but need to hear. The job ahead is monumental. Sacrifice will become the norm, either now or later. Time to start.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

is absolutely huge.

His miniscule prescriptions for change are designed to merely be inconvenient for those of us in the industrialized world. We are responsible for a wildly disproportionate share of resource use consequences.

George Monbiot's Heat goes to a much better degree in describing what we are going to have to do to survive and I do not think dropping the thermostat a few degrees is really what it's going to take.

This is a fantastic article you should forward to everyone in all your networks...and I've never said that about an alternet.org piece before. I really mean it.

stephen buckley
dgiVista.org

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Just think about the millions (or billions) of gallons fuel that are WASTED daily as people just sit in traffic...yes, as we sit in traffic or creep along at a few miles per hour during rush-hour we are irresponsibly wasting huge amounts of fuel ON A DAILY BASIS. Yes, energy that took millions of years to form simply burns away as millions if not billions spend hours each day sitting idly in traffic.

This is why we need gas-electric hybrid cars IMMEDIATELY. The car/truck can be kept in electric mode while sitting idly in traffic and while going slow. But the car can switch over to gasoline usage on the highways/freeways where gasoline can be utilized quite efficiently in modern cars.

Seeing thousands of cars just sitting in traffic daily where I live, all the while burning (WASTING) valuable fuel burns me up; it's even more deranged when one realizes that this is happening everywhere, every day.

We should also start mass-manufacturing mini/micro two-seater cars too (or even one-seater cars); people could take these back and forth to work every day (since people often drive alone to work) or use them for simple trips instead of driving the family Hummer around everywhere (they could still own a full-size car too, only it would be used less frequently). These very small micro-cars could easily get 70-80 MPG or even much more, and would use MUCH less gas when idling in traffic during rush-hour -- horsepower could be capped at low and optimized ranges on these micro-cars to increase fuel efficiency, say a top-speed of 75-85MPH, if even that. These micro-cars would also be quite cheap to make and buy, no more than $6-7,000 each I would say (and the individual governments that make them could even GIVE them away to citizens to save huge quantities of fuel on a mass basis!). This is only a temporary fix -- but it would obviously cut gas consumptions dramatically if it was immediately implemented though.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

All interesting ideas, yet all have a common theme: That we have no choice but to go back in time to Mayberry RFD.

Here's an alternative for you. Instead of regressing backwards, how about going forwards? Instead of assuming transportation is going to become prohibitively expensive, how about working to ensure that it's not?

How about researching alternative energy technologies like hydrogen, solar, wind, geothermal, tidal, pebble-bed nuclear, and so on? How about working today to ensure our infrastructure is ready for tomorrow? How about being proactive and not reactive for a change?

How about, just once, taking 1/10th of the amount of money spent annually on "defense" and investing it into the above mentioned research? One tenth. Or, heaven forbid, spend one quarter of that amount. Because if we did that, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

How many advanced fighters, bombers, ships, carriers, and submarines do we need, anyhow?

One additional side-effect of our developing and mastering those energy-related technologies is that if we do, we're not going to have to worry about our economy. Why? Because the entire world is going to want them.

In addtion, buy energy-efficient lighting and heating now. Replace energy-wasting windows and, if it's time, appliances. If you need a new car, get one that's fuel-efficient and flex-fueled. Turn off your computer. Put devices on timers. Recycle and reduce your impact.

In short, stop pretending that yesterday is the answer, stop sticking your head in the sand, stop wasting resources, and above all, SOLVE THE PROBLEM.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Mike Gravel's Campaign

"We have become a nation ruled by fear. Since the end of the Second World War, various political leaders have fostered fear in the American people--fear of communism, fear of terrorism, fear of immigrants, fear of people based on race and religion, fear of gays and lesbians in love who just want to get married and fear of people who are somehow different. It is fear that allows political leaders to manipulate us all and distort our national priorities."

"We are indeed a great nation, one that has made significant contributions to humanity. But our leaders are promoting delusional thinking when boasting that the United States and Americans are superior to the rest of the human race. We are no better and no worse."

"The major problems we face are all global in nature--energy, the environment, terrorism, drugs, war, immigration, disease, economic and cultural globalization. These problems require global solutions that can only be addressed by concerted diplomacy and cooperation, not jingoism about America's super power superiority."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

In Kunstler's words: "You can state categorically that any enterprise now supersized is likely to fail -- everything from the federal government to big corporations to huge institutions."

The monster called the federal govt is not authorized in its present scale and power by the US constitution. The Defense and Security State, No Child Left Alive, the federal income tax and its thug enforcer IRS, Farm Subsidies to Cargill et al, tax breaks for BP and Exxon, Federal Health Care (including the meddling and incompetent FDA) , Social Security are all items with meritorious contents (not the Security State) that should be in the purview of and the essence of active state and local govts, as well as voluntary citizens(what a quaint word) associations.

Big Fat Federal Moma burns a lot of energy. Air Force One and Nancy Pelosi's jet are symbols of our federal aristocracy and its wasteful habits. Substract the co2 emissions of the feds and you've put a few medium sized countries on a Kyoto emissions reduction diet.

Federal Moma: you are not going to be put on life support because you are taking all the oxygen out of the room. People will have to take care of people that they actually interact with daily, not some stranger in a faroff state. And yes, states have a purpose. They should determine who is a resident of the state, because they, not the federal govt, are the essential building blocks of the original federal system in the Constitution. The Feds serve the states,not the other way around. At least that's how it was supposed to work and we'd have wasted a lot less energy and lost a lot fewer lives in idiotic wars if we stuck to the intent and purpose of our constitution.

Earl Warren, we will finally dig you up and drive a stake through your bleeding heart.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Buy your horse and buggy now!!! And start looking for a place with a barn and pasture. Good luck.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I lived for 25 years in NYC, and the best thing about it (though sometimes the worst) was mass transit. Now I'm living in a village, but because it's a tiny village, I must drive to work in another town. Only 7 miles, but that's a long way to walk or bike as I enter my golden years. Anyway, my industry (clinical research) will collapse with the government. I'm hoping by then my village, once a booming canal town, will have swelled with new ways to earn a living, and at least I can start learning how to grow some of my food.

The fixation on the car, keeping the car viable, is indeed going to be the nail in the coffin of surviving the end of oil. If I hear one more person talking about biofuels as a replacement - don't they realize we're growing the plants to make biofuels with petroleum-based fertilizers??? People are denial machines, but if we keep hammering the message home, it'll get through. If we could just link it up to a prejudice, as Bush did with Iraq, we'd already be transitioning to solar, wind, and water power systems.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

James Kunstler has once again favored us with his sharp insights and his usual acerbic wit in warning us about the looming post-petroleum future.

What he is saying in a nutshell, I think, is this: in the grim future that awaits all of us after our petroleum-addicted global mass culture goes cold turkey, those most likely to survive and prevail will be those who start now learning how to grow gardens, grow communities, and grow local, self-reliant economies.

Because everything "big"--from big government to big business, to big agriculture, to big suburbia, to big medicine, to big transportation, to big education--is utterly dependent on cheap petroleum, and will crumble and collapse into chaos.

In this new chaotic global environment, those best able to cope will NOT be the merciless, hard-core survivalists who take to the hills with their stash of guns and ammo, build high walls, and shoot everyone who comes near. Rather, it will be those who learn, now, how to grow gardens, grow communities, and grow local economies--who get to know, and make themselves useful to, their neighbors, starting today.

When the petroleum-based infrastructure collapses, those local communities that are well organized and already actively involved in building a local, sustainable economy will be infinitely better off than all the clueless suburbanites, sitting in their SUVs with empty gas tanks, wondering why there is no food available at the local Wal Mart...

It all begins with getting off our butts, planting a few seeds, learning a few skills, and above all talking to a few neighbors.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I don't think Kunstler is suggesting that we return to the stone age. He is pointing out the futility of our carbon-burning-dependent cultural/economic system. It matters not whether one lives in a city town or rural area. The points are that the current system is grossly inefficient and self destructive. To improve efficiency people need to work closer to their homes and the goods they consume need to be produced closer to their homes. Also, addressed is the difference between needs (food, clothing, shelter, energy) and wants, hence the repeated i-pod analogy. As we know it today, the sun powers our planet, even the fossil fuels are long term results of solar power. It's possible that science will uncover a new clean power source, gravity, anti-gravity, dark matter, dark energy, ionic, who knows. Until then it seems prudent to do the best we can with the technology we have, solar, wind, wave, etc. to gear for a clean sustainable future. Changes are immanent. He's suggesting we prepare for them now.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

1) The entrenched fossil fuel industry must be actively opposed and forced to change, from the top tiers of financial control down to the gas stations and freeways and coal-fired power plants and petroleum-guzzling automobiles and heating oil-fired boilers and natural gas-powered petrochemical plants. We have to take steps to shut down coal-fired power plants, and ban foreign oil imports as a first step.

Why? There's enough fossil fuel in the ground to fry the climate - we could easily raise CO2 levels to 1500 ppm, and they could go all the way to 3000 ppm, unless the human species decides to stop burning coal and petroleum and natural gas - and that will lead to catastrophic global warming. Things will be difficult enough if we can stabilize CO2 at 450 ppm, but not catastrophic. The science is no longer in doubt - even the conservative IPCC report agrees. We can't afford to wait around for the oil & coal to run out - we have to shut it off on a global basis - meaning we need to work together with China, India, Russia, Australia, Europe, Africa, etc. - we need global cooperation, and the first step is to sign the Kyoto Protocol.

2) Population and per capita CO2 emissions have to be addressed, or we'll all end up like China - a semi-totalitarian society where birth rates are controlled by government intervention. There were 2 billion people in the world in 1945; now there are 6.5 billion people in the world. Promoting healthy and safe birth control and supporting the economic and human rights of women in the Third World are the best methods of reducing population growth. Notice also that many Western countries are developing top-heavy, aging populations - and the solution is obvious - allow more immigration from the Third World to industrialized nations - and that means getting over provincial hatred of foreigners and entrenched racism of the past few centuries - immigration strengthens a nation when there are opportunities for all. Start thinking about human beings - one people, on one little planet, with one connected future.

3) Energy replacements. Look around - you see houses, cities, farms - the dwelling places of humanity. We need heat and light in order to survive. What's the energy source if we don't use fossil fuels? There's only one answer: the sun. Solar photovoltaics and solar water heating are immediate solutions for existing homes, and the electricity grid is a critical component as well - it allows us to share and distribute and store electrical energy generated via solar and also wind (sun heats the air and land and ocean, and causes the winds to blow). The solar resource is unlimited - unlike fossil fuels, we will never run out - but you only get so much per day, so there is also a need for energy storage systems - methods of collecting solar and wind energy and metering it out as needed. The new renewable energy economy will produce more jobs than exist in the fossil fuel sector, as well.

We can figure out the farming, the water and the transportation needs, and we can maintain the global information connectivity of the Internet - but face it, you can't wait for the fossil fuels to run out. You can't hide in your idyllic little village and ignore the outside world - because believe me, it won't ignore you. If you are really concerned about this, you have to shut down the use of fossil fuels - and with our government at war in the Mideast over oil, and preparing to go into Africa to seize their oil as well, with more coal being burned on a global basis than ever before by a massive political-economical combine with obviously fascist tendencies and tight links to the London-New York financial system, it's going to be a struggle of epic proportions - but it must be done. The other choice is to sit on your back porch and watch the sun go down on humanity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

When in college many years ago there was a course offered in surmising the future of our society. I wrote a lengthy paper on renewable energy. Little of what I envisioned would come true. The times changed and the players changed and not all forces on this green earth pulled for the good. Some corporations did everything they could to tighten the strangle hold on the little guy and the little guy often failed at doing what's right.

Most of us will do the best we can and we'll all bungle along down that unknowable road into the future. It's the kids that have a tough time coming, I can crap out and die at anytime and still have had a full life. One that benefited from surpluses of our culture if even in a limited way. The greed that has marked our socitey will leave a debt to be paid.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Instead of focusing on what we will lose, we should look at our opportumities. Many aspects of our lives propped up by fossil fuels and cheap energy don't really serve us well. While there are things I will miss, primarily out of nostalgia and convenience, there is much I will be glad to see gone when this deck of cards comes tumbling down.

Our lives will once again have context and meaning. This can't be understated how much it will mean, especially for generations to come. Todays youth definitely suffer from this loss. Many of us go about our daily lives not directly experience who, what, and why we live, work, and die for. Most of our personal transactions have been reduced to impersonal, unintimate, almost anonymous moments. The system that we have come to depend on has been become so large and complex that virtually none of us can even begin to comprehend our place in it all and it has left us spiritually empty.

Physical health wise, we will be much better off. While there are many things that humanity has made that we will be dealing with for a long time to come (persistent chemicals, salinisation/erosion of the soil, deforestation, esertification, nuclear waste, etc) this place has an amazing capacity for renewal, we just need to start doing our part and helping it along. Eating organic, local foods in season, working more with our brain and brawn, and just having a much more manageable pace and scale of life will make many of the degenrative diseases we have come to know relics of our industrial past.

This whole Earth, this entire living process that accomodates and provides for us loves us unconditionally. Stars die releasing the constituent elements that make up the air we breathe. Every breathe we take, every moment we have is because of untold sacrifice. All it asks is to be loved in return, for the sacrifice that is made on our behalf to be observed, acknowledged, and reciprocated. All we have to do is listen and return the favor. It really is that easy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So where do we start? I support the "10 For 10 Solution" to American dependence on imported fossil fuel. This promotes reducing our use of imported oil by 10% per year for 10 consecutive years through increased use of energy conservation technology and alternate energy generation technology. Much of this goal is achievable by increasing the use of EXISTING off-the-shelf technology. The remainder will come from new technology that is under development. While it is true we lack the political will on the national level to support this goal, there is much we each can do individually, locally, and regionally to support it. ( Without trying very hard, I have reduced my electricity and natural gas use by about 40% in six years by weatherproofing and insulating my 180 year old house, and by installing new windows, switching to flourescent light bulbs, buying more energy efficient applicances, and nagging my housemates to be more conscious of turning off lights and electronics when not in use. By the way--isn't it time for someone to manufacture a residential scale co-generation unit so we all can generate electricity AND heat our houses with the same BTU's?) These local solutions to this global problem need not wait for political support. Most are cost effective now. To be sure, lifestyles will change as the cost of fossil fuel and global warming increase, but we are a clever people. We will adapt, thrive, and prosper. So, what will you do this year to reduce your use of imported fossil fuel by 10%?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Kunstler's recommendations, and virtually every comment assumes that the citizenry will be fine if WE will simply adjust our behavior appropriately. The problem is there is no WE and has not been for a long time -- William Greider's message in Who Will Tell the People, a must read still for anyone serious about creating a politically effective citizenry.

Without a WE, or even any real Left, it seems most likely that the paradigm shift indicated by Kuntzler will be managed entirely by THEM -- the very well organized Powers That Be. This transition will be facilitated by citizens passively continuing to do what we are individually doing until all systems are in place (FEMA as police force, the Patriot Act, Homeland Security and a packed Supreme Court as the backbone of a new Justic System, a hugher more ruthless prison system) to deal with our dis-organized discomfort when the rug is suddenly pulled out from under the lot of us (some Middle East incident sending gas prices to $10 or $15 a gallon overnight) and most people find ourselves pretty much on the streets and up for grabs.

In-the-works company towns like those already serving John Deer in the Midwest, built by U.S. and Asian manufacturers to which those of us who choose to do so can be transported one-way only in packed buses, to live in tiny apartments (no A-C) in condos a short mass-transit ride from our workplace -- assembly line plants with 11-15 hour a day shifts at maybe $8 per hour, providing prison-quality health care and no other benefits. Of course people can refuse this largess and take their chances confronting urban gangs or the most powerful police force in history, who will pretty much ignore the gangs.

This, I'm afraid, is a somewhat more realistic picture than Mr. Kuntzler paints -- unless citizens can finally become a WE. This means coalescing and boiling up leadership not presently invident among the candidates running for office in either (or any) political party.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This writer wants us to question everything but the military. In fact militarism is the most environmentally destructive element we face.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

All the changes we make now in preparation for peak oil are really moves in the direction of national security. We are slow learners in this regard, as witness this quote from 1936: “They say we have foreign oil. Well, how are we going to get it in case of war? It is in Venezuela, it is out in the east in Persia, and it is in Russia. Do you think that is much defense for your children?”

A prescient question in light of our current friction, 71 years later, with those very countries (Persia, is of course, Iran). The speaker was Francis Garvan, a former director of the Bureau of Investigation (predecessor of the FBI) and a leading proponent of bio-fuels and bio-based industrial raw materials---two thngs we will see a lot more of in the post-peak-oil future.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

GROWTH is the name of the game, and until people are willing to engage in a future that isn't based on more people acquiring more stuff without being called communists, we haven't a prayer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I was just wondering if it was cost effective in
the long run to refine petroleum waste products from
its usual sources and use them again? Is their a technology
in place already to achieve this short-term strategy while we
work on new ways to produce efficient, clean energy?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is the best article I've ever read on Alternet...None of the standard trivialities--just plain old concrete goals for a sustainable--and much more to be desired--future. This should be the platform for a presidential campaign.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We should also assist countries like China, India, Asia and Africa in the development of new energy sources that would be beneficial to them as well as to North America and Europe. We need to implement a global alternative energy strategy now. Kyoto is not good enough.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The modern world depends on oil and other natural resources for survival – and the most powerful countries travel the globe, searching for supplies. China, surpassed only by the US in oil-consumption levels, has blocked UN sanctions against the Sudan to secure oil shipments and is increasingly becoming friendly with Iran. When it come to oil, the US and China have policy differences, leading some experts to suggest that the two countries are on a “collision course.” More countries use oil to shape foreign policy: Latin America has become more anti-Western, and Venezuela could threaten to cut off oil exports to the US; as Georgia and the Ukraine favor European policies, Russia punishes its neighbors with higher oil prices; China and India cooperate on oil deals to prevent bidding contests from spiraling out of control. Oil and gas won’t become unaffordable overnight, but the era of cheap, abundant supplies is over – and countless corporations will find it more difficult to do business. The world, particularly the biggest guzzlers, must rely on human ingenuity and find alternatives to the “black gold.” – YaleGlobal

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Just wait til we hit Iran. We're looking ahead to $10 per gallon, completely and utterly un-doable. Everything will collapse fast. Barring some most unfortunate incident at the White House, or the more secretive healms of power and apocalypse, we're looking at Iran by April and all the unthinkable consequences. Put your seat belts on. It's the law.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Mr. Kunstler is leaving out one very important thing: the fact that over-population is the root cause of every problem facing our planet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Kunstler's article is very good, and I mostly agree, but I think a chunk or two of his general vision is wrong. First, he gives up on electricity--the 'no more reliable Internet' etc. stuff. I'm not convinced. Solar, wind, etc. power are going to grow, and the Internet will be cheap compared to transportation by electricity, etc. With cheap communication, a lot of the Mayberry image goes out the window.

Second, I fear that the Mayberry image understates the level of conflict that could easily develop. Even if the US acquiesces in sinking to the status of a second-class country overall, the spoiled upper class (especially the retired baby-boomers whose savings get wiped out) is not going to give up its goodies without a fight. Gangs will become as prevalent here as in Iraq. Kunstler hints that the population will decline, but not at the wave of disease from bodies in the streets, and the gun-toting USA will lead the world in internal slaughter.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Kunstler stresses how decentralized our society will become in post-peak-oil world. He is also pessimistic about how reliable electrical transmission will be. I wonder if he has considered the potential for securing much of that transmission through microgrids. Such grids can derive their power from LOCAL photovoltaic panels (mounted on homes, apartment buildings, factories, and office buildings); wind generators (cranking away in nearby farmers' fields); and/or small-scale hydroelectric dams (installed in local streams and rivers). The mix would obviously vary from place to place.

Such grids can be linked into larger power systems or operate independently. And they are here now, awaiting further development and deployment. See, for example, the following article in the current issue of "Sustainable Industries" magazine:

http://www.sijournal.com/energy/5527426.html

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As a banjo player I was happy to read that there may be work for me in the future. With the exception of overdependence on oil, however, one of the issues that I think supercedes many is overpopulation. The strain on resources and resulting pollution from too large and over-consuming a population cannot be alleviated until this its source is addressed.

I wish everyone could read this article and at least THINK about what each of us can do to lessen our dependence on oil.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Converting to a solar based society should be recognized and implemented without delay. The sun and wind are free energy to be used by all, use as much as you like, do solar access laws still apply? If you have expertise in areas of energy efficiency and sustainability, speak out, the world is waiting. Talk to friends, neighbors, complete strangers about what you have done personally to minimize your fossil fuel use and if prompted, offer quality advice to them. It is no stretch for each of us to reduce our CO2 emissions by half, I have done so myself (see above reply, "The time is now").

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Mother Earth News

I wish my parents had subscribed to this magazine through my childhood and teen years. It saddens me to think I could have been reading this magazine all my life yet only started recently.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This new 'reality' sounds more like the wet dream of the author.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Great article! It's about time someone started looking seriously at alternatives to this crazy addiction we (particularly we in the U.S.) have for fossil fuels. And by that, I don't mean just alternative fuels, but alternative lifestyles.

There's a relatively new vehicle being made in Germany called a TWIKE (that's an acronym, but I can't remember what it stands for - saying it brings to mind Elmer Fudd, though. It would probably sell better with a different name). It is a fully enclosed three-wheeled plug-in electric/pedal powered vehicle that will go 80+ miles on a charge and travel at speeds over 50 MPH. It has regenerative braking, so slowing down or stopping helps to charge the battery. It will recharge in about 2 hours.

With a solar array doing the recharging, this vehicle could be the answer for short to medium commutes without any demand on the current grid. It also comes without the pedals. At $26,000 (US), it's pricey, but I'm betting that as it catches on and production gets going, that should come down. Take a look at the website:

http://www.twike.us/

I'm betting that innovation will solve many of the transportation challenges we'll face, but not all. Still, vehicles like the TWIKE or similar human-powered vehicles will go a long way toward that end. And no, I don't have any fiscal interest in the TWIKE company or its distributors. I just think it's a fantastic idea whose time may have nearly come.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

http://www.permaculture.org.au/greening.htm

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

but at least he gets the main points across in an entertaining way. Worth 1,000 Al Gore's...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

nature can provide.

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Lightning_Power

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The trouble described above will be severe when it hits in the next few decades. Some people are predicting a mass "die-off" as oil isn't available to provide food to the concentrations of people in the cities.

But people seem to be uncritically accepting the notion that there won't be any more oil. This is far from certain. Plants make oil every day from carbon dioxide in the air, water, sunlight, and nutrients in the soil.

Some day (possibly within decades) we will have the technology for factories to duplicate this process far more efficiently. When this happens, oil may become as plentiful as it was from wells, and production of it won't be limited to specific geographic regions.

Oil is composed entirely of carbon and hydrogen. There's no shortage of carbon in the atmosphere (in fact it's increasing) and no shortage of hydrogen from water. As a byproduct of taking carbon from carbon dioxide and hydrogen from water, pure oxygen is produced, as in photosynthesis. (This process also reduces the carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, in the atmosphere.)

I remember back in the sixties, much of photosynthesis was a mystery to science. Then by the eighties, the details of the process had been completely worked out. I have no doubt that science will eventually work out how to make oil cheaply, on a scale that will make it plentiful again. Unfortunately, it doesn't appear it will happen soon enough to avoid a global cataclysm of biblical proportions.

We might stand a chance if the astronomical military budget was suddenly channeled into research on the plant biochemistry of oil production. With a Texas oilman in the White House, heavily funded by "defense" corporations, however, this won't happen. Voting Democratic won't do it either. Voting for the Green Party (www.gp.org) whenever possible will make solutions like this happen sooner. Who knows, enough Green victories may make it happen soon enough to avoid a total disaster!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bring back one hundred mile per gallon carburation for all internal combustion engines of any kind. Some decades ago, this actually existed. Like legal marijuana, it was ruthlessly suppressed. The glass is still half full, but I honestly don't think we're gonna make the grade.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alongside Kunstler, read J.H. Crawford on real plans to build carfree cities.

http://www.carfree.com/

He also oulines specific ways to convert existing cities to carfree status. I myself got my drivers licence in 1982, but have never owned a car. By happy coincidence, I always lived close to work or school and could rely 100% on public transit, bicycles and walking. About 10 years ago I relaised that this could also be by choice.

Again by chance, my wife does not drive and has no driver's licence. Therefore, our home will always be located in a neighbourhood servicable by walking. When children come, we will walk them to school, with pleasure!

Although we can afford a much larger home, our place is only 500 sqaure feet. Although when our second child comes we will likely need a bit bigger place, but will choose among the smallest of homes available in the market...again by choice.

What we do not place a limit on is friendship, community, time, health, and happiness.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...the days of the personal auto are over.

We'll have to rely on mass transit - or on our legs, or bicycles, to get from place to place.

Of course, mass transit will probably be unable to get us to a lot of places. No more summer vacations in the White Mountains hiking with my kids, in other words - unless someone proposes to criss-cross the mountains there with light rail lines. Not all distances are walkable/bikeable, after all - especially for younger legs.

And of course, my kids shouldn't expect to travel back to Russia to see their grandparents. Or to Europe, to see their other relatives. Or to see other things, like the Louvre, or Rome, or Africa. They should content themselves, apparently, with learning long division and how to compose a well-written English paragraph. Colleges and universities are unsustainable, in any case. No need to stretch young minds with inane learning - philosophy, physics, art or cultural history, sociology, world history, politics - especially if, for the most part, their career choices will be limited to "local" occupations having to do primarily with food production, retail, carpentry, etc.

What can I say? - Mr. Kunstler may indeed be right with his projections. Where he's dishonest, I think - or perhaps just oblivious - is in suggesting that this "adjustment" should give us, and our children, "hope" for the future. Unless I'm really missing something, the future he advocates represents more of a "hope" for some sort of physical survival for the human species rather than survival of the better aspects of human culture - i.e., "spiritual", "cultural" survival, as it were. Perhaps this doesn't strike him quite as forcefully as it does me - indeed, I don't get the feeling, somehow, that he, or those who applaud him, think there ARE all that many "better aspects" to the civilization we've developed over the past several thousand years.

As you might guess, not all of us relish, unreservedly, the thought of living in some new version of the Dark Ages, even if it means our progeny will survive as yeomen farmers or masons or shopkeepers. The Roman Empire may have been "unsustainable", but it nevertheless produced many beautiful things that are treasured and remembered to this day - unlike the Dark Ages, for the most part devoid of scientific, literary, artistic, or technologic achievement, remembered mostly for having evolved the social system of feudalism.

It's difficult for me not to sound bitter. I was fortunate when younger to see a good deal of the world - at that time I didn't appreciate how destructive air travel was to our environment - and I very much regret the thought that my children will apparently not, at least in Mr. Kunstler's vision, have the possibility of experiencing foreign cultures, speaking foreign languages, hiking and camping in strange exotic mountain ranges or savannahs, or gazing at beautiful paintings or ancient churches. I regret the thought that they'll be far more constrained in terms of where they might live, and what sort of employment they might choose. I'm afraid these "adjustments" will inevitably cause them to become more close-minded, less appreciative and understanding of the beauty and variety of human existence, and less visionary as to the future of their own children.

Again, maybe I'm misinterpreting Mr. Kunstler's vision. But there does seem to be a lot of emphasis on giving up things - not just material comforts, but also other things like education, travel, urban life, higher standards of medical care, and many aspects of higher art and culture that strike me as among the finer achievements of our civilization.

I understand now why so many environmentally conscious folks don't have kids. Indeed, I'm starting to wish I hadn't had any myself.....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We need entire, broad-seeping lifestyle shifts in the West, especially in America...everything needs to be geared toward the local as this author writes, for sure. All you busybody city-dwellers are in for some BIG changes.

Who says that humans MUST work 40-60 hours per week, driving/commute hundreds of miles per week back-and-forth to and from work, school, stores, etc.? Who says that we must run around like a bunch of chickens with our heads cut off in order to be "happy" and "fulfilled"? Why must be always "stay busy"? The "busybody syndrome" must come to an end -- semi-laziness to save the world! Neurasthenia as the result of all this busybodiness is not only trashing our minds and bodies, but the world as well!

People are just going to have to start sticking around their houses and neighborhoods more; we could easily slash the work and school week -- extend the weekend by a day and have shorter work weeks, maybe 20 to 25 hours or less.

These means that America would adopt the classical Italian lifestyle, or the old lifestyle in the American South -- slow livin' would certainly save us A LOT of energy and prevent A LOT of pollution. We all just sit around more, have more 'organic fun and leisure' -- local concerts/music, reading, dances, clubs, etc. Move families from the cold Northern latitues further South where less energy must be used throughout the year to heat homes/businesses; build porches and wind ventilated buildings so that people can sit outside during the Summer in the shade rather than having everyone cooped up indoors in the Summer with the millions of A/C units vampirizing our energy needs, straining the system and causing blackouts. Remove the constant stream of cars from our roads to reduce air pollution -- we can all do this by just hanging around the house/neighborhood much more often!

Massively minimizing needs -- driving less and working less, focusing on the local much more. More leisure time for everyone, easy and clean slow livin' like back in Andy Griffith's Mayberry! This is how to partially solve the energy crisis!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Buy guns, and a ton of ammo. If this collapse is like you say it is going to be, all hell will break lose.

We saw how well the (poor) people (that were to stupid to leave, or to stupid to be able to leave) of New Orleans worked together to overcome that situation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A very thought provoking article and generating some good responses from everyone. You have to keep in mind that this is only one person's spin on what the future holds, though I would agree with many of his points.

I think the important thing to get a hold of is that everything you can think of is going to change in some way or another, but ultimately it will result in a saner, slower and more humane and sustainable culture.

I spend more time than I should these days pondering on what life in the future will be like for those on this continent. Decentralization is a given, and the author's points on creating local economies and communities and the connectedness and context it will provide are all good things. Another great thing, from my perspective, is the resurrection of many old time skills and long forgotten knowledge on self reliance and doing and making things from what is available locally. It has always amazed me that we have a system that produces and ships things from hundreds and thousands of miles away, when they could be made locally, with all the benefits that entails. Here in southcentral Alaska, for instance, we have forests for paper and lumber, rich fertile soils for growing food, abundant energy resources, etc., but yet we import most of what we consume from the Lower 48 states and beyond. The only thing preventing us from making that shift is the lack of will and complacency. But when gas hits $10 a gallon and your SUV or giant pickups are abandoned and rusting in your yard just like the old homesteads, things will be much different.

Maybe a return to some of the old ways is not so bad? Maybe when all is said and done, the technological blitz of the last 150 years is just an anomaly. Maybe our great grandchildren will be raising, riding and working the land with horses.

It's going to be tough going, but I'm looking forward to the future and the end of this corrupt and stupid system. In the meantime, I'm doing everything I can to instill self reliance and optimism in my children. It's going to be a better world for everyone, a new resurgence that will demand of us to be the very best we can in so many ways. The message in this article is not one of gloom or despair, it is one of hope.

Time to get a lifetime subscription to Mother Earth News and get busy planning your new life!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There is no way out of this mess, deep down you know it. There is no way we are going to get the baby boomers on board for a radicly different way of life. Have you ever tried to talk about global warming or peak oil with one of them? I have tried everything to open their eyes and you know what? They don't want to open them. Boomers are already killing the youth in Iraq because of terrorism. Even though we all know there was no connection. Hey, if your not one of these boomers, I'm sorry for the stero type, but cmon, you do make up the majoriy of voters and you will for a long time to come (given we have more years to come), and you voted for Bush twice! I think the focus should be on every youth talking to their boomer parents or grandparents until someone figures out how to get through to them. I have done everthing and have yet to change their minds.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

First of all, I suspect we will switch to nukes. So while the day of reckoning is coming (we'll run out of uranium too), it may not be as close as Mr. Kunstler thinks. Not that I don't hate the suburbs too, but...anyway.

Second, I'm wondering: you know, organic chemistry is a lot about synthesizing medicines, and where do you think they get the carbon chains for all those weird chemicals? Yup, oil. I think we'd see an upsurge in herbals as we run out of the raw materials for our drugs. This is going to be a big problem with some totally synthetic drugs, and I wonder how they're going to dose some of these blood pressure pills, where you really don't want to give too much.

Third, I think radiology is going to tank, at least the more energy-intensive modalities like MRI. But you might see a return to older studies like barium swallows and regular chest X-rays.

Fourth, doctors will of course have a lower standard of living (materially anyway) but then again everybody will. Relative to the rest of society, I'm not so sure it will fall: the profession carried prestige back in the Middle Ages when it was worse than useless.

Fifth, we do have some extra knowledge (and Kunstler mentions this in his book). We know bacteria and not evil spirits cause illness, so if we can still distill alcohol, we can disinfect wounds, etc. But we might have a harder time running the autoclave that sterilizes surgical instruments (it scalds them with pressurized water at hundreds of degrees). Also, if we can't make synthetic drugs, we're going to lose a lot of our antibiotics; the pneumonia bacteria (Strep pneumo and Co.) are now resistant to penicillin.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

From the very beginning, the 9/11 truth movement has been infiltrated by "Peak Oil" ideologists (or disinformers).

They argue that the false-flag attack of 9/11 and the subsequent wars in Afghanisthan, Iraq, and possibly the upcoming one in Iran, are the natural consequences of a world running out of oil.

"Peak Oilers" do not offer any hope in alternative energy sources, for as Michael Ruppert claims in "From the Wilderness": "there is no effective replacement for what hydrocarbon energy provides today."

Instead, they paint bleak doomsday scenarios of the future, like when Colin Campbell writes that the consequences of oil depletion will be: starvation, economic recession, possibly even the extinction of homo sapiens."

The implication, of course, is that if we, the West, want to survive, we need to secure Middle East oil-reserves for ourselves. Otherwise, China or India will get them.

It´s either us or they who will starve.

But once again we have fallen for a "Big Lie".

We neither need to secure any middle-Eastern oil reserves for our survival, nor is the world actually running out of oil.

Full Article:

http://www.iraq-war.ru/article/1176991

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

1. Get rid of the HEMP ban and ABOLISH THE DEA. HEMP is NOT a bad biofuel and does not deserve to be confused with bad ones such as corn and soy.

2. Divert the current over-subsidization of OIL/COAL/NUCLEAR to alternative renewables such as solar, wind, hemp, etc ...

3. Instead of making people feel guilty about themselves alone, reward them for participating in conservation efforts and keep the incentives going. Currently there are very few rewards for conserving and while I detest the cons for rewarding wasting in our society, the liberals are no better by turning a blind eye to price gouging when instead they could fight against it for those who actually conserve. You liberals should stop playing the Strict Father Morality game against the people you claim to support and show respect for the hard work they put forth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Anyone who cares to recall William Randolph Hearst and how he and DuPont along with the vested interests joined forces to BAN HEMP, DEFUND solar and wind and stifle their growth, and FORCE America to be completely dependent on petroleum would realize that for much of this article, the author is COMPLETELY MISINFORMED about the longterm history of this crisis in development. Sorry to be harsh but truth needs to be told.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hemp
Coverups uncovered

http://members.iimetro.com.au/~hubbca/hemp.htm

The building of early American colonies as well as the American Revolution would not have been possible if it were not for a very special plant.

The Cannabis / Hemp plant was used throughout the world since the beginning of time for just about everything that mankind needed. Paper made from hemp was used for books, bibles, maps, and money. You can produce 4 times as much paper from an acre of hemp as you can from an acre of trees at 1/4 the cost, 1/5 the pollution, it is 10 times stronger and lasts up to 1000 years instead of only 50. And it can be recycled 4 times as many times as paper from wood pulp.

The Constitution was printed on hemp paper as well as the first 3 drafts of the Declaration of Independence. Even great sailing ships like the U.S.S. Constitution were made primarily out of hemp.

Hemp is the STRONGEST natural fiber on the planet. Hemp is 26 times stronger than cotton and 10 times longer lasting. The first Levi jeans were made out of hemp as well as all of the soldier's clothes for the Revolutionary War. It requires no chemicals to grow, has very few natural enemies, and grows in the widest variety of climates of any weed or plant. It is also the FASTEST GROWING plant on the planet, growing 4 times faster than corn. The seeds from the hemp plant provide the highest source of complete vegetable protein of any food source on earth. Even higher than soybeans. It has also been re-realized lately that the hemp seed is the highest source of Essential Fatty Acids in the world. ESSENTIAL, meaning :NECESSARY FOR LIFE, Fatty Acids are necessary for us and beneficial for cleaning the cholesterol out of the arteries naturally. All oils in the supermarket are bad since they are placed in clear plastic containers and exposed to direct sunlight. They become as bad as saturated fats, and end up CAUSING cholesterol buildup, leading to heart attacks, etc. Hemp seed oil can even be used as a machine-grade lubricant for engines and other machines replacing petroleum oil from the ground.

Henry Ford built his Ford Model-T using hemp to line the side panels. The impact strength was 10 times stronger than steel alone. This would eliminate many vehicular deaths today. The Model-T was also designed to run on hemp fuel which Henry Ford grew. This was displayed in Popular Mechanics in Feb. of 1938. Concentrated extracts of Cannabis from the flowers were the 2nd most used medicines in America for 150 years for over 100 separate medical illnesses. It is probably the best natural medicine for Glaucoma, stress, and controlling nausea, and works very well for arthritis , asthma, and epilepsy. It is estimated that Hemp would have at least 50,000 commercial uses if it were legal in America today.

The reason that Hemp is illegal in America today is because the main families in America (Masons), the Harrimans and Rockefellers (Standard Oil), the Whitneys (Eli Whitney-Cotton Gin), Dupont (Chemicals in wood pulp processing and cotton pesticides), and Hearst (Newspapers, Media) find it more profitable to sell us unnecessary chemicals, unneeded dug-up petroleum oil, immune system destroying pharmaceuticals, and axed up trees cut into real thin slices, all at over-inflated prices and at the expense of our health and living environment. For these companies, the real problem is that one cannot patent a natural plant. Almost everything produced in America by large corporations is exported for sale on the world markets. The total value of oil, petrochemicals, and pharmaceutical sales totals hundreds of billions of dollars. However, with the availability of over 50,000 new products and the necessity to manufacture them, America would be a much richer nation if the farmers and the average citizen were allowed to grow this valuable crop.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Any vision of the future that doesn't include a move to vegan diets is totally off mark. It consumes so much of our fossil fuels and contributes so much to pollution. This author, just like Al Gore, doesn't get it.

There is no such thing as a meat eating environmentalist!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The editor's opening remarks note that Mr. Kunstler "is a leading writer on the topic of peak oil," but fail to mention that Mr. Kunstler is categorically NOT a leading (or even trailing) expert on 'peak oil'. More to the point, the editor fails to note that Mr. Kunstler lives in the terminally-confining world of post-peak imagination, where his impoverished understanding compels prescriptive Khmer Rouge-like 'back-to-zero' solutions worthy of a modern-day neo-urbanist Pol Pot. In short, Mr. Kunstler is a text-book case of nihilistic pseudo-intellectual self-indulgence.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This sounds more like a nuclear holocaust then the end of oil.

I don't think our society is going to be undone. We will just learn to do the same things smarter when it becomes cost prohibitive.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Webster Tarpley

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Between solar panels and an electric car, I'll be just fine, thank you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

More likely, American's will find news more efficient energy sources. You know the stuff which is little more than science fiction today.

It would have been money well spent, if we had invested in our advanced energy needs, instead of the Iraq/Afganistan Wars. One or two trillion dollars probably would have made the USA the first type I society on this type Zero planet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Get ready folks! Get your space suits on and get your triangles ready!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Here is a great way to start weening ourselves from fossil fuels.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This empire falls, melodramatic crap is getting really annoying. So, basically what your advocating for is an American version of the Cultural Revolution?

Look, just because entertainment is "canned" doesn't mean its bad. And you won't find many people who want to swap cinema for banjo playing. This sounds a dry rehash of misguided 60s idealism.

In any case, we aren't going to run out of oil in the coming decades. When will it run out? Well, it will probably get severly depleted by the end of the century, but by then alternatives will exist.

Young American's should not waste their time learning how to farm and cobble shoes. If we want to save the world we should devote more of our attention to science.

There's no doubt in my mind that big, greedy corporations have screwed us over, and literally created a huge, dark cloud that comprimises our future, but a return to "the simple life" will not solve anything.

Technology is here to stay. We need to assert ourselves, and win back control from these conglomerates, but not by dismantling our society. This hippie, Peace & Love bullshit didn't work the first time and it won't work now. Not because the people involved didn't have their hearts in the right place, but it doesn't fit with human nature.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm all for commentators like Kunstler providing solutions, and not just the doomsday scenario. However, I think it would be improper to say that he has done so in this article. Instead, for each point, he has merely restated the problem, with some version of, "that's the way it's going to be, get used to it."
"Your cars are going away, get used to it", is not a solution.
I was going to address each of the 10 points individually, but most seem to be predicated on the assumption that personal trasportaion is doomed to extinction. In other words, no fossil fuels, no cars, trucks, planes....
So, for point #1, what's wrong with this solution http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/article_alge.html
I know you have to read a bit, but the gist of the research is that under ideal growing conditions it would take 15,000 square miles to grow all the bio-fuel currently used for transportation in the USA.
There, I've thrown down the gauntlet. I seriously believe it is much more likely that we will arrive at new solutions to extend our dependancy on personal transportation before we break our addiction to it. The way of life in "the West" is still that of the future. Our execution of that dream is unsustainable at this juncture, but the changes neede to make it sustainable will be made.
What am I missing?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

1. Expand your view beyond the question of how we will run all the cars by means other than gasoline.

Swell. Most of those "greens" he denigrates through his overarching presumptions (which prove false when you actually "talk" to people instead of judging them from your suburban cave), actually know this but know their audience. You can make everyone go cold turkey but look at smokers, some frankly need the damned patch. That's what all this talk about veggie oil and stuff is, a Patch and Greens know that. Kunstler has a really nauseating fundamentalist bent to him.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

2. We have to produce food differently.

Duh. I can say that with my iPod plugged into my ears as well as with it turned off. Again, Kunstler's little jabs at the very people who will be bathing his old shrivelled arse in the post-oil era are self-defeating and obnoxious. He needs to drop the Boomer-tude meme that everyone under 50 is lazy and too tech-addled. We don't need any more ageist Luddites, we need people to speak clearly without all the judgment.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

While the views are interesting, and I agree in principle with many of the idea represented, the idea that there will be some sort of return to agrarian society due to loss of one fuel source strikes me as a bit short sighted at best. All the time researchers come up with newer better ways to do things with newer better fuel sources. the only thing stopping any ideas from market supremacy is an abundance of cheap oil. As oil becomes more scarce (and hence more expensive) I have no doubt other fuel sources and other technologies will have no problems filling the gaps, because the technology already exists to do so.
Two primary barriers need to be reached (in my opinion) to make a swap from oil possible: 1. Oil needs to become prohibitively expensive, 2. The difference in cost between oil and the alternative needs to be great enough to overcome the inherent fear of, "trying something new"
Sociologically, I wonder where the motivation comes from to decentralize, as the author says will become necesarry. Sure, not having oil will change things, but with so many power sources readily available, there is no reason to believe it's loss will have any significant impact on the way our siciety is set-up. While I believe changes in society will be beneficial (particularly decentralization) don't depend on loss of oil to do the job for you, you'll have to convince people to want to, because at this point there won't ever be a need to. (barring some major global catastrophe wiping out the majority of the population and infrastructure.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What struck me about this article is the complete lack of actual solutions presented. I laughed at the internet entertainment tripe especially. Why is it that non-artists always have artists so figured out? As a writer, I am counting on that sketchy electricity my PV panels (that aren't supposed to work so don't even consider them in any solutions... because there are no solutions, we're all gonna dier!) to power whatever 'Net is around from time to time. See, unlike the Kunstlers of the world artists find ways to make art and communicate with other artists all over the world, even if travel is dangerous and difficult. And unlike the Kunstlers of the world, most of us artists who harness technology also were trained on the acoustic-pre-analog base from which our arts have sprung. Just because someone makes art using tech today doesn't imply they couldn't do the analog version of it. But see, Kunstler will poopooh any acoustic art when it emerges from gaps in tech infrastructure because he's all about being the judge & executioner not about solutionizing and cooperating with other people (who might have better ideas).

All ten items are nothing more than summaries of what he's already said ad-nauseum a doezen times over, except that now he's added ageist Boomer-tude epithets against the young in every single "item." This confirms my view that Kunstler is good at raising hackles but not so good at imagining a future that is workable under the conditions he's prognosticating. That's unsurprising as few prognosticators of doom have the imaginative depth required to survive the results of their declarations. No matter what imaginative folks come up with guys like James will always poopooh it. And with James they'll get an insult about their age, youth or tech savvy for their trouble. Meanwhile real young people (and the few Boomers who dropped the 'tude already) who ARE learning how to: permaculture farm, construct Green buildings from on-site local materials (that they ironically learned in those terrible "narcissistic grad schools), make new engines for transport, harness new fuels and technologies, sailing oceans with safer, more efficient boats than refubred old iron tubs, learning backcountry surgery, non-violent self-defense, etc. will be actually forging the survival of whomever doesn't die-off first.

I'm looking forward to walking my old boney ass to whereever JHK lives in 2050 to witness how many young people are taking care of his useless soul.

You've presented some real good "solutions," James, offer nothing imaginative or practical and while you do that, be sure to alienate the hands that will someday save your old shriveled arse.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The thrust of this article to to prepare oneself for life after oil. Yes, there may always be some oil, but as this resource becomes scarce, the masses can't afford it. Most all of us are in a state of denial when it comes to a sustainable society, life as we know it is not sustainable, take away the oil and all hell breaks loose. We cannot move quickly away from oil or natural gas or coal for electricity, but we can conserve what is left, reducing CO2 emissions in the process. Time for each of us to do our part and put on our thinking caps to create efficient new technologies, this is the opportunity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It seems that some people responding to this article have missed the entire point. It's not that the author is attempting to force people back to the dark ages. He's just the messenger. Perhaps his solution is not the one others would like to invision, and if not, it might be a good idea to begin thinking of alternatives.

A lot of the posts seem to be protesting far too much. The vehemence is unnecessary and counterproductive. If it's true that most people are not interested in rural lifestyles or sacrificing their ability to travel and be entertained, it would behoove them to begin taking immediate steps to ensure that this civilization can be saved.

I do live a rural lifestyle in many ways, but I have to travel 18 miles to work every day. There is no reason in the world that, as a programmer, I could not work at home. But the school system I work for does not give me that option. A very good solution that the author has not touched upon is allowing people to work from home. But his not mentioning that does not make me angry.

I grow all my own vegetables except for a very few that I can't keep fresh in the winter. (I'm working on that - my next project is a cold frame for growing lettuce in the cold months.) I get my eggs from a local friend. My house is insulated with 6 inches of fiberglass (from before this was recognized as environmentally damaging) and another kind of thin insulation. I use no chemicals on my gardens. I make my own pickles and relish. If millions of other people did this, it would make a difference. It would not, I realize, solve all the problems, but it's a start. It surely saves on the fuel used to store and ship strawberries, for example, from California to West Virginia.

It is not necessary to live in the country to have a garden. The friend who inspired me to grow my own lives in the city with a small backyard, and her yield is amazing. She can't grow everything, but she makes a huge dent in her food bills.

Getting all angry and defensive about someone's suggestions on how to survive a fuel shortage seems childish. Other ideas, in fact all ideas, should be welcome. The negative responses to this article simply illustrate how unable many people are to work together toward solutions.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Okay, I don't have to be convinced that this country needs a functioning public transportation system: rail. BUT, what do we have to do to convince our government to support it? Why are we building more roads that will just be more crowded? 40 years ago we heard that we needed to have an alternative energy system and public transportation. So much for progress in this country. It's hard to get enthusiastic about alternatives when it's very apparent that our nation only responds to a crisis.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I haven't yet finished reading all the comments but one thought looms over me. If indeed Kunstler's predictions come to be, there seems a rather fanciful assumption that most people will want to work together with each other to meet basic needs on a local level, etc.
Maybe I am too much of a pessimist, but I suspect one of the main problems will be massive conflict - both political, military and economic that will totally eclipse the Iraq war. Countries fighting each other over the dwindling supply of fossil fuels, food and water will become the primary concern. Youth will no doubt be drafted for these wars - not much time for the farm here.
For those of us too old to fight - we will probably have to worry about a significant number of criminal types, whose solution to the collapsed economy from lack of fossil fuels will be to just steal from those who still have something left. I know this goes on already - but if the cops don't have gas, hmmm. Besides, when millions of people are unemployed and no means of getting work or money, there could be trouble.
Perhaps learning to protect yourself might top the list in making a good plan for the future. As for myself, I don't think I will bother, too old to learn weaponry - I would rather just hide under my ipod earplugs until they come to steal it and try to avoid thinking about what a nightmare it will all be if Kunstler's grim predictions come to pass.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Several things that I have done to gradually to survive on a rather limited income.
1). I live and work in the same community, linked by public transportation. 10 years ago, when my old toyota needed $800 to fix, I got rid of it. I took the bus to work every day. On weekends, when I wanted to travel on mini-vacations, I would rent a compact car (brand new) for $25 day plus insurance of another $25 a day. By this method, I saved thousands of dollars every year.... like getting a pay raise!

2). Vons in Southern California now delivers your grocery order for about $10. Sign up and place your order on line at www.vons.com. They give you all the discounts that you can get with the Vons card when you walk in. Even with the delivery charge, it beats the local liquor-store grocery store which is close by but very expensive.

3. Time-savings: My two tvs gradually broke down, became inoperative. Not a great fan of tv anyway, I have not replaced them, saving money and time. I now focus my valuable time on other pleasures and tasks. The new high tech expensive flat tvs, and luxury priced cable tv, always advertise all the sports programming as a big deal. But I never really liked sports that much, so what else is there? Not much but cable still has lots of advertising, which I can't stand.

The bottom line: you don't listen to the sheep that say that you "NEED" much of the advertised crap. Especially avoid buying anything on credit cards! That is the ultimate goal - to keep you in credit-card slavery for the rest of your life!!

I do use the internet a lot for finding out all sorts of things, finding affinty groups and people. About the only source of news that is not pure propaganda.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I think Kunstler is deliberately overstating the problem and the severity of the solutions, much as a marketer will overprice his goods in order to bargain down to what he really wants to charge. One example: "The big universities, both public and private, may not be salvageable." This is plainly nonsense. Big Universities pre-date modern technology and its petroleum base, and need not be abandoned in a search for earth-friendly means of travel and production. It won't be necessary to regress to what we had or could do before the Industrial Revolution. There are more efficient ways to achieve much of what we've already done; old ways aren't the only solution. The genius of humanity is that under duress we can discover new ways of doing things. The answer doesn't reside in abandoning everything that's brought us to where we are now; more is salvageable than Kunstler pretends.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The true motoring society that evolved into our modern society only occoured after the Second World War with the explosion of growth after the US victory. Based on the premises given in this essay these are my thoughts.

What will happen will be an increased dependence on more "mass transit" cargo and people movement. Trains, Planes, and barges may move more cargo to local areas. I don't think we will see much of an end of the retail environment as we know it. We will probably see an expansion of dependence on mass transit to move people to work areas. Cities which have planed for this with new programs such as light rail and other mas transit systems will be the ones who can sustain their suburban areas. Cargo movement by train will necessatate the need to rebuil the ailing rail infrastructure in this country. We were a rail economy before and we will be again. Transportation will look for the alternatives and look for the cheapest ones. Economics, rathar then incentive will determine this as in most business models. What will happen will depend on how drastic the economic change is. Like most things, we only change when drastic things are forced upon us and this is most likely how it will be.

Education might end up becoming more dispersed. We would see the education system become more internet based, with primary education being conducted at home via internet correspondence. Parents are going to have to become more responsible for the education of their child. The trend is towards more parental responsability in the education of their children. Too many special interests are vying for the control of our education system. This conflict between liberal and conservative ideologies will eventually lead to the breakdown of the education system as we know it.

The internet has revolutionized how entertainment is distributed in this country. Most people have entertainment systems that were undreamed of in the past. I don't these will dissapear. Unless there is some severe economic disruption, this trend probably would not change. The local theatre is going the way of the Dodo. People can rent the movie and the vast majority of motion picture sales are from DVD's and not the release in the theatre. DVD's and the Internet will be primarially how entertainment is distributed.

Agriculture will probably remain much the same but be more labor intensive as we need more peole where petrolum based pesticides are phased out. Agribusiness will be searching for alternatives to those. Ethanol and Bio-diesel will be the primary fuels for agribusiness as well as for the economy. We will be dedicating more and more areas for agriculture as we turn more and more to biofuels. A breaking point will be reached when the conflict between providing food and fuel surfaces. Once we reach a point where biofuels are sucking food from our economy we will then start switching to the "Mass Transit" economy out of necessity rather than incentive. The need for labor will start to have an effect on the agribusiness areas, as more migrant labor will be needed to support the biofuel industry and the more localized agribusiness economy. The influx of imigrants will lead to soical conflict as these people move into the midwest.

Unforunately for the environmental movement, Hydroelectric, Coal and Nuclear will be the power generation systems. As oil and Natural Gas become more espensive, these plants will be converted to run on Coal or decommissioned. We may end up with a lot of garbage burning plants. What they put in the environment is unknown. God only knows what goes into lots of peoples trash.

There's my two cents.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I highly recommend reading “Infinity’s Rainbow: The Politics of Energy, Climate and Globalization,” by Michael P. Byron. This book explains the problems that we now face of peak oil, globalization, global warming, extreme weather, fascism, and religious fundamentalism. Byron explains that all of these issues are actually connected to each other. This book is a real eye-opener.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]