Rating: 
Summary: Please read this book.
Review: Before reading this book I thought that running out of oil would be a problem for my grandchildren. If this book is correct the situation is much more urgent. The author, David Goodstein is someone to be taken seriously -- vice provost and a physics professor at Caltech. The book is well-written, clear, short, and to the point. For sake of humankind, please read this book and recommend it to friends.
Rating:
Summary: Non-hyperbolic treatment of a serious subject
Review: David Goodstein does a good job of treating a flammable subject with the balance and seriousness it deserves. His conclusion is that there is no doubt that fossil fuels (oil, natural gas and coal) will run out by the end of the century, but that we will be forced to begin dealing with the ramifications of falling supply long before that. Most estimates assume that the coming lack of oil will become a problem only when the wells have all dried up. Goodstein argues that the problems will occur much earlier - when production peaks at the half-way point of the planet's oil reserves. A point that is either here or will soon arrive.The book avoids a long and detailed discussion of the geological forces behind the formation of fossil fuels - giving just a brief overview - and doesn't discuss the techniques of oil exploration, production and drilling at all. Goodstein's audience is the person who is unfamiliar with the science behind the controversy and a large portion of the book is devoted to an overview of energy, fuel, the science behind the discovery of the uses of oil and our rising dependence on it (with one or two brief forays into the related phenomenon of global warming). I give the book 5 stars not for its fluid prose (although it is very readable) but because the author draws simple, firm and appropriate conclusions based on available evidence, while at the same time studiously avoiding hysteria and hyperbole to make his point. He also offers some alternative suggestions which, while unable to completely prevent economic and social dislocations that will be caused by falling oil production, do offer some hope.
Rating: 
Summary: Why did WW Norton publish this book?
Review: David Goodstein's book tells us nothing new. We've known about oil discovery, consumption, and pricing economics for years. The Hubbert curve is nothing new either. What's fundamentally missing from this book is a discussion of how cheap petroleum products are in the U.S., how this country has had a fundamental mismanagement of energy policies for fifty years, how amazing the politicians are when it comes to useless and expensive pet energy projects, and how gutless they are when it comes to actually doing something about the impending energy crisis. Let's not forget, either, how the oil lobby has managed to bamboozle us for decades, and win all those wonderful tax breaks. Instead, after a first (introductory) chapter, we're treated to several chapters of elementary thermodynamics that have little to do with the oil problem per se, and a cursory glance at the alternatives. Entropy (the Second Law of Thermodynamics) only really comes into the equation when we do the numbers and realize that the true price humanity pays for its gas supply does not even comes close to $2 per gallon. (It's more like $8 or $10.) I would've liked to have seen Gooden take this approach. Massive conservation fuel programs would help, but we're busy
giving business owner $100,000 tax breaks for buying SUVs. Surveys show that the average SUV owner thinks the current "gas crisis" is "manufactured," and a $40 tankful is not going to
get rid of their beloved behemoth. Why didn't Gooden talk
about our high octane habit in detail? Why did the diesel
Rabbit disappear? Gooden thinks nuclear energy is relatively safe. And, on the numbers he's relatively right. But the economics are appalling. It wasn't safety that killed the American nuclear reactor program, it was the expense! And in the current climate, breeder reactors make as much sense as selling plutonium at Wal-Mart. What I disliked most about Gooden's whole book is that it is entirely fatalistic. And some of the comments I've read make it seem as though some people are genuinely shocked. Where have you people been? Partying for the last few decades? If the Bush Administration had spent $80 billion on energy research, conservation measures, and rolling back all the gas guzzler inncentives, instead of trying to lock up a cheap source of crude oil for Americans, we wouldn't have an impending
crisis. But people don't care. Instead of worrying if they'll be shivering next winter, they're more concerned about ensuring gays and lesbians don't get married. Perhaps $8 per gallon sticker shock will finally ram the message home. Unfortunately none of those arguments are in the book either.
Rating:
Summary: Serious topic, worthy of a more serious treatment
Review: David Goodstein, author of "Out of Gas: The End of the Age of Oil", needs no lessons in alarmism. His entire book can be summed up by its first paragraph, whose last sentence reads as follows: "Even if human life does go on, civilization as we know it will not survive, unless we can find a way to live without fossil fuels." The rest of this short book is meant to be proof of this thesis. In the Introduction and the initial chapter, Goodstein is effective in convincing us of the impending crisis -- dwindling supplies of oil -- one that will be upon us much sooner than we think. He takes up what others have proposed or theorized as ways out of the crisis (methane, shale, nuclear fusion, etc.) and makes his case for why those are unlikely to suffice. After that the book fills in some very basic facts about the relevant physics associated with energy production and concludes with a revisit of the main ideas. It's not clear what level of audience this book is aimed at. My best guess is that the author had in mind a group of college freshman with non-science majors. There's a strong condescending air about the book, reinforced (perhaps I imagined this) by the standard author's photograph in which Goodstein strikes a stern, professional expression. The diagrams meant to illustrate textual points are laughably simplistic. This book is another example of what I sense is a disturbing trend in publishing. It's a small format book with generous line spacing and margins. The Notes are minimal. Yet it's been priced and reviewed as if it were a more substantial treatise, with little mention of its brevity. Goodstein obviously knows what he's talking about. In "Out of Gas", he manages to convince us that this is an important subject deserving a more comprehensive and energetic effort.
Rating:
Summary: Too much thermodynamics; Too little on the age of oil
Review: Disappointing. This book has a great, concise summary of Hubbert's Peak by Kenneth Deffeyes in the first chapter. Then the author gets lost in a discussion of the history of thermodynamics (his favorite subject maybe?). I was disappointed. You would be better off just buying Hubbert's Peak - or for a more entertaining view, The Party's Over by Richard Heinberg.
Rating: 
Summary: Out of Gas runs out of gas
Review: Dr. David Goodstein, professor at Caltech, begins this book with aplomb, paraphrasing a key piece of research completed by M. King Hubbert in the 1950s regarding the future supply of crude oil. Unfortunately, he sidetracks the reader into other alternative fuel sources -- and the physics and thermodynamics of each -- to the detriment of providing the real "meat" (research and new data) to the Hubbert's Peak premise that underpins the thesis for the book. Goodstein eventually reveals enough personal bias that it becomes apparent that his political leanings filter an initially objective discussion, and unnecessarilyy detract from otherwise relevant discussion which is, at times, very well constructed. Out of Gas left me disappointed and unfulfilled from the viewpoint of supporting data. Clearly, the author possesses a mastery of thermodynamics and mechanics that one expects from a person in his position. However, this book expended an inordinate amount of energy (entropy, using the author's parlance) discussing the merits of nuclear fission, heat engines and the like but left me wanting for better insight into alternative solutions for the impending shortagee of petrochemical feedstock (crude oil), the most important use of the raw material. While I appreciated a review of my college physics, I found it difficult to remain focused on his topic and instead my mind wandered, wondering where the discussion was leading. Lest readers believe I missed the point, Goodstein makes it abundantly clear that we are inexorably headed down the road to shortages of a critical global raw material (crude oil). Sooner than we believe. And, there are other energy sources that are available and can be had given the proper focus and magical funding (that darn capitalism and profit thing gets in our way). The physicist provides the best theoretical solution (nuclear fission), discusses some other possibilities (geothermal, solar, wind) but completely fails to provide any plausible solutions for the lack of raw material (for example, gas-to-liquids technology). What began as an interesting restatement of a problem correctly identified 50 years ago, declined into a discussion of physics and ended without a strong conclusion (aside from the obvious fact that we as a civiliztion need to work to identify and develop alternate sources). While the author makes some well reasoned points, it is fortunate that this book is brief because I almost abandoned it several times. I crave a bit more factual data, a bit less theoretical physics and a LOT less political sniping. To paraphrase a useful line from The Blues Brothers "it's okay m'am, we're SCIENTISTS".
Rating: 
Summary: Thermodynamics for Dummies
Review: Goodstein's book stands out from others about Peak Oil I've read because he emphasizes the thermodynamic aspects of the oil problem. Economic reasoning about energy resources can be misleading because economics arose in the 18th Century and implicitly assumed the Newtonian scientific worldview before it incorporated the concepts of heat and entropy developed in the 19th Century. In other words, economics presupposes the existence of perpetual-motion machines. In the physical reality we have to live in, however, the "energy returned on energy invested" (EROEI) determines the true value of an energy resource. The good old-fashioned gushing oil wells we had 50-60 years ago had EROEI's of 100:1 or better, whereas current oil extraction has an EROEI around 10:1 on average and falling. When the EROEI of an energy resource falls down to 2:1 or less, the game is over because you aren't yielding enough energy to maintain an industrial civilization, much less to grow it. However we keep seeing physically ignorant economic analyses of alternative energy "sources" like ethanol-from-corn, Canadian oil sands, hydrogen fuel cells etc. that are really pseudoscientific because they have unity or worse EROEI's, even if the author can assign some arbitrary "price" to the final product that makes them seem "competitive" with real energy supplies.
Once you understand and integrate the thermodynamic aspect of the energy problem, you realize that the seemingly colossal reserve of oil sands in Alberta is useless and irrelevant if you can't extract it with a high enough EROEI. Moreover, any physically plausible way to capture a form of energy to replace oil will require a massive investment from the current and struggling stream of fossil fuels supplies for its construction, and it will have to generate an EROEI thereafter that is not only sufficient for our current needs, but also leaves plenty for building its replacements and further expanding the supply without having to dip into additional fossil fuels. Solar panels and windmills can't do this; the factories which make them don't run off of sunlight and wind, but are plugged into the regular electrical grid powered by coal, natural gas and nuclear. Until we can find the thermodynamic trap door that frees us from fossil fuels, we face the prospect of the "Dieoff" plausibly argued on certain Websites, especially considering that modern agriculture burns about ten calories of fossil fuels energy to deliver one calorie of food energy to our tables. Goodstein deserves a lot of credit for trying to get out the truth about the energy emergency, despite the cognitive resistance he's encountering from people who claim to be knowledgeable about physics yet who have been hypnotized by "economics."
Rating:
Summary: Small volume, profound content
Review: Goodstein's small volume discusses the consequences of having passed the peak of oil discovery and soon reaching the peak of oil production. He makes the extreme but correct claim that civilization as we know it will not survive, but will revert to no better than an eighteenth century world, unless we can find a way to live without the oil, coal, methane, and other fossil fuels which are running our electrical generation plants and our transportation systems. In the course of his discussion of the scientific basis for our fuel based society, he makes the useful distinction between energy conservation (That's the first law of thermodynamics, energy/mass is always conserved) and fossil fuel conservation (That would help postpone the crisis), briefly discusses heat engines and entropy (that's the second law - we need useful work not just energy). Goodstein makes the telling observation that oil is valuable and essential as a raw material (feedstock) for the synthetic materials, chemical, and pharmaceutical industries. Once we don't have enough of it, it will be more valuable for these purposes than it ever was as a fuel source. A chapter, possibly a book, could be written on this neglected aspect of the oil as a fuel issue alone. Drilling for the Alaska oil should be postponed, if not forever, until at least it is the last resource for the petrochemical industries. The alternatives to oil as the fuel source are examined. Goodstein identifies two as possible solutions to the problem. One is direct conversion of sunlight to electricity. This is something that can be done now but at nowhere near the efficiency and cost needed to be practical. It will need to be done much better to be a solution. The other is the feared and scorned nuclear power alternative. Nuclear power is not easy to discuss in a society that required NMR instruments to be renamed MRI instruments (magnetic resonance imaging instead of nuclear magnetic resonance) to avoid the dreaded word nuclear before introducing them into medical practice for diagnostic purposes, . People are frightened of nuclear fission power generation and there are issues to be resolved (safe disposal of long lived radioactive waste, safe operation of power plants). Goodstein has dismayed and offended people - see other reviews - for daring to raise nuclear power and identifying it as one of the two possible fuel source solutions. Goodstein is optimistic even in the face of his "civilization as we know it will not survive" statement when he identifies the solution as one of engineering. This is a case where the trite "If we can put a man on the moon why can't we ... " works. We don't need a break through in fundamental science nor do we need to discover a perpetual motion machine to overthrow the second law. We need to recognize that we have a serious problem which will require significant resources and serious commitment from top to bottom. (a U.S. entropy law rather than a new U.S. energy bill?). It is difficult to be optimistic about that happening until there is more than $2 a gallon gasoline to focus the debate. Goodstein isn't very optimistic that our present national and international leadership even recognizes the problem. Possibly this book will help.
Rating:
Summary: THE OIL COMPANIES MAY HAVE KILLED ALCOHOL FUEL, BUT WHY?
Review: Hi, I am Jim Wortham, and I am very pleased to read and comment on David Goodstein's new book, "Out of Gas." High oil prices have been an ongoing problem since the late 1970's. Professor David Goodstein, on page 32, addresses the fact that ethanol alcohol can be used as automotive fuel. At the time period around 1978 to 1980, the government gave money in the form of grants to farmers to produce ethanol alcohol. That is the type of alcohol that can be fermented and distilled by using grain (such as corn) or other organic material. In fact the government then and still does provides a permit (I think it is now a free permit) to legally distill ethanol alcohol as long as an individual completes a short application, and commits to using it to experiment with running engines including cars, tractors, motorcycles, lawnmowers, with the fuel (rather than drinking it). I am the author of the book (Forget The Gas Pumps--Make Your Own Fuel) and I believe it is one of the books still in print written on the subject of converting a car to run on 90 to 100 percent alcohol. It was published in 1979 at the price of $3.95 (it is still selling at the same price on Amazon.com). This book sells as an autographed copy (to anyone you want it autographed to) for just $1.50 on Amazon Marketplace , where you are reading this. I explain how to legally distill alcohol for automotive fuel & how to get a permit (I believe it is now free to get this permit--I include with the book where to get this permit to legally distill alcohol for fuel. I tell in my book how to make minor adjustments to a car so you will never need to use gasoline again. I had converted a 1969 Dodge Dart to run on alcohol at that time. I hope to revise this book in the next year to include how to convert the newer cars that are more computerized. I am presently considering converting a motorcycle to run on alcohol and taking a tour to major cities (and contact the press) to prove that anyone can run an American made motorcycle or car or lawnmower) on American made fuel. I wrote this book in 1979. Several other books were published because of the success of my book. This book was initally turned down by every large and small publisher that I contacted, so I self-published the book and sold 24,000 copies in the first few months. It is still in print. I am selling the first edition, and autographing the book for you or for anyone who wants to get a copy. You can email me at: jwortham@seidata.com. I would be interested in your feedback of anything I have said. Respectly,
Jim Wortham
(Author and Publisher)
Amazon Marketplace name: jwortham4
Address:
Jim Wortham
Marathon International Book Company
PO Box 40
Madison, IN 47250 U.S.A.
Fax: 812-273-4672
Voice Mail: 812-273-4672
Thanks for any feedback you desire to give.
Rating: 
Summary: Burn this book for fuel
Review: I chose to read this book because I'm already familiar with the issues of fossil fuel depeletion and deeply concerned about our transition into the looming Post-Petroleum Age. After skimming the first few pages, I was under the impression the author would reveal some hopeful alternatives as a map to steer us through the looming crisis. Not so. After wading through several chapters of tedious and irrelevant explanations of basic science and engineering, lured on with each turn of the page by the promise of light at the end of the tunnel, I learned that the light was indeed a train. The conclusion of the book is totally, abjectly pessimistic.
This book plunged me into a morass of despair for over a week. Fortunately I'm a resilient person and managed to bounce back to resume enjoyment of life as I currently experience it, limited though the duration of this current era may be.
Since reading the book, I've seen news reports of alternate energy breakthroughs in China, and heard other indications that when the chips are down, our scientists will come through.
My recommendation: Do yourself a favor and burn this book. The resulting blaze will warm you for several minutes!
| 
