COMMENTS: 155
Are You Ready for the Energy Crash?
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Environment headlines via email.
One writer, James Howard Kunstler, has been particularly passionate -- some might say over-the-top -- about peak oil. In his latest book, "The Long Emergency," Kunstler addresses our stark looming reality square in the face and analyzes the consequences. While many of the scenarios he describes -- the prospect of millions of Americans stranded in suburbia forced to preside over their economic decline as their once normal auto-dependent lives become unattainable luxuries -- are no doubt valid, his tone has struck me as overly apocalyptic, verging on some kind of fetish for him; that the content of what he was writing about mattered only as much as it offered Kunstler the opportunity to prophesize The End, pleasing himself as he killed the hopes of his audience.
So I was curious to hear what Kunstler would say at the Local Energy Solutions conference in New York City last month. Aside from Kunstler, I knew what to expect from the rest of the speakers at the conference -- ideas and information about how we can best cope after the energy crash.
Perhaps what was so striking about the speakers and attendants at the conference was their almost angelic goodness and optimism -- even though by all rights they are among the most knowledgeable about the scale of the challenge facing our petro-dependent society, and would have the most cause to make a run for all those abandoned cabins constructed in the Yukon after the Y2K nonapocalyptic anticlimax.
There was Julian Darley, director of the Post-Carbon Institute speaking as softly as a kindergarten teacher about the need to develop currencies based on locally produced energy and decrease our reliance on our society's "flesh-based" diet.
There was Henry Gifford, an expert on "boiler, steam, and hydronic heating systems, water pressure boosting systems, and ventilation systems," calmly discussing how the office buildings and homes we use today are pissing away our natural resources at a rate that left me reeling.
Yet while I can't dispute the need for massive improvements in the energy efficiency of our buildings and the necessity to localize food production to deal with our coming energy crisis, the biggest obstacle to change seems to be cultural inertia. Most of us are zooming along blissfully in exactly the wrong direction: building more freeways, more malls, more auto-dependent housing developments, increasingly grotesque and demeaning commercial enterprises sucking the meaning out of our lives and American society as a whole. It's the collective insanity of our society that makes it possible for us to drive, consume and build freeways as though we could go on forever.
It was on that topic that Kunstler delivered his lecture, on what he called the "psychological dimension" of what's needed to get things going on the right track, which he said is "as important as the geological dimension."
I half expected Kunstler to say that the conference was pointless, that there was no hope for a society that needed to change its energy consumption if it were to survive. But while he was merciless in his critique of American society, I left the conference believing he was as optimistic as the rest.
Kunstler's rage and disdain was righteous and unsparing. He was pissed and he was eloquent: "We've turned into this nation of overfed clowns, riding around in clown cars, eating clown food, watching clown shows," he said. We're "a nation of cringing, craven fuckups."
Kunstler singled out one element of the psychological dimension in American life: "The idea that when you wish upon a star, your dreams come true. It's not a good thing for adults to wish upon a star. Right now, this is a normative belief -- that you can wish for things, and you'll get them."
He said that the nation's leading religion has become the "worship of unearned riches, which is based on a very stark idea, the idea that you can get something for nothing."
If that was the religion, Kunstler said, then the city of Las Vegas is its temple. Why this matters, he argued, is that when we talk about the problems facing our oil-dependent society, the dominant frame of mind is one of pure fantasy -- that years of predominance on the international stage has left America smug in the belief that it need only wish to have its problems solved, and that it doesn't have to face challenges that might require a massive change in all aspects of American life.
Bringing this rather abstract statement directly to contemporary national politics, Kunstler cited a quote he attributed to Dick Cheney about the centrality of our shopping malls and freeway systems to society: that this way of American life is "non-negotiable." Kunstler argued that Cheney's mindset is that of all Americans -- that SUVs, fast food, hourlong home-to-work commutes driven alone with the air-conditioning blasting was the best of all possible worlds, and the natural outcome of what our forefathers had dreamed of when they drew up the Constitution.
It was this kind of collective insanity, Kunstler said, that led CBS' 60 Minutes to run a program telling millions of Americans that the Canadian province of Alberta's tar sands held two trillion barrels of extractable oil that would keep us going for perpetuity -- never mind that the infrastructure required for extraction is decades away from being ready, and that the best available technology requires almost as much energy to extract as it produces.
Kunstler also criticized the arrogance that industrial leaders in the tech sector had about dealing with petro-dependency. He described a visit he made to the Google headquarters in Northern California for a speaking engagement. Here were the execs of a major company, whose ideas and products have received the official stamp of "The Future." Young captains of the tech industry, who, because "they have been megasuccessful -- they have very grandiose ideas about what is possible." And what Kunstler saw were a bunch of kids "dressed like skateboard rats."
Kunstler bemoaned their almost religious confidence in technology to solve society's problems. He said that after he gave his speech outlining the dangers facing our oil-dependent society, the young executives didn't ask any questions but made comments and rebuttals, which Kunstler summarized essentially as, "Dude, we've got the technology."
Kunstler argued that it was this mixture of arrogance based on Google’s sudden phenomenal financial success and delusions about the rise of the internet that allowed the young executives to confuse technology with energy -- for these skateboard rats to see them as the same thing. To hammer his story home he pulled up a slide of a picture of a Boeing 747 with the caption, “Fill’er up with, uh... technology.â€
Kunstler's final and biggest point was that if we wanted to convince wider society that it has to make a very different set of living arrangements to survive in a post-oil society, we need to find a "vocabulary and syntax" that speaks to its most dogged adherents. He said that rhetoric had been given a bad name, and that it needed to be retrieved from the dumpster of history.
I think Kunstler was dead right -- many of the ideas and practices about how we can make other arrangements are already in existence, but there isn't a wide demand for them. There must be a language that competes with the standing fantasies in our consumer society that makes people want to ditch their cars, stop their consumptive impulses, and make our standing commercialized social narratives as appealing as the idea of taking a bath with a corpse.
But I wonder if the winning rhetoric involves direct insults, like calling middle Americans who live in suburbia "craven fuckups" to their face. I wouldn't write it off instantly, given the popularity of serial insult artists like Dr. Phil. Kunstler also emphasized that talking about peak oil and automobile dependency just once to someone isn't going to make any converts. "You're going to have to employ repetition ... to an uncomfortable degree."
I know what I'd do if someone kept telling me I was a craven fuckup, I was a craven fuckup; I'd react angrily and cling to my way of life all the more desperately. Finding the right rhetoric that makes people want to change all on their own is a high art and one of our greatest challenges.
While Kunstler didn't once preach apocalypse, he did say that there isn't any guaranteed outcome of an energy renaissance or salvation for American society. "We either make it work, or we don't," he said, capturing the total indifference the Earth has regarding our fate. Lucky for us, the attendants at this conference were not as aloof.
This article has been changed to reflect an earlier version.
Stay up to date with the latest Environment headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: nbrown on May 10, 2006 12:55 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That said, what can people do about gas prices in the short term? I wrote a few things anyone can do to regain some of that lost disposable income. Forgive the locality, but the basic principles will apply in lots of areas.
For anyone who hasn't lived in a country other than the USA... it just might open your eyes to spend a couple months somewhere else.
Jan Frel is exactly right: there's a collective insanity about the way people in the US use energy. It's shameful, really, but I believe people can improve if they are made conscious of their behavior.
Small changes can have noticeable impacts. And such changes can succeed on the individual level without cooperation from the entire planet.
Since we're only responsible for our own actions, I think that's the most logical step to changing the world, if that is one's wish.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» One big problem
Posted by: medstudgeek
» RE: One big problem
Posted by: JimTheAnarchist
» RE: One big problem
Posted by: hms2004
» It's expensive to live within 1 hour of the city!
Posted by: medstudgeek
» Been there, done that.
Posted by: Artkansas
» RE: One big problem
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: One big problem
Posted by: redjenny
» RE: One big problem
Posted by: jwg
» RE: Interesting article. But what about short-term?
Posted by: solrev
» RE: followers need leaders
Posted by: ScottP
» RE: Interesting article. But what about short-term?
Posted by: jeff2045
» Lots of Oil out there; just renew the American Spirit
Posted by: feller
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Sojourner on May 10, 2006 1:52 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Americans won't listen to bad news until after it has happened. Take global warming, for instance. Now where we gonna run to? 'Nuf said.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Didn't really care one way or another about the name-calling. If it happens on the playground...
Posted by: ABetterFuture
Comments are closed-
Posted by: n7ekg on May 10, 2006 4:04 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
With all due respect, this is a minor issue. The real obstacle is the Bush administration and their big oil cronies, who fight tooth-and-nail every conservation attempt, every attempt at developing more fuel-efficient vehicles, and every attempt at developing alternate sources of energy.
Consumers aren't the real problem, and your disdain for consumers, however well-meaning, is woefully misplaced. If Madison Ave., in collusion with big oil and big business, hadn't brainwashed the American public for 40+ years that "bigger is better" we wouldn't be in this situation, would we? Even those who come to an awareness of the problem find it harder and much more expensive to "go green". Why are fuel-efficient cars like the Toyota Prius and Ford Escape so much more expensive then their less-efficient counterparts? Why do we have vehicles that only get 50 or 60 MPG at best? And why do we have vehicles that run on petrochemicals at all? Why do we have a 54 cent tariff on imported ethanol while at the same time encouraging generating ethanol from corn, a very inefficient process but which creates a market for corn grown here? Why do we have lithium ion and polymer batteries that are so much more expensive than their much heavier lead counterparts? Why are solar cells still so expensive, even after manufacturing costs falling 10-fold in the last 20 years?
If we were truly interested in conservation, we would make it more affordable, more convenient, and more socially acceptable. But, as it has for the last 60 years, big business and big oil has dominated both the political landscape and the lawmaking process in this country, and so we still have passenger cars on the road that are touted as "fuel efficient" while getting a mere 30 miles per gallon, we still have gasoline at artificially inflated prices, and we still discourage developing alternative sources of energy, both as a matter of national policy and as a matter of law.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» High gas prices
Posted by: medstudgeek
» RE: Consumers aren't the problem
Posted by: mazur
» RE: Consumers aren't the problem
Posted by: techno
» Consumers ARE the problem - at least part of it
Posted by: LeonDion
» agree/disagree
Posted by: brasilaron
» You are confusing the symtoms with the cause!
Posted by: fool-on-the-hill
» RE: Consumers aren't the problem
Posted by: mwildfire
Comments are closed-
Posted by: solrev on May 10, 2006 4:16 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Step away from the moon...
Posted by: greentime
» RE: Step away from the moon...
Posted by: solrev
» Aaaarggh.
Posted by: nickptar
» RE: Aaaarggh.
Posted by: Samantha Vimes
» Not fusion, solar
Posted by: nickptar
» Oh, sorry, it was fusion!
Posted by: nickptar
» Nice idea, but there are big obstacles!
Posted by: Jesse
» "Dude, we've got technology."
Posted by: RobW
» RE: "Dude, we've got technology."
Posted by: MT512
» RE: "Dude, we've got technology."
Posted by: RobW
» RE: "Dude, we've got technology."
Posted by: eichorn
» RE: "Dude, we've got technology."
Posted by: MT512
» RE: "Dude, we've got technology."
Posted by: janakiblum
Comments are closed-
Posted by: rsaxto on May 10, 2006 4:30 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» The cliff of disaster will do it for you
Posted by: LeonDion
» DECENT LEADERSHIP?!
Posted by: BJT
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Tom Degan on May 10, 2006 4:35 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"A nation of clowns, eating clown food, watching clown shows" Wow. Wish I'd said that!
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Don't repeat it
Posted by: greentime
» slightly off topic
Posted by: Samantha Vimes
Comments are closed-
Posted by: nickptar on May 10, 2006 5:25 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Semi-counterpoint
Posted by: MT512
» RE: Semi-counterpoint
Posted by: nickptar
Comments are closed-
Posted by: greentime on May 10, 2006 5:25 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dominating a conversation, or anything, seems to me to be the problem.
There are reasons people are discussing these issues purposefully and quietly. It is part of a new way we must behave as human beings in order to make the changes we seek and to include each other in the dialog. Screaming and yelling are so... old technology. ;-)
We are not just clowns or fools or worse. We may be somewhat lost, we may have been thoughtless because of our previous beliefs, but we do think new thoughts, recognize mistakes and we can and do change. It is called evolution.
Jimmy, all the while you have been yelling, many people have been busy building more efficient houses and "cars", improving efficiencies in technolgy and planning the next steps toward energy independence. Millions of us have supported their efforts, quietly, so I guess you thought we were all clowning around or something.
Why not simmer down and when you are calm, join us! There is a lot to write about.
And on a personal note: Saratoga The Magazine
You didn't listen then either.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: personal note was for Kunstler, sorry, didn't clarify.
Posted by: greentime
» RE: Oh good, more bullying...
Posted by: antoniomo
Comments are closed-
Posted by: O.B.Server on May 10, 2006 5:46 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: williameon on May 10, 2006 5:59 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bomb Iran!
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb,
Bomb Iran!
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb,
Bomb Iran!
Bomb Iran
As
Fast as you can!
Bomb Iran
Be a man
They’ll be Nuke-en and a Steal-en
Torture and Treason
In Iran
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb,
Bomb Iran!
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb,
Bomb Iran!
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb,
Bomb Iran!
Bomb Iran!
As
Fast as you can!
Bush’s Poll #’s are a falling
Carle Rove is a calling
Better Bomb Iran!
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb,
Bomb Iran!
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb,
Bomb Iran!
Bomb Iran
as
Fast as you can
Call the NSA
Spy on them today
Exxon is calling!
There’s oil in those dunes!
Tex-ass Tea!
Black Gold!
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb,
Bomb Iran!
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb,
Bomb Iran!
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb,
Bomb Iran!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» You are obviously a Special Counsel to the President...
Posted by: fool-on-the-hill
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Bruuks on May 10, 2006 6:23 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"It's "peak oil" -- the term for the period after which global oil and natural gas demand outstrips supply and the prices for these commodities become too volatile for modern society to function."
Strictly speaking 'peak oil' is the period during which worldwide oil 'production' is at the highest it will ever be, before beginning to decline. Supply and demand do come into play, but not necessarily at 'peak'. Demand can quite easily exceed supply long before peak. However, most certainly, supply will not be able to keep up with demand post-peak.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: JimTheAnarchist on May 10, 2006 6:27 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Kunstler is a good example. He flaunts his own oil consumption, mentioning his frequent flying in his blog posts even when it is not necessary to make his point. To a Jevonist people who get rid of their cars are chumps, since according to them, someone else will just consume what they conserve. Therefore, peak oil types often brag about not conserving. I've seen several suggestions in Kunstler's blog (not by Kunstler but by his accolytes) to the effect that "If there's somewhere you've always wanted to go you'd better go now before the price of jet fuel goes up."
The peak oil movement is all about how to deal with the breakdown of civilization after the oil is gone and not about how to do anything to prevent the breakdown. They fly and drive all over attending conferences, watching peak oil movies, raising awareness and acquiring the skills they think they will need post-apocalypse. The organizers of the conference claim that their goal is to make more people aware of peak oil. Considering that these people have significantly increased their own oil consumption since becoming aware, I wonder if this is such a good thing.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Jevonism
Posted by: mogwai
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Jasonix on May 10, 2006 6:31 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Any ideas on how to survive?
Posted by: EY
» RE: Any ideas on how to survive?
Posted by: gar
» RE: Any ideas on how to survive?
Posted by: purplehawk
» RE: Any ideas on how to survive?
Posted by: putman9
» RE: Any ideas on how to survive?
Posted by: jimbee
» RE: Any ideas on how to survive?
Posted by: eichorn
» RE: Any ideas on how to survive?
Posted by: the poet
» RE: Any ideas on how to survive?
Posted by: eichorn
Comments are closed-
Posted by: gar on May 10, 2006 6:55 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now we have a man who comes along and calls the general public "fuckups" and "clowns" because they don't follow an ecological lifestyle. Well, maybe it will be good for some shock value to wake some people up who need a little jog but I think overall, it will have a negative effect.
As they have been saying in politics for the last few years, perhaps what is needed is a new frame; a new way of expressing the values and the ways of living that could go a long way towards saving our planet. For instance, people who attempt to live in a self-sufficient manner with the earth are not "eco-freaks," they are "life-style pioneers."
Here are two more view changing frames. Instead of labeling food grown without the use of chemicals as "organic," change the law to where foods that are grown using chemicals are labeled "non-organic" with a list of the chemicals used in their production. Another good one would be to force the labeling of food grown more than 200 miles away with a label giving the distance it was shipped.
These are only presented as illustrations of the types of things that could be done to change the public attitude. As Rumsfield (excuse me please) might say, "We've got to win their hearts and minds." We won't do that by calling them "fucked up clowns."
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Good suggestions!
Posted by: sln70
» You have no idea how masochistic people are
Posted by: LeonDion
» Ouch... what did Chapelle do to deserve getting stuck in THAT list? [nt]
Posted by: axolotl_helix
» RE: co-Freaks or Life-Style Pioneers?
Posted by: aussidawg
» Honestly and positively critiquing your proposal
Posted by: peritonlogon
» RE: co-Freaks or Life-Style Pioneers?
Posted by: kmaripo
Comments are closed-
Posted by: purplehawk on May 10, 2006 7:18 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: wishful thinking
Posted by: LeonDion
» RE: wishful thinking
Posted by: nickptar
» RE: wishful thinking
Posted by: LeonDion
» RE: wishful thinking
Posted by: nickptar
» "Wishful thinking" means to "do nothing." Hope is not wishful thinking...
Posted by: Sojourner
» Similarly...
Posted by: nickptar
» RE: "Wishful thinking" means to "do nothing." Hope is not wishful thinking...
Posted by: janakiblum
Comments are closed-
Posted by: DaveB on May 10, 2006 7:25 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Understanding the sustainability challenge, and appropriate responses to it, should be at the foundation of progressive thinking. Massive economic changes will occur. We can either watch them happen to us, or attempt to guide them in a strategic way.
Commitment to a social safety net is essential under the circumstances. Failure to make such a commitment will result in a psychology of desperation and panic, which will make an already challenging situation much, much worse.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Ricki on May 10, 2006 7:34 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Some ideas on how to survive the crash
Posted by: Roverton
» RE: Some ideas on how to survive the crash
Posted by: nickptar
Comments are closed-
Posted by: maddy on May 10, 2006 8:09 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In fact, I wanted to shout at some of these folks--"Didn't you see this coming?" "Did you think we could continue sucking this planet dead without any consequences?" "Do you really think your convenience is a birthright?"
I think this piece is right, though, that you don't inspire people by telling them they're ignorant and spoiled.
It seems to me that the solution is indeed, a difficult one--I think you have to dig in and start having real conversations with people about what they "lose" by participating in American sprawl and a life made dead by both careerism and consumerism.
The good news, believe it or not, can be found in the rise of evangelicalism. While I loathe everything about it's belief system, I think it's addressing a widespread American malaise--it's giving people purpose in their lives, a sense of existence deeper than Starbucks and SUVs.
That is the challenge. Tap into that search for meaning. And I think the way to do that is by generating local groups who work on simple solutions. Bringing people together for small tasks will empower them... which is key.
Imagine, instead, if the folks around me started organizing local carpools, or, off the top of my head, cooperative gardening projects? If folks pledged to...I dunno...turn off their TVs and gather outdoors?
The possibility and hope is there, and I'll find it once I get over my urge to scream at the whining folks around me!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» We are literally poised on the edge of a knifeblade.
Posted by: fool-on-the-hill
» RE: Managing Temper Tantrums
Posted by: MT512
Comments are closed-
Posted by: LMNOP on May 10, 2006 8:21 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Those that have a neuron or two will figure this out and begin becoming personally less dependent on fossil fuel. The rest, people who mock the rest of us for concern in this matter, will bleed. Too f-ing bad!
America needs to hope for mercy because it couldn't survive justice.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: VoteHope on May 10, 2006 9:26 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Questions or philosophy? I live as if it is a philosophy. I have quit the corporate mindset of collective work for huge profits to the wealthy owners: feudalism.
I am trapped by the energy crisis that oil brings to the planet and see profit as the motive to continue using fossil fuels. Contamination, global warming, and plutocratic rule are the real by-products of using oil.
One person can not change the "geological clock" that started with the automobile and the huge consumption of oil the dominant species seems to need to function, but I can get out of the rat race and stop being one person in "a nation of cringing, craven fuckups," whenever and however I can.
Decide what you need to live and quit doing what seems to be a large advantage to the rich and power owners of the company you work for and start working for your own life.
Psychologically, what makes you secure and happy is health and shelter for yourself and those you love. Nothing is more important. Not boats, second homes, wealth, or power is as important as our relationships.
Materialism is a disease for modern culture and Corporate America is the pathological leader of the world. We are not in touch with reality and insanity, fascism, and greed are our cultural crisis qualities, at the same time this crisis will eventually unite the world against Corporate Plutocrats and their fascism.
Human rights begin with you giving yourself the right to be who you are, not what you have been taught from the Corporate American education model to compete and be the best so they can profit from your talents, but the just to do what you want and be with the people you love.
Oil and energy are the asteroid hitting the earth and it feels like we could become extinct, or at least the lifestyle we have come to know, but it can also be the crisis that leads to an opportunity to become more human and less material based. Non polluting and environmentally friendly energy sources are available and would become more productive and efficient if industry was producing and refining the technology, but oil based economics is too powerful.
The oil infrastructure is the corporate model for corruption in our government and this fascism and plutocracy needs to be resolved on a governmental level if we are going to change what industry/corporations focus on and produce for people to use. No change is possible if the status quo runs the government and makes huge profits; there isn’t any incentive to change. Even with war, global warming, and looming apocalyptic predictions, change isn’t the goal for Corporate America, and neither is the best interest of the people in the U.S. or the world. Americans have their head in the sand, a very comfortable head hole, but they deny there is a need to get Corporate America out of our government to have a real democracy. We don’t have elections or a democracy in the U.S., just Corporate appointments. We could vote to change things with no big $ in power, but that would mean we learned from history and stopped denying and lying to ourselves to not make waves and make the big $ bosses happy that in turn own you too when you can’t walk away.
Start a career that you can make by applying your own talents and make enough to live. Buy small used cars and save you money for solar cells, wind turbines, voltage regulators, and batteries... Get off the grid and live free as you can. Stop working for "the man" and work for yourself. Survive and work to be with the ones you love.
Cottage industry and democracy were born together.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Baranga on May 10, 2006 9:35 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's just below the surface but if you were to take a sampling of opinions in "mainstream" America, the generic, misinformed response would be that "technology" is going to make it all right. "Scientists over at the National Energy Technology Labs are working on ways to convert orange peels into jet fuel as we speak." This kind of thinking diverts attention from what the author pointed out: we need to collectively overhaul our consumption patterns but as we all very well know, that won't change until pumps are bone dry.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: albiegf13 on May 10, 2006 10:19 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» You're ready
Posted by: LeonDion
Comments are closed-
Posted by: MonkeyBoy on May 10, 2006 10:23 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/
and
http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/SecondPage.html
It's a wealth of information that will quickly bring you up to speed on the subject of "Peak oil".
Even if we haven't reached a peak yet, we will soon be in a state where demand from rapidly growing industrial economies like China and India will far exceed the worldwide supply of oil and gas.
Be forewarned, you won't be the same after you visit this site.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Peak Oil Awareness Needed
Posted by: Baranga
» http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/
Posted by: anniedine
» RE: http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/
Posted by: MonkeyBoy
Comments are closed-
Posted by: wildrehab on May 10, 2006 10:51 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Perhaps the point isn't to figure out how to prevent it, but rather to face the inevitable end of this bloom of humanity that's been happening for several thousand years. No biological bloom ever happens without it's subsequent crash. Why would our species be different?
As a result of our incredible bloom, there are more humans alive than the habitat can sustain. We won't limit our own bloom---- which may not be a matter of stupidity or self-delusion, but merely the way species behave. We'll push our expansion of numbers and power as far as we can, and then crash. From our point of view, that's a huge looming disaster. From Ma Nature's point of view, just business as usual. And it'd be a little silly to think She'll make some kind of exception for homo sapeins.
Sad from our personal viewpoint, but then we're each going to die someday anyway, so maybe it's not that big a deal exactly how it happens, en masse or individually. Like an individual with a terminal diagnosis, we have choices in how to respond:
freak out? Moan and groan? Or maybe just celebrate our amazing and interesting tenure and enjoy each moment we have remaining on this beautiful planet.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Blooming humanity
Posted by: anniedine
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mdf1960 on May 10, 2006 11:13 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think people need to consume wisely, however. Take a look at your lifeastyle and decide where you can cut back and not decrease your overall quality of your life.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Materialism
Posted by: redjenny
Comments are closed-
Posted by: anniedine on May 10, 2006 11:18 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Some people you can reach, some people you can't. Some people need to be yelled at and called names, some need a soft touch, some people have enough critical thinking skills to see the truth for themselves.
Those with wealth and power in our world have ensured that the crash is coming. It may be related to finite resources (water, land, oil, etc.), it may be a nuclear holocaust, it may be a collapse of monetary systems, it may be marshall law and an end of the US Constitutional protections for citizens, it may be a flu pandemic - it will probably be a combination of many of these. The U.S.'s fragile safety nets have been cut away while we were childishly dreaming of being saved from our selfishness, greed, and laziness.
Enough smart people have warned us. Octavia Butler has laid out in beautiful storytelling what a future scenario could be. But many clowns will continue ignoring all of this and go merrily along (there were people on the Titanic who insisted to the very end that help would arrive). Regardless, the time is coming when we won't be protected from the realities of nature (including our own) by our technologies and our hubris.
In any case, it will be a fine day when there are fewer human clowns destroying mother earth. May she, at least, survive the coming crash.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: ead "Parable of the Sower" by Butler
Posted by: schmitta1573
Comments are closed-
Posted by: schmitta1573 on May 10, 2006 11:24 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: worksg on May 10, 2006 11:36 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The consensus of experts is for peak oil to occur well before 2025. And we're already living on credit, so we don't have trillions of dollars to invest. And America and its leaders have no political will to begin a crash program immediately, anyway.
I moved my family to a place that can feed itself and moved my money into hard assets. I'm learning how to farm. If you know a better way, please comment.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Already Too Late
Posted by: anniedine
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Meremark on May 10, 2006 11:59 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You are not going to be ALIVE in five years
Death is what it means, to one out of two of us. Next time you are conversing with someone, think to yourself, 'one of us two is going to be dead within five years.'
Because all the oil on Earth runs out.
Arguing whether it runs out in 5 years, or 10, or 20 or 30, is wasting time arguing. End of oil happens IN OUR LIFETIME. Whenever and however it arrives, we each have to deal with it before we die. The sooner we each take steps of active design of our lifestyle to accommodate and to adapt for oil-less living, the more likely we succeed then. Where 'suicceeding' means living.
What oil-less living looks like is human life on Earth in 1850. Or 1800. Or pick a date you prefer before oil 'was invented,' before 1900, say. Life in 10 years is going to be like life in 1850. If you want food in the future, then grow it. Else don't have food, and die.
This starkness and absoluteness is hard to get one's mind around and deal with. Especially for minds of American (capitalist) indoctrination, which is, in oversimplifed generality, a mind which knows 'work' as that which is paid in 'money,' and knows 'money' as that which gets 'food, clothing, and shelter.' In that mind, to think of oil running out, is identical with, equals, to think of money ending. And the ideas are equal -- end of oil does mean end of money in the 'American' sense of money. Having to live, or before then just imagining having to live without money, is too far into ignorance for many of us to get our minds to.
So minds 'don't go there.' Rather, those minds merely stand pat and issue denial -- "Oil is NOT going to run out." Or, "people only say oil is expensive or unobtainable BECAUSE those people have an angle, or are making a buck, they speak with a profit motive - THEIR personal profit, and to convince us to give them more of our money; and there is NO WAY anyone is saying this for humanitarian purposes or motives, trying to help save my life." Nevermind save humankind.
Well, ladies and gentlemen: WAY. I speak as an elder who has seen and known very much in my life. Speaking as an insulting know-it-all, I say, that maybe one person, somewhere, one time, by some small word or phrase I say, 'gets it' and gets prepared and survives and saves their life, saves one little life and is here helping populate humankind after oil ends. I say, I'm telling you, oil runs out very soon -- in OUR lifetime. Each of us MUST deal with it, and each of us who does not deal with it dies. Within 5 years. In case you were thinking you'd get to retire, or in case you were thinking in terms of some other 'American dream' fiction. There is more to know. And there are many now -- especially the Prez Duncy and his Supremacist cohort -- who want you NOT to KNOW more.
They tell you that yoiu cannot understand. I tell you that you CAN understand. A child can understand. It is this: When you use it all, it is gone. Oil on Earth is one of those things that have a finite supply. Of course, everybody knows oil runs out. Sometime. Only not many people think about WHEN, since not many people know how much there is (as measured) and not many people know how fast we are using it. Because people are busy, and don't have time or take time to study it, get some the facts and learn the subject. And mass media don't cover it.
Two references. Here is one news item from last December which says Kuwait only has half the oil REALLY that was said to be there -- said by other people in bygone years. Believe them then now, or believe those here now. Or ... you probably don't have time to read this ... "Kuwait and oil reserves,"
http://peakoil.net/Kuwait.html
... and it is TOO complicated, What's a 'Gb' (giga-barrel) of oil? ...
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: You are not going to be ALIVE in five years
Posted by: nickptar
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Meremark on May 10, 2006 12:09 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"THE PARADIGM IS THE ENEMY: The State of the Peak Oil Movement at the Cusp of Collapse," A Speech by Michael C. Ruppert for the Local Solutions to the Energy Dilemma Conference, April 27-29, New York City, at Cooper Union
From The Wilderness (.COM)
My favorite pull-quotes
--
"Perhaps the greatest flaw in the Peak Oil movement’s current operating paradigm is that, a part of the movement at least, instead of building lifeboats in the face of an immediate disaster, is delusionally focused on trying to build alternative-powered luxury liners that operate just like the paradigm we as a species need to be abandoning. Not only is this a futile effort, it may well be responsible for killing or destroying the lives of people who at least partially understand Peak Oil and who are trying to find the best courses of immediate action for themselves and their families.
-
It is a shame that much of the Peak Oil movement that understands this problem is foolishly trying to change the way money works systemically, instead of trying to change it in the only way that time and circumstance now permit—individually, locally and regionally. The first and primary requirement for that to occur is for people to disengage from the global paradigm.
-
If the activist paradigm that we live under says that we must slow down the process of reform and planning to make room for all and offend no one, no matter how much they may slow down or confuse the process, then we must disengage from that paradigm. This is no longer about protracted—and almost always ineffective—social change. This is about survival. I refuse to die, and I refuse to encourage anyone else to risk death or to slow down for or argue with people who are either incapable of understanding, too lazy to do the necessary homework, or too tightly wedded to old ideas."
--
I say Peak Oil means halfway until oil runs out, and yours and my personal survival, and our descendants' survival, and all of humankind's survival -- life or death for us all -- depends on living without oil. Imagine the North American continent, without state borders, without national borders, a patchwork of 'tribal villages' separate and self-sufficient yet in communication and 'trade' with each other, across the land ... just like Before Oil, (except with global point-to-point video cellphones, and a few other modern 'electronic' inventions, just, NO cars trucks or planes; and, besides cell phones, some other interesting juxtapositions, but, basically, 1850 lifestyle. If you grow food, you eat. If you don't, you and yours are dead. Uh, it sorta seems that land is too valuable to let 'distant government' govern it.)
Others (commenters here, for instance) shout NO NO NO NO to drown out my voice, and order you not to listen to me or not to believe me. Hey, it's your life and your death. You may choose to look into it and get some facts for yourself. And decide for yourself. Choose: Live or Die?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Considering the advances in extraction and refining technology...
Posted by: axolotl_helix
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thehousedog on May 10, 2006 1:41 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Abandon the Capitalistic Ideal and everything is affordable
Posted by: Baranga
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on May 10, 2006 1:44 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here's a story you won't find in the US press: Powerlight Corp of California has been contracted to build the world's largest solar electric generation facility in Europe. Oh, that's not news! Here is the only mainstream news report on this I could find : San Jose Mercury News - not exactly a headline, either. Maybe the fact that US media is owned by the same banks that control US oil and pharma companies is relevant to this lack of coverage?
How about another important topic: how to grow crops without massive inputs of fossil fuels. This is critically important if you want to make biofuels (including hydrogen, methane, ethanol and biodiesel) for energy purposes. Well, Brazil has figured this out and has been doing it for years with sugarcane. Looks like we won't all starve to death after all.
The fossil fuel industry does everything it can to sabotage renewable energy production. Take Stanford Universities "Global Climate and Energy Program." That sounds good, doesn't it? However, ExxonMobil funded this program ($100 million) and retains arbitrary control over which projects are funded, as well as a five-year exclusive license to any invention produced. Considering their multibillion dollar quarterly profits, $100 mil is chump change when it comes to controlling energy markets and boosting profits. And yes - the Stanford center is now focussing on "clean coal". Farcical!
Germany, on the other hand, has large research institutes that focus entirely on realistic renewable energy strategies focussed on solar and wind energy. Believe me, you won't find that in the US research budget. Wonder why?
Japanese building codes require that solar hot water heaters are included in new buildings. This would reduce your local gas & electric utility profit margin, so we don't see such strategies in the US. Government regulations on energy use? The energy sector likes the captive cattle of the American market just the way they are, thanks. The notion that we can live off-the-grid makes them oh so nervous.
Peak oil? Well, Iraq has 100 billion barrels of crude. Our oil, however, comes largely from Mexico and Canada. Yes, there isn't enough to go around, and supply isn't going to be artificially choked off anymore, yet we can look forward to more 'demand stimulation' by the fossil fuel sector.
All the technology currently exists to replace, say, 25% of our current energy usage. Wake up! The energy sector controls this country; they love high energy prices and high gas prices, and if the country goes belly-up they'll just move off to the Swiss Alps or some other location.
Get rid of your SUV and invest the money in a solar power system for your home, start a backyard garden and get to know some organic farmers, ride a bicycle and quit your lame-ass corporate commuting job, make sure your government isn't run by a bunch of crooks from the fossil fuel/pharmaceutical/weapon sales sector, and learn to live a simpler, more enjoyable and stress-free life. Now, is that so hard?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Regulate all energy supplies for the sake of the common good.
Posted by: Sojourner
» RE: egulate all energy supplies for the sake of the common good.
Posted by: eichorn
» RE: The US is way behind the curve - get used to it
Posted by: Baranga
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Gregor on May 10, 2006 5:11 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The system is locked in. It is extremely difficult to create new structures that people can work in. You have to think outside our present system. Albert Einstein said "The minds that created the problem will not be the minds that solve the problem".
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: blame game
Posted by: janakiblum
Comments are closed-
Posted by: davcrock on May 10, 2006 6:09 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We're not going to magically run out of oil tommorow. The spigot isn't suddenly going to run dry without any warning. To argue otherwise is alarmist FUDD.
Oil like any other commodity responds to supply and demand. As supplies dwindle and demand increases, the price of oil goes up. As the price of oil goes up, more supplies that were previously not economically feasible will be feasible. As those supplies dwindle, the price of oil will continue to rise and demand declines. More importantly, investing in technology becomes more feasible.
So what can we do now in public policy? First, provide economic incentive to conserve oil. Drive a fuel efficient car? Great, get a tax credit. Commute really far by car everyday? Great, pay a tax. Etc etc.
Let's see more practical solutions and less alarmism. We need to have our eyes open to our problems and the risks that we face and manage them in a practical manner. Otherwise, you're just burning up energy sitting at your computer (pay a tax?).
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Oil
Posted by: MonkeyBoy
» RE: Oil
Posted by: the poet
» RE: Oil
Posted by: davcrock
» Well, that's the difference between the peak oil hypothesis, and "PEAK!!! OIL!!!"
Posted by: ABetterFuture
» RE: Well, that's the difference between the peak oil hypothesis, and "PEAK!!! OIL!!!"
Posted by: ABetterFuture
» RE: Check this out . .
Posted by: Baranga
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Baranga on May 10, 2006 10:28 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What other things are all of you doing or thinking? I grew up on 40 acres and drove an old Alice Chalmers for a good many years so I can raise almost anything that grows in soil. I also grew up hunting deer, elk, pheasant and ducks and had friends who trapped so I am no stranger to that either. Apart from that what is the concensus on "must have" or "must do" things?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Planning ahead . . Suggestions?
Posted by: abqbabe
» RE: Seriously
Posted by: abqbabe
» RE: Seriously
Posted by: eichorn
Comments are closed-
Posted by: dismayed on May 10, 2006 10:57 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: meth is not a problem.
Posted by: Jan Frel
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mokidugway on May 11, 2006 12:06 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In 2000, guess who moved in with my next door neighbors because he had sold everything he owned, bought a share in a windmill, and planned on moving to the Australian outback?
This crazy mad max shit won't solve anything. It's just a flip side of the Rapture coin.
Conservation is possible. It had a HUGE impact on energy consumption in the 1970s. Moreover, people would be eager to do it and proud to be doing something positive for a change. They are SICK of sitting around on their asses watching some dude submerged in a big aquarium for two hours and thinking that this is what passes for a meaningful life.
But most people need some inspiration, some hope, and we all need leaders who can instill these feelings rather than just playing on fears and pushing consumerism as a form of self-medication to relax these fears.
Where is the person who can bring us hope?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Peak Oil = Y2K for the new millenium
Posted by: tvanslaughter
» RE: Peak Oil = Y2K for the new millenium
Posted by: mokidugway
» RE: Peak Oil = Y2K for the new millenium
Posted by: DaBear
Comments are closed-
Posted by: leemiller38 on May 11, 2006 12:19 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A crash is now inevitable, but life will go on in some unpleasant manner for a few more centuries somewhere on the planet but for far fewer people. Relax and enjoy the time we have left. Drive a smaller car, ride a bike, consume less, contribute to family planning organizations and don't have any kids you don't want to see starve someday.
Growing your own food is good if you enjoy it, but don't count on it for survival. I grow lots of my food, but PG&E pumps the water to grow it from a somewhat depleted aquifer. I'm on the grid. Our technological dependencies put us far out on a fragile limb. It is hard to live as if we are at 1850 again. How would the great masses in LA, Chicago or New York even begin to become self-sufficient in food or water without energy resources? The resources that nurtured our hunter-gatherer ancestors are largely gone, half the soils are eroded. Not a pretty picture.
It is hard for me to rationalize this outcome of our evolution, but most populations are controlled by lack of food. Malthus was correct, but who thinks of Malthus when having a roll in the hay, eh?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: rtdrury on May 11, 2006 2:35 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: You're right.
Posted by: RobW
» RE: You're right.
Posted by: ConnecttheDots
» RE: You're right.
Posted by: DaBear
» RE: You're right.
Posted by: DaBear
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Guy on May 11, 2006 12:06 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Guy
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Framing
Posted by: eichorn
Comments are closed-
Posted by: RobW on May 11, 2006 12:55 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
peakoil.com
This is a news and discussion forum. LOTS of good info here, from science, geology, and economics, to psychology, preparation and geopolitics.
Of special interest is the forum on preparation. Lots of good info here, and it isn't all "MadMax" gloom and doom stuff. Ok, there's a little bit- but that just makes it more fun...
For a good, well-documented general overview of the proble, the LATOC site linked above is useful, though a bit scary. Be warned. I couldn't sleep for days after reading it.
For those who seem to want to focus on a political angle to this topic- this isn't a "left" or "right" thing.
Look at who are saying this thing is real... investment bankers, petroleum company geologist, congresscritters on both sides of the aisle, and commodities traders. Not exactly a bunch of wild-eyed liberal environmentalists, ok?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: RobertTheHager on May 13, 2006 9:17 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and many more, for as long as there's been autos on the road; and much longer... but it's too simple for people; for some people, anyway.
http://www.rense.com/general67/FORD.HTM
Looking forward,
Robert The Hager
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Riverside on May 15, 2006 7:29 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
CAFE must be upgraded to reach 40mpg by 2012. The stonewalling that Secretary Minetta did at the recent hearings should have the whole public up in arms, but we the people remain either confused or indifferent to the crisis and so we do very little, whereas we should be raising the roof.
We are not going to stop driving cars, yet. We would drive cars with good gas mileage if we are spoon fed (a sorry state). With the exception of only a few with respect to the total driving public most wont change their driving habits or vehicles. Unfortunately we either wait for a dreadful crisis that imposes no other choice, or our Congress mandates the following:
1. Change CAFE now including sufficient vote support to override any White House veto.
2. Mandate an immediate drop in Interstate speed limits down to 55mph
3. Expand the tax breaks and discounts for our buying of fuel efficient vehicles (regular and hybrid).
4. Finally develop a no cost or low cost disposal system for auto dealers who take in fuel hogs in trade for good CAFE cars. No dealer wants a lot full of unsellable cars and they should not have to bear the full cost of their disposal.
Just solving the fuel efficiency problem for all vehicles will bring about a most significant relief in the effects that boost global climate change. This will extend the time we have to concentrate on other energy problems and to also extend our supply of gasoline beyond the expected peak oil date, which can be seen looming on the horizon.
So why can't all those organizations fighting to save this planet play from the same sheet music? We just might make it if they do.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: TagsNOLA on May 15, 2006 8:45 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Technology IS the fix. It's ALWAYS been the fix and it always will be. The doomsayers and neigh-sayers are fascist, nazi a**holes to the core of their being. Their beef is the human race whom they regard as, in the words of one eco-fascist interviewed some years ago on NPR, "a cancer on the Earth." If we let the eco-fascists or the commodity speculators or neo-con jerks like Dick Cheney have their way, we'll be relegated to a world like that in the film, "Soylent Green."
But if those types are shoved aside, we can have more people living on this planet at a higher standard of living than ever before in human history. And, no, "standard of living" is NOT a bad world. Nor is it a bad thing. That is, not unless you're an anti-humanist eco-fascist.
Remember this, when these jerks talk about "lowerd expectations" and "doing with less," they're NOT talking about themselves. They're talking about suckers like us who buy off on their eco-fascist crap.
TagsNOLA
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: this article is NOT idiocy
Posted by: leemiller38
» RE: this article is NOT idiocy
Posted by: TagsNOLA
Comments are closed-
Posted by: diogenes on May 16, 2006 7:45 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Air cars and super solar panels
Posted by: TagsNOLA
» RE: Air cars and super solar panels
Posted by: diogenes
Comments are closed-
Posted by: DaBear on May 16, 2006 12:05 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Beware the doomsayer who says there is no solution
Posted by: TagsNOLA
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Alternative Energy on May 29, 2006 3:20 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: FFA on Jun 1, 2006 9:42 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Watching great writers talk about "Peak Energy" without mentioning OVER POPULATION is sort of like watching Al Gore run a campaign talking about the environment, then running away from enviro protestors at an Everglades press conference (no, this little parable is not fiction), or, more recently, hearing him talk about Global Warming, while not mentioning disenfranchised voters, massive deficits, oh, and an expansion of imperial-at-war America.
As any football fan knows, you can win 1,000 battles in the trenches, and still be wiped out by a few timely passes. Or, to be more academic, while "all politics is local", you have to have a competent overall strategy, otherwise local successes may yield little.
Due to modern technology, including fossil fuel energy, we have been able to IGNORE the Malthusian nightmare. Indeed, fossil fuel is one of the huge elements that turned the "dismal science" (economics) into the tech- and market boom years. Well, like a spaceship that discovers it is on a crash course with a huge meteorite, it might be time to change our priorities a tad, and recognize there is only so much space and resources to go around, no matter how unpopular that politics may be!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: FFA on Jun 1, 2006 10:04 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We COULD issue DOUBLE THE MPG requirements on auto manufacturers OVERNIGHT... IF we wanted to.
I had a neighbor in Washington DC suburbs who rode his bike to work, 8 miles each way, including almost all year but for the worst winter days. (Speaking of nuclear power and self-contained environments, he was an original Rickenbacker disciple, working on the early nuclear subs and staying in that biz. until his retirment.)
There are plenty of us in the "outdoor-backpacking" community who consider a summer spent hiking the Appalachain Trail burning nothing but food (and small stoves to heat one meal a day) to be a rare escape. And scooters, bicycles, and mass transit could bring down the per-capita energy consumption in great percentages, except it is deadly to try to compete with existing autos and trucs on our current crowded streets and highways.
Indeed; that brings us to a HUGE point in our political paradigm: While righties like to TALK about "FREE ENTERPRISE CAPITALISM", the NUMBER ONE ATTRIBUTE of American social life is... the automobile! And guess what: AUTOS are almost useless WITHOUT STATE SUBSIDIZED ROADS AND HIGHWAYS! In perhaps the all-time historical masterpiece of propaganda, Big Business and Righty talking points have convinced us that "MASS TRANSIT is SOCIALIZED", when in fact the individual and his autos are perhaps THE_SINGLE_BIGGEST_EXAMPLE of SOCIALIZED GOVERNMENT welfare SPENDING, EVER!
Hell, Germany at the tail-end of WWII was brought to its knees by its ENERGY PRODUCTION Achilles heel... but even so, it was no picnic knocking Germany out of the war! They did MIRACLES with synthetic fuels, and that was 60 years ago, ringed by enemies, and bombed daily!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: nbrown on May 10, 2006 12:55 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That said, what can people do about gas prices in the short term? I wrote a few things anyone can do to regain some of that lost disposable income. Forgive the locality, but the basic principles will apply in lots of areas.
For anyone who hasn't lived in a country other than the USA... it just might open your eyes to spend a couple months somewhere else.
Jan Frel is exactly right: there's a collective insanity about the way people in the US use energy. It's shameful, really, but I believe people can improve if they are made conscious of their behavior.
Small changes can have noticeable impacts. And such changes can succeed on the individual level without cooperation from the entire planet.
Since we're only responsible for our own actions, I think that's the most logical step to changing the world, if that is one's wish.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» One big problem
Posted by: medstudgeek
» RE: One big problem
Posted by: JimTheAnarchist
» RE: One big problem
Posted by: hms2004
» It's expensive to live within 1 hour of the city!
Posted by: medstudgeek
» Been there, done that.
Posted by: Artkansas
» RE: One big problem
Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: One big problem
Posted by: redjenny
» RE: One big problem
Posted by: jwg
» RE: Interesting article. But what about short-term?
Posted by: solrev
» RE: followers need leaders
Posted by: ScottP
» RE: Interesting article. But what about short-term?
Posted by: jeff2045
» Lots of Oil out there; just renew the American Spirit
Posted by: feller
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Sojourner on May 10, 2006 1:52 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Americans won't listen to bad news until after it has happened. Take global warming, for instance. Now where we gonna run to? 'Nuf said.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Didn't really care one way or another about the name-calling. If it happens on the playground...
Posted by: ABetterFuture
Comments are closed-
Posted by: n7ekg on May 10, 2006 4:04 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
With all due respect, this is a minor issue. The real obstacle is the Bush administration and their big oil cronies, who fight tooth-and-nail every conservation attempt, every attempt at developing more fuel-efficient vehicles, and every attempt at developing alternate sources of energy.
Consumers aren't the real problem, and your disdain for consumers, however well-meaning, is woefully misplaced. If Madison Ave., in collusion with big oil and big business, hadn't brainwashed the American public for 40+ years that "bigger is better" we wouldn't be in this situation, would we? Even those who come to an awareness of the problem find it harder and much more expensive to "go green". Why are fuel-efficient cars like the Toyota Prius and Ford Escape so much more expensive then their less-efficient counterparts? Why do we have vehicles that only get 50 or 60 MPG at best? And why do we have vehicles that run on petrochemicals at all? Why do we have a 54 cent tariff on imported ethanol while at the same time encouraging generating ethanol from corn, a very inefficient process but which creates a market for corn grown here? Why do we have lithium ion and polymer batteries that are so much more expensive than their much heavier lead counterparts? Why are solar cells still so expensive, even after manufacturing costs falling 10-fold in the last 20 years?
If we were truly interested in conservation, we would make it more affordable, more convenient, and more socially acceptable. But, as it has for the last 60 years, big business and big oil has dominated both the political landscape and the lawmaking process in this country, and so we still have passenger cars on the road that are touted as "fuel efficient" while getting a mere 30 miles per gallon, we still have gasoline at artificially inflated prices, and we still discourage developing alternative sources of energy, both as a matter of national policy and as a matter of law.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» High gas prices
Posted by: medstudgeek
» RE: Consumers aren't the problem
Posted by: mazur
» RE: Consumers aren't the problem
Posted by: techno
» Consumers ARE the problem - at least part of it
Posted by: LeonDion
» agree/disagree
Posted by: brasilaron
» You are confusing the symtoms with the cause!
Posted by: fool-on-the-hill
» RE: Consumers aren't the problem
Posted by: mwildfire
Comments are closed-
Posted by: solrev on May 10, 2006 4:16 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Step away from the moon...
Posted by: greentime
» RE: Step away from the moon...
Posted by: solrev
» Aaaarggh.
Posted by: nickptar
» RE: Aaaarggh.
Posted by: Samantha Vimes
» Not fusion, solar
Posted by: nickptar
» Oh, sorry, it was fusion!
Posted by: nickptar
» Nice idea, but there are big obstacles!
Posted by: Jesse
» "Dude, we've got technology."
Posted by: RobW
» RE: "Dude, we've got technology."
Posted by: MT512
» RE: "Dude, we've got technology."
Posted by: RobW
» RE: "Dude, we've got technology."
Posted by: eichorn
» RE: "Dude, we've got technology."
Posted by: MT512
» RE: "Dude, we've got technology."
Posted by: janakiblum
Comments are closed-
Posted by: rsaxto on May 10, 2006 4:30 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» The cliff of disaster will do it for you
Posted by: LeonDion
» DECENT LEADERSHIP?!
Posted by: BJT
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Tom Degan on May 10, 2006 4:35 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"A nation of clowns, eating clown food, watching clown shows" Wow. Wish I'd said that!
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Don't repeat it
Posted by: greentime
» slightly off topic
Posted by: Samantha Vimes
Comments are closed-
Posted by: nickptar on May 10, 2006 5:25 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Semi-counterpoint
Posted by: MT512
» RE: Semi-counterpoint
Posted by: nickptar
Comments are closed-
Posted by: greentime on May 10, 2006 5:25 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dominating a conversation, or anything, seems to me to be the problem.
There are reasons people are discussing these issues purposefully and quietly. It is part of a new way we must behave as human beings in order to make the changes we seek and to include each other in the dialog. Screaming and yelling are so... old technology. ;-)
We are not just clowns or fools or worse. We may be somewhat lost, we may have been thoughtless because of our previous beliefs, but we do think new thoughts, recognize mistakes and we can and do change. It is called evolution.
Jimmy, all the while you have been yelling, many people have been busy building more efficient houses and "cars", improving efficiencies in technolgy and planning the next steps toward energy independence. Millions of us have supported their efforts, quietly, so I guess you thought we were all clowning around or something.
Why not simmer down and when you are calm, join us! There is a lot to write about.
And on a personal note: Saratoga The Magazine
You didn't listen then either.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: personal note was for Kunstler, sorry, didn't clarify.
Posted by: greentime
» RE: Oh good, more bullying...
Posted by: antoniomo
Comments are closed-
Posted by: O.B.Server on May 10, 2006 5:46 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: williameon on May 10, 2006 5:59 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bomb Iran!
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb,
Bomb Iran!
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb,
Bomb Iran!
Bomb Iran
As
Fast as you can!
Bomb Iran
Be a man
They’ll be Nuke-en and a Steal-en
Torture and Treason
In Iran
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb,
Bomb Iran!
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb,
Bomb Iran!
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb,
Bomb Iran!
Bomb Iran!
As
Fast as you can!
Bush’s Poll #’s are a falling
Carle Rove is a calling
Better Bomb Iran!
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb,
Bomb Iran!
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb,
Bomb Iran!
Bomb Iran
as
Fast as you can
Call the NSA
Spy on them today
Exxon is calling!
There’s oil in those dunes!
Tex-ass Tea!
Black Gold!
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb,
Bomb Iran!
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb,
Bomb Iran!
Bomb, Bomb, Bomb,
Bomb Iran!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» You are obviously a Special Counsel to the President...
Posted by: fool-on-the-hill
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Bruuks on May 10, 2006 6:23 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"It's "peak oil" -- the term for the period after which global oil and natural gas demand outstrips supply and the prices for these commodities become too volatile for modern society to function."
Strictly speaking 'peak oil' is the period during which worldwide oil 'production' is at the highest it will ever be, before beginning to decline. Supply and demand do come into play, but not necessarily at 'peak'. Demand can quite easily exceed supply long before peak. However, most certainly, supply will not be able to keep up with demand post-peak.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: JimTheAnarchist on May 10, 2006 6:27 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Kunstler is a good example. He flaunts his own oil consumption, mentioning his frequent flying in his blog posts even when it is not necessary to make his point. To a Jevonist people who get rid of their cars are chumps, since according to them, someone else will just consume what they conserve. Therefore, peak oil types often brag about not conserving. I've seen several suggestions in Kunstler's blog (not by Kunstler but by his accolytes) to the effect that "If there's somewhere you've always wanted to go you'd better go now before the price of jet fuel goes up."
The peak oil movement is all about how to deal with the breakdown of civilization after the oil is gone and not about how to do anything to prevent the breakdown. They fly and drive all over attending conferences, watching peak oil movies, raising awareness and acquiring the skills they think they will need post-apocalypse. The organizers of the conference claim that their goal is to make more people aware of peak oil. Considering that these people have significantly increased their own oil consumption since becoming aware, I wonder if this is such a good thing.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Jevonism
Posted by: mogwai
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Jasonix on May 10, 2006 6:31 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Any ideas on how to survive?
Posted by: EY
» RE: Any ideas on how to survive?
Posted by: gar
» RE: Any ideas on how to survive?
Posted by: purplehawk
» RE: Any ideas on how to survive?
Posted by: putman9
» RE: Any ideas on how to survive?
Posted by: jimbee
» RE: Any ideas on how to survive?
Posted by: eichorn
» RE: Any ideas on how to survive?
Posted by: the poet
» RE: Any ideas on how to survive?
Posted by: eichorn
Comments are closed-
Posted by: gar on May 10, 2006 6:55 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now we have a man who comes along and calls the general public "fuckups" and "clowns" because they don't follow an ecological lifestyle. Well, maybe it will be good for some shock value to wake some people up who need a little jog but I think overall, it will have a negative effect.
As they have been saying in politics for the last few years, perhaps what is needed is a new frame; a new way of expressing the values and the ways of living that could go a long way towards saving our planet. For instance, people who attempt to live in a self-sufficient manner with the earth are not "eco-freaks," they are "life-style pioneers."
Here are two more view changing frames. Instead of labeling food grown without the use of chemicals as "organic," change the law to where foods that are grown using chemicals are labeled "non-organic" with a list of the chemicals used in their production. Another good one would be to force the labeling of food grown more than 200 miles away with a label giving the distance it was shipped.
These are only presented as illustrations of the types of things that could be done to change the public attitude. As Rumsfield (excuse me please) might say, "We've got to win their hearts and minds." We won't do that by calling them "fucked up clowns."
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Good suggestions!
Posted by: sln70
» You have no idea how masochistic people are
Posted by: LeonDion
» Ouch... what did Chapelle do to deserve getting stuck in THAT list? [nt]
Posted by: axolotl_helix
» RE: co-Freaks or Life-Style Pioneers?
Posted by: aussidawg
» Honestly and positively critiquing your proposal
Posted by: peritonlogon
» RE: co-Freaks or Life-Style Pioneers?
Posted by: kmaripo
Comments are closed-
Posted by: purplehawk on May 10, 2006 7:18 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: wishful thinking
Posted by: LeonDion
» RE: wishful thinking
Posted by: nickptar
» RE: wishful thinking
Posted by: LeonDion
» RE: wishful thinking
Posted by: nickptar
» "Wishful thinking" means to "do nothing." Hope is not wishful thinking...
Posted by: Sojourner
» Similarly...
Posted by: nickptar
» RE: "Wishful thinking" means to "do nothing." Hope is not wishful thinking...
Posted by: janakiblum
Comments are closed-
Posted by: DaveB on May 10, 2006 7:25 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Understanding the sustainability challenge, and appropriate responses to it, should be at the foundation of progressive thinking. Massive economic changes will occur. We can either watch them happen to us, or attempt to guide them in a strategic way.
Commitment to a social safety net is essential under the circumstances. Failure to make such a commitment will result in a psychology of desperation and panic, which will make an already challenging situation much, much worse.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Ricki on May 10, 2006 7:34 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Some ideas on how to survive the crash
Posted by: Roverton
» RE: Some ideas on how to survive the crash
Posted by: nickptar
Comments are closed-
Posted by: maddy on May 10, 2006 8:09 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In fact, I wanted to shout at some of these folks--"Didn't you see this coming?" "Did you think we could continue sucking this planet dead without any consequences?" "Do you really think your convenience is a birthright?"
I think this piece is right, though, that you don't inspire people by telling them they're ignorant and spoiled.
It seems to me that the solution is indeed, a difficult one--I think you have to dig in and start having real conversations with people about what they "lose" by participating in American sprawl and a life made dead by both careerism and consumerism.
The good news, believe it or not, can be found in the rise of evangelicalism. While I loathe everything about it's belief system, I think it's addressing a widespread American malaise--it's giving people purpose in their lives, a sense of existence deeper than Starbucks and SUVs.
That is the challenge. Tap into that search for meaning. And I think the way to do that is by generating local groups who work on simple solutions. Bringing people together for small tasks will empower them... which is key.
Imagine, instead, if the folks around me started organizing local carpools, or, off the top of my head, cooperative gardening projects? If folks pledged to...I dunno...turn off their TVs and gather outdoors?
The possibility and hope is there, and I'll find it once I get over my urge to scream at the whining folks around me!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» We are literally poised on the edge of a knifeblade.
Posted by: fool-on-the-hill
» RE: Managing Temper Tantrums
Posted by: MT512
Comments are closed-
Posted by: LMNOP on May 10, 2006 8:21 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Those that have a neuron or two will figure this out and begin becoming personally less dependent on fossil fuel. The rest, people who mock the rest of us for concern in this matter, will bleed. Too f-ing bad!
America needs to hope for mercy because it couldn't survive justice.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: VoteHope on May 10, 2006 9:26 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Questions or philosophy? I live as if it is a philosophy. I have quit the corporate mindset of collective work for huge profits to the wealthy owners: feudalism.
I am trapped by the energy crisis that oil brings to the planet and see profit as the motive to continue using fossil fuels. Contamination, global warming, and plutocratic rule are the real by-products of using oil.
One person can not change the "geological clock" that started with the automobile and the huge consumption of oil the dominant species seems to need to function, but I can get out of the rat race and stop being one person in "a nation of cringing, craven fuckups," whenever and however I can.
Decide what you need to live and quit doing what seems to be a large advantage to the rich and power owners of the company you work for and start working for your own life.
Psychologically, what makes you secure and happy is health and shelter for yourself and those you love. Nothing is more important. Not boats, second homes, wealth, or power is as important as our relationships.
Materialism is a disease for modern culture and Corporate America is the pathological leader of the world. We are not in touch with reality and insanity, fascism, and greed are our cultural crisis qualities, at the same time this crisis will eventually unite the world against Corporate Plutocrats and their fascism.
Human rights begin with you giving yourself the right to be who you are, not what you have been taught from the Corporate American education model to compete and be the best so they can profit from your talents, but the just to do what you want and be with the people you love.
Oil and energy are the asteroid hitting the earth and it feels like we could become extinct, or at least the lifestyle we have come to know, but it can also be the crisis that leads to an opportunity to become more human and less material based. Non polluting and environmentally friendly energy sources are available and would become more productive and efficient if industry was producing and refining the technology, but oil based economics is too powerful.
The oil infrastructure is the corporate model for corruption in our government and this fascism and plutocracy needs to be resolved on a governmental level if we are going to change what industry/corporations focus on and produce for people to use. No change is possible if the status quo runs the government and makes huge profits; there isn’t any incentive to change. Even with war, global warming, and looming apocalyptic predictions, change isn’t the goal for Corporate America, and neither is the best interest of the people in the U.S. or the world. Americans have their head in the sand, a very comfortable head hole, but they deny there is a need to get Corporate America out of our government to have a real democracy. We don’t have elections or a democracy in the U.S., just Corporate appointments. We could vote to change things with no big $ in power, but that would mean we learned from history and stopped denying and lying to ourselves to not make waves and make the big $ bosses happy that in turn own you too when you can’t walk away.
Start a career that you can make by applying your own talents and make enough to live. Buy small used cars and save you money for solar cells, wind turbines, voltage regulators, and batteries... Get off the grid and live free as you can. Stop working for "the man" and work for yourself. Survive and work to be with the ones you love.
Cottage industry and democracy were born together.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Baranga on May 10, 2006 9:35 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's just below the surface but if you were to take a sampling of opinions in "mainstream" America, the generic, misinformed response would be that "technology" is going to make it all right. "Scientists over at the National Energy Technology Labs are working on ways to convert orange peels into jet fuel as we speak." This kind of thinking diverts attention from what the author pointed out: we need to collectively overhaul our consumption patterns but as we all very well know, that won't change until pumps are bone dry.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: albiegf13 on May 10, 2006 10:19 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» You're ready
Posted by: LeonDion
Comments are closed-
Posted by: MonkeyBoy on May 10, 2006 10:23 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/
and
http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/SecondPage.html
It's a wealth of information that will quickly bring you up to speed on the subject of "Peak oil".
Even if we haven't reached a peak yet, we will soon be in a state where demand from rapidly growing industrial economies like China and India will far exceed the worldwide supply of oil and gas.
Be forewarned, you won't be the same after you visit this site.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Peak Oil Awareness Needed
Posted by: Baranga
» http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/
Posted by: anniedine
» RE: http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/
Posted by: MonkeyBoy
Comments are closed-
Posted by: wildrehab on May 10, 2006 10:51 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Perhaps the point isn't to figure out how to prevent it, but rather to face the inevitable end of this bloom of humanity that's been happening for several thousand years. No biological bloom ever happens without it's subsequent crash. Why would our species be different?
As a result of our incredible bloom, there are more humans alive than the habitat can sustain. We won't limit our own bloom---- which may not be a matter of stupidity or self-delusion, but merely the way species behave. We'll push our expansion of numbers and power as far as we can, and then crash. From our point of view, that's a huge looming disaster. From Ma Nature's point of view, just business as usual. And it'd be a little silly to think She'll make some kind of exception for homo sapeins.
Sad from our personal viewpoint, but then we're each going to die someday anyway, so maybe it's not that big a deal exactly how it happens, en masse or individually. Like an individual with a terminal diagnosis, we have choices in how to respond:
freak out? Moan and groan? Or maybe just celebrate our amazing and interesting tenure and enjoy each moment we have remaining on this beautiful planet.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Blooming humanity
Posted by: anniedine
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mdf1960 on May 10, 2006 11:13 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think people need to consume wisely, however. Take a look at your lifeastyle and decide where you can cut back and not decrease your overall quality of your life.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Materialism
Posted by: redjenny
Comments are closed-
Posted by: anniedine on May 10, 2006 11:18 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Some people you can reach, some people you can't. Some people need to be yelled at and called names, some need a soft touch, some people have enough critical thinking skills to see the truth for themselves.
Those with wealth and power in our world have ensured that the crash is coming. It may be related to finite resources (water, land, oil, etc.), it may be a nuclear holocaust, it may be a collapse of monetary systems, it may be marshall law and an end of the US Constitutional protections for citizens, it may be a flu pandemic - it will probably be a combination of many of these. The U.S.'s fragile safety nets have been cut away while we were childishly dreaming of being saved from our selfishness, greed, and laziness.
Enough smart people have warned us. Octavia Butler has laid out in beautiful storytelling what a future scenario could be. But many clowns will continue ignoring all of this and go merrily along (there were people on the Titanic who insisted to the very end that help would arrive). Regardless, the time is coming when we won't be protected from the realities of nature (including our own) by our technologies and our hubris.
In any case, it will be a fine day when there are fewer human clowns destroying mother earth. May she, at least, survive the coming crash.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: ead "Parable of the Sower" by Butler
Posted by: schmitta1573
Comments are closed-
Posted by: schmitta1573 on May 10, 2006 11:24 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: worksg on May 10, 2006 11:36 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The consensus of experts is for peak oil to occur well before 2025. And we're already living on credit, so we don't have trillions of dollars to invest. And America and its leaders have no political will to begin a crash program immediately, anyway.
I moved my family to a place that can feed itself and moved my money into hard assets. I'm learning how to farm. If you know a better way, please comment.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Already Too Late
Posted by: anniedine
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Meremark on May 10, 2006 11:59 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You are not going to be ALIVE in five years
Death is what it means, to one out of two of us. Next time you are conversing with someone, think to yourself, 'one of us two is going to be dead within five years.'
Because all the oil on Earth runs out.
Arguing whether it runs out in 5 years, or 10, or 20 or 30, is wasting time arguing. End of oil happens IN OUR LIFETIME. Whenever and however it arrives, we each have to deal with it before we die. The sooner we each take steps of active design of our lifestyle to accommodate and to adapt for oil-less living, the more likely we succeed then. Where 'suicceeding' means living.
What oil-less living looks like is human life on Earth in 1850. Or 1800. Or pick a date you prefer before oil 'was invented,' before 1900, say. Life in 10 years is going to be like life in 1850. If you want food in the future, then grow it. Else don't have food, and die.
This starkness and absoluteness is hard to get one's mind around and deal with. Especially for minds of American (capitalist) indoctrination, which is, in oversimplifed generality, a mind which knows 'work' as that which is paid in 'money,' and knows 'money' as that which gets 'food, clothing, and shelter.' In that mind, to think of oil running out, is identical with, equals, to think of money ending. And the ideas are equal -- end of oil does mean end of money in the 'American' sense of money. Having to live, or before then just imagining having to live without money, is too far into ignorance for many of us to get our minds to.
So minds 'don't go there.' Rather, those minds merely stand pat and issue denial -- "Oil is NOT going to run out." Or, "people only say oil is expensive or unobtainable BECAUSE those people have an angle, or are making a buck, they speak with a profit motive - THEIR personal profit, and to convince us to give them more of our money; and there is NO WAY anyone is saying this for humanitarian purposes or motives, trying to help save my life." Nevermind save humankind.
Well, ladies and gentlemen: WAY. I speak as an elder who has seen and known very much in my life. Speaking as an insulting know-it-all, I say, that maybe one person, somewhere, one time, by some small word or phrase I say, 'gets it' and gets prepared and survives and saves their life, saves one little life and is here helping populate humankind after oil ends. I say, I'm telling you, oil runs out very soon -- in OUR lifetime. Each of us MUST deal with it, and each of us who does not deal with it dies. Within 5 years. In case you were thinking you'd get to retire, or in case you were thinking in terms of some other 'American dream' fiction. There is more to know. And there are many now -- especially the Prez Duncy and his Supremacist cohort -- who want you NOT to KNOW more.
They tell you that yoiu cannot understand. I tell you that you CAN understand. A child can understand. It is this: When you use it all, it is gone. Oil on Earth is one of those things that have a finite supply. Of course, everybody knows oil runs out. Sometime. Only not many people think about WHEN, since not many people know how much there is (as measured) and not many people know how fast we are using it. Because people are busy, and don't have time or take time to study it, get some the facts and learn the subject. And mass media don't cover it.
Two references. Here is one news item from last December which says Kuwait only has half the oil REALLY that was said to be there -- said by other people in bygone years. Believe them then now, or believe those here now. Or ... you probably don't have time to read this ... "Kuwait and oil reserves,"
http://peakoil.net/Kuwait.html
... and it is TOO complicated, What's a 'Gb' (giga-barrel) of oil? ...
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: You are not going to be ALIVE in five years
Posted by: nickptar
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Meremark on May 10, 2006 12:09 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"THE PARADIGM IS THE ENEMY: The State of the Peak Oil Movement at the Cusp of Collapse," A Speech by Michael C. Ruppert for the Local Solutions to the Energy Dilemma Conference, April 27-29, New York City, at Cooper Union
From The Wilderness (.COM)
My favorite pull-quotes
--
"Perhaps the greatest flaw in the Peak Oil movement’s current operating paradigm is that, a part of the movement at least, instead of building lifeboats in the face of an immediate disaster, is delusionally focused on trying to build alternative-powered luxury liners that operate just like the paradigm we as a species need to be abandoning. Not only is this a futile effort, it may well be responsible for killing or destroying the lives of people who at least partially understand Peak Oil and who are trying to find the best courses of immediate action for themselves and their families.
-
It is a shame that much of the Peak Oil movement that understands this problem is foolishly trying to change the way money works systemically, instead of trying to change it in the only way that time and circumstance now permit—individually, locally and regionally. The first and primary requirement for that to occur is for people to disengage from the global paradigm.
-
If the activist paradigm that we live under says that we must slow down the process of reform and planning to make room for all and offend no one, no matter how much they may slow down or confuse the process, then we must disengage from that paradigm. This is no longer about protracted—and almost always ineffective—social change. This is about survival. I refuse to die, and I refuse to encourage anyone else to risk death or to slow down for or argue with people who are either incapable of understanding, too lazy to do the necessary homework, or too tightly wedded to old ideas."
--
I say Peak Oil means halfway until oil runs out, and yours and my personal survival, and our descendants' survival, and all of humankind's survival -- life or death for us all -- depends on living without oil. Imagine the North American continent, without state borders, without national borders, a patchwork of 'tribal villages' separate and self-sufficient yet in communication and 'trade' with each other, across the land ... just like Before Oil, (except with global point-to-point video cellphones, and a few other modern 'electronic' inventions, just, NO cars trucks or planes; and, besides cell phones, some other interesting juxtapositions, but, basically, 1850 lifestyle. If you grow food, you eat. If you don't, you and yours are dead. Uh, it sorta seems that land is too valuable to let 'distant government' govern it.)
Others (commenters here, for instance) shout NO NO NO NO to drown out my voice, and order you not to listen to me or not to believe me. Hey, it's your life and your death. You may choose to look into it and get some facts for yourself. And decide for yourself. Choose: Live or Die?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Considering the advances in extraction and refining technology...
Posted by: axolotl_helix
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thehousedog on May 10, 2006 1:41 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Abandon the Capitalistic Ideal and everything is affordable
Posted by: Baranga
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on May 10, 2006 1:44 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here's a story you won't find in the US press: Powerlight Corp of California has been contracted to build the world's largest solar electric generation facility in Europe. Oh, that's not news! Here is the only mainstream news report on this I could find : San Jose Mercury News - not exactly a headline, either. Maybe the fact that US media is owned by the same banks that control US oil and pharma companies is relevant to this lack of coverage?
How about another important topic: how to grow crops without massive inputs of fossil fuels. This is critically important if you want to make biofuels (including hydrogen, methane, ethanol and biodiesel) for energy purposes. Well, Brazil has figured this out and has been doing it for years with sugarcane. Looks like we won't all starve to death after all.
The fossil fuel industry does everything it can to sabotage renewable energy production. Take Stanford Universities "Global Climate and Energy Program." That sounds good, doesn't it? However, ExxonMobil funded this program ($100 million) and retains arbitrary control over which projects are funded, as well as a five-year exclusive license to any invention produced. Considering their multibillion dollar quarterly profits, $100 mil is chump change when it comes to controlling energy markets and boosting profits. And yes - the Stanford center is now focussing on "clean coal". Farcical!
Germany, on the other hand, has large research institutes that focus entirely on realistic renewable energy strategies focussed on solar and wind energy. Believe me, you won't find that in the US research budget. Wonder why?
Japanese building codes require that solar hot water heaters are included in new buildings. This would reduce your local gas & electric utility profit margin, so we don't see such strategies in the US. Government regulations on energy use? The energy sector likes the captive cattle of the American market just the way they are, thanks. The notion that we can live off-the-grid makes them oh so nervous.
Peak oil? Well, Iraq has 100 billion barrels of crude. Our oil, however, comes largely from Mexico and Canada. Yes, there isn't enough to go around, and supply isn't going to be artificially choked off anymore, yet we can look forward to more 'demand stimulation' by the fossil fuel sector.
All the technology currently exists to replace, say, 25% of our current energy usage. Wake up! The energy sector controls this country; they love high energy prices and high gas prices, and if the country goes belly-up they'll just move off to the Swiss Alps or some other location.
Get rid of your SUV and invest the money in a solar power system for your home, start a backyard garden and get to know some organic farmers, ride a bicycle and quit your lame-ass corporate commuting job, make sure your government isn't run by a bunch of crooks from the fossil fuel/pharmaceutical/weapon sales sector, and learn to live a simpler, more enjoyable and stress-free life. Now, is that so hard?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Regulate all energy supplies for the sake of the common good.
Posted by: Sojourner
» RE: egulate all energy supplies for the sake of the common good.
Posted by: eichorn
» RE: The US is way behind the curve - get used to it
Posted by: Baranga
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Gregor on May 10, 2006 5:11 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The system is locked in. It is extremely difficult to create new structures that people can work in. You have to think outside our present system. Albert Einstein said "The minds that created the problem will not be the minds that solve the problem".
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: blame game
Posted by: janakiblum
Comments are closed-
Posted by: davcrock on May 10, 2006 6:09 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We're not going to magically run out of oil tommorow. The spigot isn't suddenly going to run dry without any warning. To argue otherwise is alarmist FUDD.
Oil like any other commodity responds to supply and demand. As supplies dwindle and demand increases, the price of oil goes up. As the price of oil goes up, more supplies that were previously not economically feasible will be feasible. As those supplies dwindle, the price of oil will continue to rise and demand declines. More importantly, investing in technology becomes more feasible.
So what can we do now in public policy? First, provide economic incentive to conserve oil. Drive a fuel efficient car? Great, get a tax credit. Commute really far by car everyday? Great, pay a tax. Etc etc.
Let's see more practical solutions and less alarmism. We need to have our eyes open to our problems and the risks that we face and manage them in a practical manner. Otherwise, you're just burning up energy sitting at your computer (pay a tax?).
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Oil
Posted by: MonkeyBoy
» RE: Oil
Posted by: the poet
» RE: Oil
Posted by: davcrock
» Well, that's the difference between the peak oil hypothesis, and "PEAK!!! OIL!!!"
Posted by: ABetterFuture
» RE: Well, that's the difference between the peak oil hypothesis, and "PEAK!!! OIL!!!"
Posted by: ABetterFuture
» RE: Check this out . .
Posted by: Baranga
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Baranga on May 10, 2006 10:28 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What other things are all of you doing or thinking? I grew up on 40 acres and drove an old Alice Chalmers for a good many years so I can raise almost anything that grows in soil. I also grew up hunting deer, elk, pheasant and ducks and had friends who trapped so I am no stranger to that either. Apart from that what is the concensus on "must have" or "must do" things?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Planning ahead . . Suggestions?
Posted by: abqbabe
» RE: Seriously
Posted by: abqbabe
» RE: Seriously
Posted by: eichorn
Comments are closed-
Posted by: dismayed on May 10, 2006 10:57 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: meth is not a problem.
Posted by: Jan Frel
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mokidugway on May 11, 2006 12:06 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In 2000, guess who moved in with my next door neighbors because he had sold everything he owned, bought a share in a windmill, and planned on moving to the Australian outback?
This crazy mad max shit won't solve anything. It's just a flip side of the Rapture coin.
Conservation is possible. It had a HUGE impact on energy consumption in the 1970s. Moreover, people would be eager to do it and proud to be doing something positive for a change. They are SICK of sitting around on their asses watching some dude submerged in a big aquarium for two hours and thinking that this is what passes for a meaningful life.
But most people need some inspiration, some hope, and we all need leaders who can instill these feelings rather than just playing on fears and pushing consumerism as a form of self-medication to relax these fears.
Where is the person who can bring us hope?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Peak Oil = Y2K for the new millenium
Posted by: tvanslaughter
» RE: Peak Oil = Y2K for the new millenium
Posted by: mokidugway
» RE: Peak Oil = Y2K for the new millenium
Posted by: DaBear
Comments are closed-
Posted by: leemiller38 on May 11, 2006 12:19 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A crash is now inevitable, but life will go on in some unpleasant manner for a few more centuries somewhere on the planet but for far fewer people. Relax and enjoy the time we have left. Drive a smaller car, ride a bike, consume less, contribute to family planning organizations and don't have any kids you don't want to see starve someday.
Growing your own food is good if you enjoy it, but don't count on it for survival. I grow lots of my food, but PG&E pumps the water to grow it from a somewhat depleted aquifer. I'm on the grid. Our technological dependencies put us far out on a fragile limb. It is hard to live as if we are at 1850 again. How would the great masses in LA, Chicago or New York even begin to become self-sufficient in food or water without energy resources? The resources that nurtured our hunter-gatherer ancestors are largely gone, half the soils are eroded. Not a pretty picture.
It is hard for me to rationalize this outcome of our evolution, but most populations are controlled by lack of food. Malthus was correct, but who thinks of Malthus when having a roll in the hay, eh?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: rtdrury on May 11, 2006 2:35 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: You're right.
Posted by: RobW
» RE: You're right.
Posted by: ConnecttheDots
» RE: You're right.
Posted by: DaBear
» RE: You're right.
Posted by: DaBear
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Guy on May 11, 2006 12:06 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Guy
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Framing
Posted by: eichorn
Comments are closed-
Posted by: RobW on May 11, 2006 12:55 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
peakoil.com
This is a news and discussion forum. LOTS of good info here, from science, geology, and economics, to psychology, preparation and geopolitics.
Of special interest is the forum on preparation. Lots of good info here, and it isn't all "MadMax" gloom and doom stuff. Ok, there's a little bit- but that just makes it more fun...
For a good, well-documented general overview of the proble, the LATOC site linked above is useful, though a bit scary. Be warned. I couldn't sleep for days after reading it.
For those who seem to want to focus on a political angle to this topic- this isn't a "left" or "right" thing.
Look at who are saying this thing is real... investment bankers, petroleum company geologist, congresscritters on both sides of the aisle, and commodities traders. Not exactly a bunch of wild-eyed liberal environmentalists, ok?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: RobertTheHager on May 13, 2006 9:17 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and many more, for as long as there's been autos on the road; and much longer... but it's too simple for people; for some people, anyway.
http://www.rense.com/general67/FORD.HTM
Looking forward,
Robert The Hager
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Riverside on May 15, 2006 7:29 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
CAFE must be upgraded to reach 40mpg by 2012. The stonewalling that Secretary Minetta did at the recent hearings should have the whole public up in arms, but we the people remain either confused or indifferent to the crisis and so we do very little, whereas we should be raising the roof.
We are not going to stop driving cars, yet. We would drive cars with good gas mileage if we are spoon fed (a sorry state). With the exception of only a few with respect to the total driving public most wont change their driving habits or vehicles. Unfortunately we either wait for a dreadful crisis that imposes no other choice, or our Congress mandates the following:
1. Change CAFE now including sufficient vote support to override any White House veto.
2. Mandate an immediate drop in Interstate speed limits down to 55mph
3. Expand the tax breaks and discounts for our buying of fuel efficient vehicles (regular and hybrid).
4. Finally develop a no cost or low cost disposal system for auto dealers who take in fuel hogs in trade for good CAFE cars. No dealer wants a lot full of unsellable cars and they should not have to bear the full cost of their disposal.
Just solving the fuel efficiency problem for all vehicles will bring about a most significant relief in the effects that boost global climate change. This will extend the time we have to concentrate on other energy problems and to also extend our supply of gasoline beyond the expected peak oil date, which can be seen looming on the horizon.
So why can't all those organizations fighting to save this planet play from the same sheet music? We just might make it if they do.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: TagsNOLA on May 15, 2006 8:45 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Technology IS the fix. It's ALWAYS been the fix and it always will be. The doomsayers and neigh-sayers are fascist, nazi a**holes to the core of their being. Their beef is the human race whom they regard as, in the words of one eco-fascist interviewed some years ago on NPR, "a cancer on the Earth." If we let the eco-fascists or the commodity speculators or neo-con jerks like Dick Cheney have their way, we'll be relegated to a world like that in the film, "Soylent Green."
But if those types are shoved aside, we can have more people living on this planet at a higher standard of living than ever before in human history. And, no, "standard of living" is NOT a bad world. Nor is it a bad thing. That is, not unless you're an anti-humanist eco-fascist.
Remember this, when these jerks talk about "lowerd expectations" and "doing with less," they're NOT talking about themselves. They're talking about suckers like us who buy off on their eco-fascist crap.
TagsNOLA
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: this article is NOT idiocy
Posted by: leemiller38
» RE: this article is NOT idiocy
Posted by: TagsNOLA
Comments are closed-
Posted by: diogenes on May 16, 2006 7:45 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Air cars and super solar panels
Posted by: TagsNOLA
» RE: Air cars and super solar panels
Posted by: diogenes
Comments are closed-
Posted by: DaBear on May 16, 2006 12:05 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Beware the doomsayer who says there is no solution
Posted by: TagsNOLA
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Alternative Energy on May 29, 2006 3:20 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: FFA on Jun 1, 2006 9:42 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Watching great writers talk about "Peak Energy" without mentioning OVER POPULATION is sort of like watching Al Gore run a campaign talking about the environment, then running away from enviro protestors at an Everglades press conference (no, this little parable is not fiction), or, more recently, hearing him talk about Global Warming, while not mentioning disenfranchised voters, massive deficits, oh, and an expansion of imperial-at-war America.
As any football fan knows, you can win 1,000 battles in the trenches, and still be wiped out by a few timely passes. Or, to be more academic, while "all politics is local", you have to have a competent overall strategy, otherwise local successes may yield little.
Due to modern technology, including fossil fuel energy, we have been able to IGNORE the Malthusian nightmare. Indeed, fossil fuel is one of the huge elements that turned the "dismal science" (economics) into the tech- and market boom years. Well, like a spaceship that discovers it is on a crash course with a huge meteorite, it might be time to change our priorities a tad, and recognize there is only so much space and resources to go around, no matter how unpopular that politics may be!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: FFA on Jun 1, 2006 10:04 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We COULD issue DOUBLE THE MPG requirements on auto manufacturers OVERNIGHT... IF we wanted to.
I had a neighbor in Washington DC suburbs who rode his bike to work, 8 miles each way, including almost all year but for the worst winter days. (Speaking of nuclear power and self-contained environments, he was an original Rickenbacker disciple, working on the early nuclear subs and staying in that biz. until his retirment.)
There are plenty of us in the "outdoor-backpacking" community who consider a summer spent hiking the Appalachain Trail burning nothing but food (and small stoves to heat one meal a day) to be a rare escape. And scooters, bicycles, and mass transit could bring down the per-capita energy consumption in great percentages, except it is deadly to try to compete with existing autos and trucs on our current crowded streets and highways.
Indeed; that brings us to a HUGE point in our political paradigm: While righties like to TALK about "FREE ENTERPRISE CAPITALISM", the NUMBER ONE ATTRIBUTE of American social life is... the automobile! And guess what: AUTOS are almost useless WITHOUT STATE SUBSIDIZED ROADS AND HIGHWAYS! In perhaps the all-time historical masterpiece of propaganda, Big Business and Righty talking points have convinced us that "MASS TRANSIT is SOCIALIZED", when in fact the individual and his autos are perhaps THE_SINGLE_BIGGEST_EXAMPLE of SOCIALIZED GOVERNMENT welfare SPENDING, EVER!
Hell, Germany at the tail-end of WWII was brought to its knees by its ENERGY PRODUCTION Achilles heel... but even so, it was no picnic knocking Germany out of the war! They did MIRACLES with synthetic fuels, and that was 60 years ago, ringed by enemies, and bombed daily!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Why Is Obama Trying to Prop Up a Doomed 'Nuclear Renaissance'?
How Can We Talk About Transformational Change Without Losing Hope?
Could All the Freezing Weather Lately Have Anything to Do With Climate Change?




