<Trying to stay afloat in deepwater The Oil Drum Gentle Folk, allow me to introduce . . . .>

23 comments on Sen Clinton's speech to the CleanTech Venture Forum

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version

Twilight on October 26, 2005 - 3:21pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
There are no solutions to the problem that do not involve fundamental changes to our way of life - essentially requiring big sacrifices.  The public has been kept in the dark about the whole issue (intentionally, I think), although many people in positions of power are obviously aware of it.  We've gone so far down the wrong road, that to suddenly announce that we've made a big mistake and everyone is going to have to pay for it is just too much to ask from politicians.  Perhaps the most disgusting thing about politicians is that they are mostly a reflection of ourselves.  

Our entire nation was built with cheap and abundant resources, from wood to coal to oil and NG.  Our way of life depends on it - this is what I believe Cheney meant when he said "The American way of life is not negotiable."   Thus we have decided to use all our wealth power to control as much of the remaining petroleum sources as we can.  I'm trying to imagine an alternate scenario where we mobilize our nation to create a new energy infrastructure that is more sustainable.  We all sacrifice for the good of the nation - it becomes our national mission.  There are incentives to train more Engineers and Scientists, funding for research, etc.  We forgo tax cuts, prevent corporations from incorporating on Caribbean islands to escape their tax responsibilities.  We rebuild the rail systems and develop agricultural practices that do not require so much oil & NG of transportation.

Nah - that would be too much work.  It would take leadership and a population convinced that such a goal is needed and worthwhile and attainable.  The latter requires that we answer some of the very questions that people on this site are wrestling with - how long do we have?  It seems like it is much easier to put a gun to the head of those that have the oil and take it - although in the end it will fail.  Rather than act, we can blame someone - either the oil companies, or the environmentalist who won't let us build refineries, or the foreigners who want to take that oil that is ours by birthright, or whoever.  And if it's too late, then those who can will just take as much as they can before the party's over, and hope that insulates them from the impacts.  

Taken as a group, we get the government we deserve, and they're out there telling us just what we want to hear.  Everything's fine, it's not your fault, go shopping (here's some money, you can pay it back later).  I have this idea that there was once an idea of a common good in this country, but I wonder now if it was just another national myth.  We won't have a responsible government until we have responsible populace that demands it.  There is no point in looking there for answers until then.  

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
step back on October 26, 2005 - 4:03pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Taken as a group, we get the government we deserve, and they're out there telling us just what we want to hear.  Everything's fine, it's not your fault, go shopping (here's some money, you can pay it back later).

I disagree with the concept of blaming the victims (us) by saying, "Well there you go again, heh heh, you deserved it, you had it coming."

Each of us was born into it.
We didn't ask for it.
We were born.
There it was. The infrastructure was already in place.

You can spend your whole life being a child and "blaming" someone, like your parents or yourself.

Alternatively, you can accept the cards that were dealt to you and do the best you can with that hand of cards. You are not going to get another one.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Twilight on October 26, 2005 - 6:14pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
That is why I said "as a group".  Individually, we may act differently.  Those who frequent a site such as this are likely more open to alternate ideas.  But as a society we crucify any politician who tells us the hard truth, no matter how obvious.  We cannot now expect the politicians selected out by this system to now turn around and do otherwise.  That cannot happen until large portions of the voters are ready to hear it - and THAT will probably take a bunch misery to occur.

And I'm not advocating wringing my hands and blaming myself or others at all - I'm trying to figure out how best to prepare.  I just wouldn't be surprised at the public policy approaches that emerge, or expect much real help from that quarter.  They're pretty predictable.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
step back on October 26, 2005 - 7:10pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
What if teachers in schools started teaching kids about
PEAK WOOD
http://anthropik.com/2005/10/peak-wood/

It would be a first step in getting the voting public to come to grips with Peak Oil

(First Graders do bring their homework home !!!)

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
JRS23 on October 26, 2005 - 9:33pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I think this would be a great idea. However too many parents would complain about the brainwashing and liberal propaganda taught in the public schools. First grade wouldn't be a good level to teach it either. As soon the children come home and talk about peak oil their parents will "fix" their beliefs and any benefit would be lost.

I think peak oil should be tied in with studies done on bacteria cultures in petri dishes with substrate. The bacteria with double until about the 7th generation when almost all the substrate has been consumed. The bacteria are oblivious to the pending doom and it is too late. There is a major die off; if not total extinction of the culture.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Gloomy on October 27, 2005 - 2:46pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
That would be a real precedent.

Every education system keeps deep silence or at most mentions reluctantly about the various ecological disasters caused by humans in the course of history.

On one side the child is taught that human activity (e.g. economy) is "good" and the child sees that it is good by getting to know the plenty of wonderful civilization advances. How do you effectively explain the same child that the same human activity can actually be bad? Can being fed and warm be bad?

Well there are those ecological courses at school but they look more like the rituals we played in the distant past to mercify gods - hug a tree, show some concern about the environment and then go on the way you did before.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
tom deplume on October 27, 2005 - 3:20pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I think teaching kids that every choice involves trade-offs from the start would teach them to ask better questions instead of accepting rote answers about life.  
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Stuart Staniford on October 28, 2005 - 1:43am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I have to defend the honor of my middle school Environmental Studies teacher (this is back in the late 70s). I can still very vividly recall the class where he went over the pond and the lilypad, and the connection to human population growth. Can't remember his name or anything else we studied in that class, but I remember that part. I think he even told us it was something we were going to have to deal with in our lifetimes. So at least some teachers have been doing their job, and I personally have no excuse of not having been warned of the potential hazards of exponential growth in a finite system.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.

23 comments on Sen Clinton's speech to the CleanTech Venture Forum

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version