<Burning coal in place or in-situ gasificationThe Oil DrumIs More Better?>

100 comments on Sunday open thread

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Engineer-Poet on March 5, 2006 - 8:25pm Permalink | Subthread | Comments top
The whole oil thing appears to be viewed as an excuse by power brokers to get votes and/or goodies for their constituencies (e.g. Obama's move to subsidize UAW retirees from tax monies, the various pushes for ethanol from ag lobbies).  Meanwhile, climate threats and other problems are ignored.

What are the odds that we'll get a program aimed primarily at the problems rather than divvying up pork?

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
JD on March 5, 2006 - 8:52pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Odds: very low. Peak oil mitigation is going to be a pork trough. IMO, the most logical approach is a good stiff fuel tax in the U.S., but what we're likely to get is a crash program to maintain the status quo, like that described in the Hirsch report. The peak oilers calling for the gov't to do something because the market won't/can't do it are playing right into the lobbyists' hands. The rationale: we can't wait for the market to build (say) coal liquefaction plants because it will be too late. So the government will put up money in the national interest, and then ownership/profits will be turned over to the private sector to ensure efficient management. In other words, the magic ju-jitsu of lobbying will turn peak oil into just another mechanism of corporate welfare.

Of course, the best way to avoid this unsavory outcome, is to attack the foundations of peak oil theory -- particularly the notion that we desperately need oil to function.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Twilight on March 5, 2006 - 9:24pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I agree with you, but I also think the market will not do enough, in time, and it will be poorly focused.  Which leaves us with what?
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
JD on March 5, 2006 - 10:08pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
It leaves us with extremely high prices at the pump, which is a good thing. Sky-high gasoline prices are the solution, not the problem. The higher they go, the better. So I think the best approach is complete laissez-faire.

There's a big disconnect between the different camps regarding the meaning of words like "do something" or "do enough". If "doing something" means spending tax money to help reduce gasoline prices, I'm totally opposed to it. People who are conserving gas should not be taxed to lower prices for people who aren't conserving. IMO, that is completely ass-backwards and nonsensical.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Twilight on March 5, 2006 - 10:21pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
This is a country where the divide between the haves and the have nots is growing rapidly, and where people on the lower end of economic fortune drive longer distances, often in older, less efficient cars.  Higher gas prices without some attempt at mitigating the cost for lower incomes might help in regards to peak oil, but it will be disastrous from a social and economic point of view.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
JD on March 5, 2006 - 10:50pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Why don't the poor people move, or trade in their car for a scooter, or bicycle, or car pool, or take the bus?
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
jeffcc on March 6, 2006 - 12:25am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
In one community that I know, 65% of the people don't own cars. There is lots of interest in bikes, but riding through a Minneapolis winter is dangerous without decent gloves, face mask, etc. They cost money that is hard to justify. Scooters are even more dangerous when the roads are snowy or icy, because they go faster and on busier roads.

The neighborhood is 3 miles by 5 miles square. For a number of years, it didn't have a grocery store, just a handful of corner markets. Taking the bus to the grocery store, laundromat, job, church, etc., is extremely time consuming even though there is good bus service by American standards. The bus lines are spaced every half-mile or so apart, so it involves some walking for the majority of people. Car pools are fine for getting to work (if you have stable work and can coordinate with someone who works about the same hours in about the same place), but aren't much help generally for shopping or the laundromat.

Numerous studies have shown (sorry, no links tonight) a correlation between car ownership and income level. One of my goals for the community's energy cooperative is to buy a fleet of flexible-fueled vehicles and get an E85 pump set up.

And where would poor people move? Some place more expensive with even worse mass transit and no cultural understanding?

One other question:  JD, how do you get around?

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
JD on March 6, 2006 - 12:50am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I live in Osaka, Japan, a city with one of the best mass transit systems in the world. I walk to the supermarket because it's right across the street. There's a Korean grocery downstairs about 30 seconds from my front door. There are probably 10 supermarkets within a 5 minute bicycle ride, and people frequently sell vegetables on the street about 2 minutes on foot from my apartment. I do all my shopping on foot or bicycle, although I do take the subway/bus/streetcar quite often. I also travel a lot, and I've been all over Japan by train and bus.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
AlanfromBigEasy on March 6, 2006 - 1:02am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
New Orleans was comparable, preKatrina, but on a much more human scale (few buildings over 3 stories tall, greenery abounds in small areas in Lower Garden District).

I had 5 places to buy food within 6 blocks.  Nearest bank, barber, tailor & insurance agent all 4 blocks away.  Two world class restuarants within walking distance, and many more just damn good ones :-)  Office Depot 7 blocks away, main Post Office a mile away.  Much more on streetcar line.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
markincalgary on March 6, 2006 - 1:19am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I guarantee you that I cycle in weather much harsher than this community you speak of gets, and I'm rarely uncomfortable. (I'm in central Alberta, Canada. Not Calgary anymore. Now, I'm further north and east. I cycle five days a week. It would take a foot of snow falling in a single night for me to consider anything else.) The extra clothing for winter cycling is nothing compared to the price of a car, and equivalent to a few months of transit passes. A single studded tire (in front), fleece long underwear, a light fleece jacket, a microft shell, gloves, a light toque, and a mask is my winter kit. I might have spent $280 total (Canadian) piecing it together. Throw in a pair of panniers, and you're set. If it were dangerous, I wouldn't be doing it. The vast majority of the folk in a 3-by-5 mile community are only looking at a 10-15 minute trip by bike from any point A to any point B. That ain't that bad.

Honestly, I don't know why people look at cycling like its a fate worse than death.

Besides cycling, there are many other options. Improving bus service is obvious. Car rentals worked great for me. (I'd rent a car for a couple of "chore-days" a month.) A hybrid between taxis and busses could also fill a niche. All of these could work within the current capitalist system. I strongly suspect we'll see things move in this direction (but not enough).

And there are many ways to help the poor without taking away anybody's (rich or poor) insentive to conserve. A revenue neutral fuel tax (tax every unit of fuel, split the revenue equally among the population) is an obvious one.

Don't get me wrong. At heart, I'm a leftie, but I've watched governments bung so many simple things up over the years that the thought of government intervention on anything important makes my sphincters cinch. Governments are just so good at doing the wrong thing. Since governments are necessarily somewhat populist, and the populous is nothing but selfish, this seems unlikely to change. Big business takes advantage whenever it can, and that's often.

This is why I've mostly stopped worrying about everybody else and began to focus on my own family and the people close to me.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
davebygolly on March 6, 2006 - 1:57am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
You're cynicism toward government is caused by not having the honest, efficient and wise governance we have here in the States. Right? :)
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Engineer-Poet on March 6, 2006 - 4:19am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Do you ride through anything less than a foot of snow, or do you wait for it to be plowed?

What will you do when the plow trucks have no fuel?

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Twilight on March 6, 2006 - 7:41am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
In the US the public transportation system sucks, except for a few cities.  We dismantled most of it decades ago.  By and large, we've surrounded our cites with suburbs, and increasingly the jobs are out there.  The poor cannot live there, and we've built those areas exclusively for cars.  The roadways were not set up for bikes either, even if the distance were close enough to make that practical.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Fletcher on March 6, 2006 - 10:34am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Because even middle class folks are in an increasingly dire cash and capital squeeze that has been happening since about 1975 as real wiage fail to keep pace with prices.  Too be sure the appalling savings rate rests in part on their own shoulders, but the fact is that many families have been using debt to try to keep pace.  Cars are a hugely capital and income intensive means of personal transport, but most of us do not have a choice in owning one.  For example most downtown developments no longer contain supermarkets which have migrated to edge cities and the shopping malls around the ring roads.  I could go on, but won't.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
odograph on March 6, 2006 - 8:30am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I think it has already happened.  While I was watching TV last night I saw a raft of GM's yellow gas cap commercials.

They've obviously found political partners in the ethanol campaign, and we are going to see more pushes like Obama's to get every car ethanol-ready.  GM then, would be seen as "ahead" of the rest in peak oil response.  Is that sad or what?

It is particularly galling to for me to see the Chevy Avalanche in the closing shot of each yellow gas cap commercial.  The thing gets 15 mpg real world with gasoline.  Using the rule of thumb that E85 has 2/3 the energy density ... would they really have us believe that 10 mpg on E85 is the future?

US Ethanol just reached a record production level of 280,000 barrels per day.

Given that gasoline demand is running at 9 million barrels a day .. we're at roughly 3% ?  We've got a long way to go to fuel every car (Obama) or talk about "the answer to oil dependence" "growing in front of us" (GM).

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.