30 comments on UK Energy Gap
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
30 comments on UK Energy Gap
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
User login
Personnel
Editors
Contributors
Peak Oil Primers
Archives
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
Vital Trivia
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
GAIA Host Collective
I think the choices the UK faces in relation to energy production are "interesting" to say the least! Gas seems to be an even bigger problem than oil. I know some of my freinds are facing massive increased gas/electricity bills of 22%.
I travelled around the country a lot a couple of years ago and I talked to an awful lot of people from all walks of life. I was doing research for a book. What struck me was how frustrated and angry most people were underneath the surface. I had to keep pinching myself, to remind myself I wasn't in pre-revolutionary France!
I remember going shopping in Reading on a Saturday, and there was almost electricity in the air. People were shopping like crazy, some had two bags of clothes in each hand. The department stores and malls were bursting with excited shoppers. It was fascinating and frightening at the same time. Surrounded by thousands of eager, frantic and gleeful consumers.
I often felt that the elaborate town centre was more akin to a stage in a theatre, and that people were playing roles in a play they didn't really understand. Sometimes I felt that the elaborate stage-sets were far more fragile than were realised and that cracks were beginning to appear in the plaster columns.
What concerns me is that so much of life in Britain appears "unreal" to me. Perhaps this is connected in some way to the lack of real debate in the mainstream media of PO UK and what this may mean for our lives. This site could help to change that. But it will be a real challange.
The Independent and the Guardian have had some good articles about environmental issues and energy supply problems, but here were talking about papers that reach less than 5% of the UK poplulation aren't we?
What is the UK government's anwer to oil depletion? Tony Blair is gung-ho for nuclear. This raises a whole raft of problems in itself.
What is Tony Blair's attitude to the environment? Basically this, that people are not prepared to sacrifice economic growth to save the environment. He sounds like we have a choice in the matter! The real question is, are we prepared to sacrifice the planet for economic growth?
You will have gathered by now that I'm almost at the desparing stage in relation to our political masters, who when all is said and done take important decissions and are supposed to represent us.
Personally I think we're moving into another historic paradigm, a new type of society if you will. I think it will be "post-democratic" and "magic" will make a big comeback. I say "magic" because I also believe the Age of Enlightenment is over. I don't think we're "doomed" though. I'm actually an optimistic person. Though I do think "democracy" and "rationality" as we've known them for the last couple of centuries are under attack.
Anyway Good Luck to you and everyone else, we're going to need it I fear. Thanks for the timely initiative.
One more thing, I think we should drop the term "global warming" it's far to benign phrase to describe what's happening. I think we should use "global meltdown" instead. It's sort of an experiment I'm conducting at TOD USA as well, to see if we can re-define the boundaries of the discourse by re-appropriating language for our own purposes.
Until I stumbled across the Peak Oil problem 3½ short months ago, I had no idea of the importance of energy. I'd never wondered how we'd managed to reduce agrarian employment from 85% of the population to 4%. I hadn't realised that when we measure increases in GDP, we're merely measuring our annual increase in the use of fossil fuels.
Our parents thought that we had it easy compared to them. I think my kids have it easy compared to me. Why is this so? Because we have replaced our work with fossil fuel work. In the West, few of us in paid employment now do any real work. We sell services to each other. "I'll mow your lawn if you coiff my hair." We're all rich and bored so we take "retail therapy" and watch "Desperate Housewifes". I'm almost 50 and I remember a time when it wasn't quite like this. My children simply don't know any different.
It is unreal.
But it may not be for that much longer.
From the US side of the pond Tony Blair looks like the model of environmentalism. The real question for him and for leaders here is, if I help the environment by ending growth and hurting voters in the short run will they vote for me.
The answer sadly is no.
If joe sixpack is forced to drink 5 instead and he thinks it's your fault.... you're fired, no matter how much you've helped the environment.
However, I think people who actually live in the UK do have certain advantages over Americans in relation to their ability to evaluate Tony Blair's qualities.
We are used to very articulate politicians with great rhetorical gifts. The cut and thrust of our parliamentary system promotes these qualities. Without them one is lost. I don't want to sound partisan, but most US politicians would have a really tough time surviving in the House of Commons. Bush's folksy charm just wouldn't work there. Bill Clinton, on the other hand would probably keep his head above water. But he was known as the great communicator after all.
I'm not making jugdement about their politics here, only their chances in a parliamentary environment like Westminster.
Anyway let's cut to the chase. I personally think that Blair is a total sham. I think he's pretty much a confidence trickster with most of the qualities of the charming fraudster. He is very shallow and seems to hate the study of detail. He is also incredibly reckless. He has the habit of saying the first thing that comes into his head when he's in a tight spot and then pulling back at a later date. He is also a primadona who really loves performing on the world stage. I think he's a frustrated rock star. If he was playing guitar in a band he would be the flashiest guitarist around, his fingers racing up and down the neck of his guitar at lightning speed, a flurry of cascading notes mesmerising the audience. He would use all the special effects pedals known to man. But he would have no soul in his palying. He would always play ten notes were one would do. He would not understand that the spaces imbetween notes are just as important as the notes themselves.
History will, I believe judge him very harshly. The British people already have. He is loathed by most people. Who regard him as a proven liar. He will be regarded as an almost tragic figure. A man who seemed to have great qualities at first, who simply pissed it all away for nothing. He will though I think seek fame and fortune in the US, as he's well passed his sell by date in the UK.
I think global meltdown, whilst catchy and in many ways likely to be accurate, sounds too alarmist. And whilst there's reason to be terrified, ti would just turn people off. Global warming sounds almost nice, as well as not telling the whole story. I make it my business to replace the term global warming with climate change wherever possible.