#### Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Options

# Peak phosphorus

I've added a brief page about the possibility of peak phosphorus. I need to look into getting permission to include some graph images that'll make it more understandable.

Tech question: one web link has ()'s in it, confusing the name parser. Is there some escaping mechanism or something?

EDIT: fixed spelling

• Options
1.

Is there some escaping mechanism or something?

I assume that, when time cometh, He will speak to you.

Meanwhile you could try standard URL escaping, like done by JavaScript as demonstrated on many web pages like this one: Escaping

( should be %28 and ) should be %29

Comment Source:<blockquote> <p> Is there some escaping mechanism or something? </p> </blockquote> I assume that, when time cometh, He will speak to you. Meanwhile you could try standard URL escaping, like done by JavaScript as demonstrated on many web pages like this one: [Escaping](http://www.web-code.org/coding-tools/javascript-escape-unescape-converter-tool.html) ( should be %28 and ) should be %29
• Options
2.
I've added another ref and an answer to Q2 in Peak Phosphorus.
Comment Source:I've added another ref and an answer to Q2 in Peak Phosphorus.
• Options
3.

The Peak phosphorus page is great! Someday soon I want to move a lot of the "uranium" information to a Peak uranium page. We also need a Peak oil page. Any other obvious "peaks"?

Comment Source:The [[Peak phosphorus]] page is great! Someday soon I want to move a lot of the "uranium" information to a [[Peak uranium]] page. We also need a [[Peak oil]] page. Any other obvious "peaks"?
• Options
4.
edited October 2010

Unless someone does it first, I'm slowly working towards peak oil, but it's particularly tricky to phrase things correctly (particularly see below).

I gather there's a medium size list of things that are usable for high-tech things (eg, tantalum, neodymium, helium) where there's either a peak or other supply problem, but I'd put them at secondary priority. The list of other credible potential major peaks to my knowledge is:

1. "Peak" potable water: aquifers being emptied faster than they refill, increasing population in areas with limited river water

2. Peak food: multiple issues combining to constrain the amount of food that can be grown

3. Peak economy/credit: regardless of how beneficial building something is, you generally have to somehow get "money" to pay for construction in advance. The recent financial downturn could have been enough to stop huge new investments.

4. Peak coal/shale gas: the claim that coal reserves are overstated in the same way as oil reserves. Very dubious on this one since unlike oil it's not clear there's been enough of an interest in coal to give an incentive to overstate things, and the huge reserves are in countries like the US which are "associated with transparency"... Also it's not clear that a limit on coal availability is a bad thing from a $CO_2$ point of view. Indeed, the problem with potential peak oil is the sudden dramatic reduction in availability of liquid fuel for building renewable infrastructure, even though it'd help reduce $CO_2$ emissions.

One of the things about "peaks" is that there's a basic idea ("peak X may happen soon") and detailed models which provide specific projections but which incorporate many assumptions. I'm trying to figure out a writing style that includes projections but makes it clear that refuting a specific model doesn't necessarily refute the basic idea without coming across as wishy-washy.

Comment Source:Unless someone does it first, I'm slowly working towards peak oil, but it's particularly tricky to phrase things correctly (particularly see below). I gather there's a medium size list of things that are usable for high-tech things (eg, tantalum, neodymium, helium) where there's either a peak or other supply problem, but I'd put them at secondary priority. The list of other credible _potential_ major peaks to my knowledge is: 1. "Peak" potable water: aquifers being emptied faster than they refill, increasing population in areas with limited river water 2. Peak food: multiple issues combining to constrain the amount of food that can be grown 3. Peak economy/credit: regardless of how beneficial building something is, you generally have to somehow get "money" to pay for construction in advance. The recent financial downturn could have been enough to stop huge new investments. 4. Peak coal/shale gas: the claim that coal reserves are overstated in the same way as oil reserves. Very dubious on this one since unlike oil it's not clear there's been enough of an interest in coal to give an incentive to overstate things, and the huge reserves are in countries like the US which are "associated with transparency"... Also it's not clear that a limit on coal availability is a bad thing from a $CO_2$ point of view. Indeed, the problem with potential peak oil is the sudden dramatic reduction in availability of liquid fuel for building renewable infrastructure, even though it'd help reduce $CO_2$ emissions. One of the things about "peaks" is that there's a basic idea ("peak X may happen soon") and detailed models which provide specific projections but which incorporate many assumptions. I'm trying to figure out a writing style that includes projections but makes it clear that refuting a specific model doesn't necessarily refute the basic idea without coming across as wishy-washy.
• Options
5.

Three options on links: either, as Tim says, escape the parentheses with %28 and %29 (this is the only escaping that's needed with the []() syntax), or if you want the URL visible put it between angle brackets: http://www.azimuthproject.org/azimuth/show/Peak+phosphorus, or use raw XHTML (but then you have to make sure that it is truly valid XHTML, a common mistake is to forget to escape ampersands).

You can upload small files (the current limit is a mere 100Kb, but that could be raised if there's need) and then include them as graphics embedded in pages. The instructions are here and this is linked off the HowTo.

Comment Source:Three options on links: either, as Tim says, escape the parentheses with %28 and %29 (this is the only escaping that's needed with the \[]() syntax), or if you want the URL visible put it between angle brackets: <http://www.azimuthproject.org/azimuth/show/Peak+phosphorus>, or use raw XHTML (but then you have to make sure that it is truly valid XHTML, a common mistake is to forget to escape ampersands). You can upload small files (the current limit is a mere 100Kb, but that could be raised if there's need) and then include them as graphics embedded in pages. The instructions are [here](http://golem.ph.utexas.edu/wiki/instiki/show/File+Uploads) and this is linked off the [[HowTo]].
• Options
6.
edited October 2010

The currently most efficient photovoltaic materials use rare earths, and the supply of these metals will impose a limit on our ability to ramp up solar power using that strategy. On a different note, China recently banned exports of rare earths to Japan... but now, I see, has resumed them. Right now China has a lockhold on rare earths, but that could change.

I'm going to create a little stub Peak theory and put your comments there, David. We can polish it with time.

Comment Source:The currently most efficient photovoltaic materials use rare earths, and the supply of these metals will impose a limit on our ability to ramp up solar power using that strategy. On a different note, China recently banned exports of rare earths to Japan... but now, I see, <a href = "http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20100929x1.html">has resumed them</a>. Right now China has a <a href = "http://www.smartplanet.com/business/blog/intelligent-energy/obama-adminstration-digs-into-chinas-rare-earth-monopoly/2977/">lockhold on rare earths</a>, but that could change. I'm going to create a little stub [[Peak theory]] and put your comments there, David. We can polish it with time.
• Options
7.

David Ando added this material to the page Peak phosphorus:

This reference (Cordell et al, 2009) suggests that peak phosphorus will occur in 2030 with eventual depletion 50-100 years from now.

A comprehensive industry analysis of the situation is in the [IFDC 'World Phosphate Reserve & Resources' Report] (http://www.ifdc.org/getdoc/56358fb1-fc9b-49ba-92fe-187dc08e9586/T-75_World_Phosphate_Rock_Reserves_and_Resources) with a [scathing critique] (http://phosphorusfutures.net/news#Events___Initiatives) by the Global Phosphorus Research Initiative.

I'm not sure why some links aren't working here - they look okay on the wiki.

Comment Source:[[David Ando]] added this material to the page [[Peak phosphorus]]: >This reference [(Cordell et al, 2009)](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.10.009) suggests that peak phosphorus will occur in 2030 with eventual depletion 50-100 years from now. >A comprehensive industry analysis of the situation is in the [IFDC 'World Phosphate Reserve &amp; Resources' Report] (http://www.ifdc.org/getdoc/56358fb1-fc9b-49ba-92fe-187dc08e9586/T-75_World_Phosphate_Rock_Reserves_and_Resources) with a [scathing critique] (http://phosphorusfutures.net/news#Events___Initiatives) by the [Global Phosphorus Research Initiative](http://phosphorusfutures.net). I'm not sure why some links aren't working here - they look okay on the wiki.
• Options
8.

I added a little explanation of the 'scathing critique' and polished up the references.

Comment Source:I added a little explanation of the 'scathing critique' and polished up the references.