Considering how many ppl think they can do a Sean Connery well, may I remind everyone that England is not an independent country? It has some appendages called Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland remember??? It's Britain or the UK gottit???!!!

1 The rate payers have to get screwed (or, to express this another way, they have to begin paying a slightly larger portion of the true worth of what is both a truly valuable commodity and also a poison, doing substantial harm to the planet), or they simply won't conserve. Only the hidden hand, or boot, has the power to coax/shove people into using less of something than they have become accustomed/addicted to.

(to other posts)
2 There will not be a US ng shortage for several years. The hidden hand is already booting the chemical industry, or that bit that makes feedstocks from ng, overseas to where ng is cheaper, taking jobs and tax base with them. High prices are also persuading most, certainly including the poor but also much of the middle class, to reduce consumption. Current stocks in storage do not justify today's high prices, and traders doing the math are accordingly taking prices down. However, in 2015, when US ng production may fall off a cliff, we will hopefully have elbowed our way to the front for ng imports (we expect and deserve the lion's share), or have built sufficient coal (ugh) or nuke power plants such that electrons will continue to obey our commands. The difference between Britain and the US is that Britain is facing this question in 2005, with zero lead time. We have a great seat to watch what will be our own preview if we squander tne next decade as we have the past three.

3 Carter was prescient on energy, which he saw as his great test - most presidents have a couple. BUt, he failed to seize the nettle and cut off Iran's oil exports in response to the hostage crisis, which would have caused a brief spike in oil but would have quickly brought the hostages home. Judged a failure in what the US public thought the greater crisis, he was cast aside. The Iranian nettle is back - we will soon see if Sharon repeats Israel's past efforts at vetoing nuclear weapons from competitors.

4 Are people aware that, early in Clinton's administration, when Democrats had a majority in at least one house, a carbon tax was proposed, but that environmentalists did not support it because it seemed to favor nukes? Naturally, with no major group behind it, the CO2 supporters had easy work. It has always been true that people are either pro-coal/anti-nuke or anti-coal/pro-nuke. This will become more apparent as we go forward (or backward) into the future.

5 McMansions are mostly new, and many are extremely well insulated, using the latest materials and techniques. They might not use much more than that consumed by smaller, older homes. The main thing is that the poor and middle class luckily far outnumber the rich, so as a proportion of gdp the latter don't matter much.

Happy holidays.

Nobody is getting screwed. Gas is still a relatively new issue. We've used it for years, but we also flared this stuff off for years and CONTINUE to do so in parts of the world, on a MAJOR basis. The flaring will be eventually come to an end as the commodity becomes more precious, and as we smarten up as a race. But for now we still haven't completely come to grips with gas. It's ok, there's no shame in being confused. Yet. 2006 will be the year of people flaking out about gas.

Someone told me Economides predicted $20 by X-mas. We can put that in the wrong column, Agric. But I didn't here him say it, maybe someone can verify.

Put me down for $20 by next Christmas, though. And It would be interesting to see how many people, at least on The Oil Drum, would bet against that outcome.