New CBB

This is for all later civilizations on this board that is industrial or on the verge of becoming industrial.

What kind of fuel is utilized and more importantly, where in the hubbert curve is the civilization currently located?

_________________
Visit the growing Conlang Wiki!

"Hubbert curve" for which resource? Fuel, I assume, but which fuel? The one that is currently most used? Won't that change over time?
"Hubbert curves" apply to any resource that there's only so much of in a geographic area (or a planet). If the total amount produced over history has a hard upper limit, there'll be a production peak and after that an asymptotic decline toward zero production.
Frankly the historically most important Hubbert curve (and peak) was probably for tin to make bronze with.
Hubbert's first publication of Hubbert curves concerned fossil fuels and fissionable metals. But the Wikipedia articles show that they're also useful, or at least theorized about, for many other resources; including, erroneously, various renewable resources (Hubbert curves apply only to non-renewable resources).

_________________
I am not responsible for the accuracy of my sources; they're responsible for their own mistakes, if any, and also responsible for defending their own statements if you disagree with them.

It's not clear that there's a single hubbert curve shape - in particular, the speed of production decline may vary widely, making the idea of a 'place' on 'the' hubbert curve problematic. Even worse, the curve may even have multiple peaks, if the resource in question is composed of subtypes that require different production routes. For instance, oil on earth may peak shortly, but then peak again either as deep-sea sources come onstream or as unconventional oil sources are exploited (or both).

Interesting.

@zelos, I didn't mean to give the impression I thought your question wasn't a good one. It is, IMO.

@Salmoneus, how right was I to think that "Hubbert curves" were not meant to apply to renewable resources?

_________________
I am not responsible for the accuracy of my sources; they're responsible for their own mistakes, if any, and also responsible for defending their own statements if you disagree with them.

Well, I'm no expert, so I'm guessing here. But I think it has to depend on how strictly you define a hubbert curve, and how strictly you define a renewable resource.

If you take a hubbert curve as one where production increases eventually reverse due to increasing extraction costs, and if you take a renewable resource to be one where extraction costs never increase, then clearly you can't have a hubbert curve for a renewable resource. But what if you take a hubbert curve more literally as just a (mostly) symmetrical logistic curve showing production increase and decline? Then of course it can be appropriate for a renewable resource, if that renewable resource stops being utilised for some reason.

Likewise, not all renewable resources are renewable in the perfect sense of the word - in fact, none of them are. The resource itself might be renewable in theory, but the resources necessary to extract and utilise that resource are finite, and may decline. I'll give two examples.
First, say that we discover nuclear fusion. We exploit it. Then nuclear plants start blowing up. Public opinion turns against fusion, and fewer plants are built. If you graphed the amount of energy produced from fusion over time, it would look like a hubbert curve - because although seawater is effectively renewable, public tolerance of safety concerns and the political capital necessary to induce that tolerance are finite resources.
Second, say that we develop a strange new form of energy that's renewable and perfectly clean, but expensive. We exploit it. But at the same time the earth experiences massive economic and environmental decline. We become poorer. We start no longer being willing to put up with more expensive energy in order to avoid a little polution. So we swtich back to coal or something. Again, the graph of energy from this source would look like a hubbert curve - because the finite resource here is the wealth of the society, or its willingness to sacrifice wealth for environmental improvements.

So it depends how you define things.