 | The Forest and the Trees -- the Oil News Imbalance | The Oil Drum | Oil export - import model for the UK |  |
293 comments on DrumBeat: September 20, 2006
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Show without comments | PDF version
293 comments on DrumBeat: September 20, 2006
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
TOD:Europe
- Peak Gold, Easier to Model than Peak Oil? - Part I
- Carbon Capture and Storage
- Oilwatch Monthly November 2009
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- International Energy Agency calls 'Peak' on OECD Oil Demand
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
- The Bullroarer - Friday 20th November 2009
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- Early Warning
- The Energy Blog
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“Any coward can fight a battle when he's sure of winning, but give me the man who has pluck to fight when he's sure of losing. That's my way, sir; and there are many victories worse than a defeat.”
—George Eliot
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
GAIA Host Collective
Los Angeles County has 5 supervisors for over 10 million people -- that's local government! At the nation's founding the constitution had 35,000 people for each Congressmen. The fact is the architecture of our government is broken, the old infrastructure of our politics has been destroyed, a completely vial and corrupt process of money, polls, and television rules.
We have a broken political and government system, it desperately needs reform.
On.
Correct.
Our entire system of government is broken. We are seeing the results we are seeing because the system has become clogged with vested interests.
Where's the political Drain-O?
Hugo Chavez makes some caustic comments about the smell of sulpher that hovers around the White House and proposes to Americans that they read one of their own as a first step in clearing the odour.
But his sense of humour and irony, his subtlety (LOL), even the accuracy of his content, puts the great white chief to shame. I'd pull out this one paragraph as being a poignant and perceptive observation:
"Yesterday, the secretary general practically gave us his speech of farewell. And he recognized that over the last 10 years, things have just gotten more complicated; hunger, poverty, violence, human rights violations have just worsened. That is the tremendous consequence of the collapse of the United Nations system and American hegemonistic pretensions."
Hugo is entertaining in an over the top kind of way, but at least he spouts some ideas and very occasional interesting observation. GW makes me shiver with his simplistic (much more so than Hugo's) mechanistic attempts - apparently mostly successful - at selected voter button pressing.
Bush's tax cuts for the rich, and Hugo's education programs for the poor for example.
I guess that answers it.
The only thing they need it would seem is Diebold Voting machines to to ensure No "Left-Wings" would get elected.
BTW, the "Coup" that nearly toppled them was staged by the CIA, not Unlike the successful one that changed Iran from a democractically elected president to a dictator in 1953, or the other hundred other examples.
<SNIP>
"In 1953, Iran had a democratic government. This is a very jarring thing for us to realize now because we are not used to seeing the word "Iran" and the word "democracy" in the same sentence. The fact is, however, that Iran was developing a long, rocky but democratic path in the early 1950s. For reasons which my book explains in great detail, the United States decided, in the summer of 1953, to go in and overthrow that democratic government. The result of that coup was that the Shah was placed back on his throne. He ruled for 25 years in an increasingly brutal and repressive fashion. His tyranny resulted in an explosion of revolution in 1979 the event that we call the Islamic revolution. That brought to power a group of fanatically anti-Western clerics who turned Iran into a center for anti-Americanism and, in particular, anti-American terrorism. "
http://www.buzzflash.com/interviews/03/07/29_kinzer.html
"There is nothing new in the world except the history you do not know."
- Harry Truman
Same thing with Iran.
Chavez, like Bush, is a symptom of dysfunction and polarization.
(Yawn) Spare me your cliches.
read about the people in venezuela from their point of view...more poor people are dying and suffering since his rule than before he came into power. chavez cares more about his own agenda than the people of his country and wins hearts of poor people in other countries by throwing oil around when he should be doing more for the poor in his own country. its sad because we need that oil and allow ourselves to be insulted and disgraced because we are so dependent on the resource. chavez needs to recheck himself and there should be more news on how venezuelans are being treated. chavez is a charade and we're allowing ourselves to give into his nonsense.
"...there exists nonetheless sufficient factual evidence to prove that Chavez' regime is by far the most corrupt that Venezuela has ever seen. For instance the irresponsible manner in which the country has been indebted. In 1998 the internal outstanding debt was close to $2.000 billion, in contrast to $16.000 billion at present. Venezuela's banking system holds 64% of the internal debt at times when PDVSA's output capacity has decreased significantly. This translates into larger chunks of the budget having to be destined to service the debt, both internal and external, placing an extraordinary burden in the country's finances. The $2.500 billion deposited in the Inversion and Macro Stabilization Fund (FIEM), were pilfered by Chavez.... "
http://www.hacer.org/current/Vene52.php
In my own county we have 1 house elected representative for 45 000 people, but that's not usual, 100 000 is more usual.
Anyway, as the total number of citizen increase, the number of people represented by one representative increase even more. That's because you cannot increase effectively the number of representative too much. At one point even more representative does not increase actual democracy.
I can see that even in small local groups. It is often more efficient to work with a small number of people (3 to 7) than working with larger groups (8 or more). As the number of people increase, the increment of added value does not increase alike.
I did not make any actual research on this, it is based on observation of a number of groups (more than 30) I have worked with in the last 8 years.
The increment of added value in a group is somewhat following the same curve than the oil "creaming curve" that you saw in some Mathew Simmons presentation.
Also in any group of more than 10 people the following apply :
1 leader, no matter what
3 or 4 people involved more than the others
3 somewhat present but with less valuable participation
2 or 3 that we see only once in a while and giving only marginal effort.
I don't want to imply that elected representative are subject to the same distribution, but I don't think that I'm very far from the reality.
We have passed the point where a Revolution could do any good. We have gotten a National Government that will not allow a Revolution in the first place.
I have Fixed it so that people may comment on my short story about "A future as I saw it" What is still scary is I think it will be sooner rather than later.
dan-ur.blogspot.com
Have fun, just remember we have the technology to do it today.
'Time to hold these companies responsible,' attorney general says
MSNBC staff and news service reports
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14924286/
Updated: 12:13 a.m. MT Sept 20, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO - California filed suit against the world's largest carmakers on Wednesday, charging that greenhouse gases from their vehicles have cost the state millions of dollars.
State Attorney General Bill Lockyer said the lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Northern California was the first of its kind to seek to hold manufacturers liable for the damages caused by their vehicles' emissions.
Lockyer, a Democrat, said the complaint states that under federal and state common law the automakers have created a "public nuisance" by producing "millions of vehicles that collectively emit massive quantities of carbon dioxide."
Carbon dioxide emissions and other greenhouse gases have been linked to global warming.
Lockyer's office said that "under the law, a `public nuisance' is an unreasonable interference with a public right, or an action that interferes with or causes harm to life, health or property."
"Global warming is causing significant harm to California's environment, economy, agriculture and public health. The impacts are already costing millions of dollars and the price tag is increasing," Lockyer said in a statement. "Vehicle emissions are the single most rapidly growing source of the carbon emissions contributing to global warming, yet the federal government and automakers have refused to act. It is time to hold these companies responsible for their contribution to this crisis."
Lockyer said he would seek "tens or hundreds of millions of dollars" from the automakers.
The lawsuit names Ford, General Motors, Toyota and the North American units of DaimlerChrysler, Honda and Nissan.
Activists welcomed the move.
"Industries responsible for the pollution that drives global warming should expect more suits like this until we have effective national legislation to stop global warming," David Doniger, a staffer with the Natural Resources Defense Council, said in a statement.
Carmakers earlier sued to block a 2005 California law that would require them to reduce greenhouse gas emissions on new vehicles.
California and 11 other states are also involved in a lawsuit challenging the Bush administration's refusal to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. The Supreme Court is expected to hear that case during its upcoming term.
Reuters and sylvester80 contributed to this report.
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14924286/
Let me rephrase that and add a bit:
Activists, MOST OF WHOM DRIVE, welcomed the move. "Why should I, the user, be held accountable when I can point fingers at the dealer?", one activist asked.
We are never going to get anywhere until people are willing to accept a higher degree of personal responsibility for the situation we are in.
Good point. Until everyone understands and then cooperates to mitigate the Tragedy of the Commons finger-pointing gets us nowhere. Optimizing the squeeze through the Dieoff Bottleneck by detritus powerdown and biosolar powerup, along with universal cooperation on voluntary birth controls is the best strategy to reduce the coming postPeak violence. Will we have the wisdom to proactively restructure our society to localized permaculture with 60-75% of us laboring in the fields?
Otherwise: Requiem
---------------------------------------------
It really will be back to the good old days! Shouts of "BRING ME HIS HEAD" will ring through the land, slaves, scalps, souvenirs and trophies of all sorts, ... exciting possibilities limited only by our ingenuity.
The good news is that recycling will finally become fashionable! We will see feral children mining the dumps for plastic to burn (Pampers) so they can heat the hovels they are forced to live in. The strongest kids will set traps for fresh meat -- rats -- while the weaker kids will eat anything they can cram into their mouths (old shoes, styrofoam peanuts, newspaper soup). Pandemics will sweep the world, punctuated every so often by explosions as abandoned nuke plants go critical. Leaking dumps and tanks will spew PCBs and radioactive hazwaste into the feral food chain spawning surprising new shapes for young mothers to enjoy nursing. [54] Toxic chemical fires, blowing garbage and trash, genetic mutations, filthy water, cannibalism ...
As the Easter Islanders say: "The flesh of your mother sticks between my teeth".[55]
The situation will be especially serious for a short time because the population will keep rising due to the lags inherent in the age structure and social adjustment. Then mercifully, the population will drop sharply as the death rate is driven upward by lack of food and health services.[56] Trapped in obsolete belief systems, Americans won't even know why their society disintegrated.
A hundred thousand years from now -- once the background radiation levels drop below lethality -- a new Homo mutilus will crawl out of the caves to elect a leader. Although we have no idea what mutilus might look like, evolutionary theory can still tell us who will win the election. He will be the best liar running on a platform to end hunger by controlling nature.
How could it be otherwise?
------------------------------
Recall my postings on the false detritus-fueled humanimal ecosystem that overlies our actual ecosystem. Until we are willing to cooperate in mitigation of both sides of Jay's Thermo-Gene Collision--we will be going in the opposite direction of optimizing the coming squeeze. Such is life.
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
Cheers
I welcome this suit.
Robert Rapier:
As to your comments about activitists, so what? Their position is utterly irrelevent to the State's case. It is relevent apparently as a chance for Robert Rapier to again place himself in some kind of ethical castle far above the "activists".
Unfortunately the climate problem is global and urgent. We need to accomplish all sorts of steps at the same time. It is simply not workable that we shall do nothing until all people, as judged by Robert Rapier, have accepted personal responsibility.
Robert, it becomes apparent that for all your thoughtful posts, when it comes to action you stand for absolutely nothing. I say this because the only actions you find acceptable require absolute ethical purity: Let he who doesn't use oil products cast the first stone. Sorry but the efforts to protect the environment are mostly not about your personal need to judge others and protect your imaginary ethical castle.
Roy
It is not the ethics. It is the hypocrisy. We always wish to point fingers at someone else. We want to pass an initiative like Prop 87, because it punished oil companies and removes personal responsibility. We now want to punish auto companies for enabling our habits. It is ludicrous. What I stand for is personal responsibility. That is one reason favor a gas tax. He who uses the most fossil fuels will pay the largest penalty. Individual accountability.
Incidentally, I will also point out that you are far off the mark. If I don't stand for what you stand for, it doesn't mean I stand for absolutely nothing. I stand for many things, among them higher gas taxes, conservation, solar energy, biomass gasification, additional research for cellulosic ethanol and biodiesel, etc.
But I believe hypocrisy should be pointed out when it occurs, and that is the issue here. We do ourselves no favors by pointing fingers at others for our oil addiction. The problem is mine and yours, not the car company's problem. If I conserved and bought fuel-efficient transportation, the oil and automotive companies would have to adapt or die.
... maybe get rid of those pesky catalytic covnerters as well ...
No. Gas taxes, for instance, are not "individual action." But we could get higher gas taxes passed if individuals stopped looking to scapegoat others for this situation. Blame the oil companies, and raise their taxes. Blame the automakers, and sue them. But a gas tax? Political suicide, because the individual doesn't accept that he is the problem.
If we understood and accepted that the problem is on the demand side, we would have a real chance of implementing meaningful change. CAFE standards? A decent start, but meaningless if peak comes sooner rather than later. By the time the average mileage of all cars on the road is significantly impacted, it may be too late.
You insist that this is scapegoating, etc. Maybe. And maybe GM's bankrolling of hydrogen could be labled distraction. And Exxon's bankrolling of climate critics could be labeled as decept.
I think you are falling into the trap of demanding the perfect here. Are you really going to convince every actor in the economy to rational and moral action?
... maybe you ask for that, and maybe you ask for it "symmetrically" with moral vendors and consumers ... but will that "meaningful" if peak oil comes sooner rather than later? By the time the average consumer and company is convinced, it may be too late.
No, I don't demand it. Maybe the lawsuit does a bit of good. Maybe Prop 87 does indirectly reduce consumption. I am honestly not sure how I would vote on it, and if I demanded perfection it would be a no-brainer to vote against it.
What is frustrating for me is that we don't accept more responsibility for our personal contribution to Peak Oil and Global Warming, and therefore we have to settle for very tiny incremental changes. I don't know that we have time for that.
If everyone accepted personal responsibility, and were willing to take serious steps toward mitigation, we could postpone Peak Oil talk for a long, long time by slappping on a $4/gal gasoline tax. But such things are only possible if we stop pointing fingers at everyone else and accept personal responsibility.
I think you misinterpret that this means I advocate primarily individual actions. No. I favor mass action, but meaningful mass action is going to be tough to implement with today's climate of "not my fault."
FWIW, there were some who made the cycnical suggestion that I should not have bought my Prius at all. I just have kept driving my Subaru, and kicked half the purchase-price to movements like this that enforce broader action.
In a pragmatic sense, it might be a dollar better spent.
(BTW, my reaction to the old Forbes quote, as I think about it, is that GM deserves whatever it gets.)
Get that? They couldn't "have the car held hostage to the debates about energy dependence, resource usage, global climate change."
We will NOT deal effectively with Peak Oil and post-Peak Oil if public policy is based on falsehoods and misleading myths. We cannot make effective steps to mitigate Peak Oil if we place our highest priority on dead ends.
Keep up the work of doing good and build thicks walls. I think it is imperative that we have open, sometimes tough, discussions in order to get at the truth. I hope people don't take questions or counter arguments as attacks on them personally.
I much prefer discussing issues with people who disagree with me than having a cheering choir following me about fawning. I suspect you do too.
But other than that, I agree :)
Robert keep up the good work. You are expending the energy a lot of us don't have. Don't think we don't appreciate it. We'd even help, if you asked.
http://www.answers.com/topic/fawn
I was thinking of a deer for some reason. I would have never guessed dog. I learn a new thing every day. Thanks, buddy.
(Why the hell was I thinking about deer?)
http://www.google.co.th/search?hl=th&q=%22Jodi%27s+Fawn%22&meta=
But then again we always knew Stepback was smarter than us. I'm willing to bet it is some distant galaxy, a paradox in quantum physics, or remote science fiction reference.
What's your guess?
Sorry. I mis-rememberized.
The name of the movie was The Yearling.
The boy who cared for the fawn was named Jody.
Can we give Scarlett Johansson a haircut and recast her as the "boy." We'll name her Jody. We'll get a crocodile named "Irwin" to play the fawn. Whaddaya say?
Oh, yeah. This is going on my DVD list. Step Back scores again.
I certainly don't. But things like Roy wrote:
"you stand for absolutely nothing" are well beyond a counter argument. You should also see some of the hate mail I get from time to time. But, probably only about 10% of my e-mail is hate mail.
To those of us who undertake individual action, that always causes some concern. Jevons. Tragedy of the commons. Etc.
So I looked back at past actions, and do you know what I found?
I think I found that individual action really served as a foundation and stimulus, and that when things worked the second stage was broad acceptance, and yes, regulation.
Dolphin free tuna is a classic case. It started as a boycott and ended up as a law.
So where does this tie into your italicized text?
I think we are looking at a transition, one in which we monkeys establish new social norms, and enforce those norms upon others. This is the point where we try to eliminate the free riders, in the economic jargon.
So no, it is not "Why should I, the user, be held accountable when I can point fingers at the dealer?" It is "How can I leverage my behavior out to the society as a whole?"
If GM is a bad monkey, this is the way we scream and throw some .. er, leaves their way.