diesel)to produce the same yield. This applies to all resources, and guess what, we don't have the vast expanse of the American west, Canada, etc. to go explore. We cant even switch to solar/wind without people dying of starvation, because the basic components are so energy intensive, and standalone the technologies only return 1/500th of a gallon of fuel, they cannot generate enough energy to build themselves. Ethanol sucks, because it is a net loss of energy. Biodiesel is 90% of diesel efficiency and by the 10th crop, you are back to diesel, permanently. And broke too, because the input costs increase by 10 percent each cut.
These are niche technologies, not long term solutions. I would be happy to provide my source if required.
And I am wise.