This is basically a variation on the Peter Huber argument, to-wit, that individual sources of energy will peak and decline, but the aggregate energy production rate--which is the sum of individual sources of energy--will never peak and decline.
From fossil fuel + nuclear sources, the world uses the energy equivalent of one billion barrels of oil every five days.
At this rate of consumption, the world consumes the energy equivalent of the entire recoverable oil reserves in the East Texas Field, the largest oil field in the US Lower 48, every 30 days.
At this rate of consumption, the world consumes the energy equivalent of the entire recoverable oil reserves in the Prudhoe Bay Field, the largest oil field in North America, every 30 days.
At this rate of consumption, the world consumes the energy equivalent of all of ExxonMobil's proven oil and gas reserves in less than four months.
We see no problem with this rate of energy consumption, and we predict that the world's rate of energy consumption will increase for the indefinite future.
We advise everyone, especially Americans, to continue buying and financing large vehicles to drive to and from large suburban mortgages.
And let us not forget that this is all based on CURRENT levels of use. In order to have the economic growth required by our economic system we have to use even greater levels of energy in the future or "the system" will break down.
I continue to find myself amazed at the blindness of my fellow citizens.
Six years ago I started riding my first cargo trike. I thought that folks would look at me and say -- oh, what a great solution to some of our problems with pollution, global warming, and lack of exercise in our daily routines. "I think I'll try that!" they'd say.
Not to mention other benefits -- "energy independence" and reduction of oil-related geopolitical tensions and also "peak oil."
But no.
Many people think that use of vargo trikes is terrific, but they do not change their own patterns at all.
Many people are indifferent about the cargo trike, and think that it is a funny novelty -- nothing more, nothing less.
A significant number of people are hostile to the cargo trike. It seems to challenge their fundamental beliefs in a way that triggers an immediate emotional response of anger and scorn.
Since I've been riding in my town (Minneapolis), I've sold three used trikes, still have two, and helped the trike maker sell yet another new trike to a person in a neighboring city (St. Paul). I have seen increased bike riding andsome superb "bike-trailer" combinations which are very practical.
I wonder if people who sit at computers and work in climate-controlled offices and who habitually travel by car end up with imaginations bound by these routines.
I truly believe that our collective and individual imaginations are bound by a belief that our civilization is "the norm" from here on out. Other people will eventually "catch up" to us economically, and then everyone will live like this evermore.
So the bankers who make up these reports must think with the same inability to see information and reason out the implications?
The exceptions are few and far between -- Matt Simmons, for example.
Most people have a well-documented inability to think outside the box. This is illustrated quite well by the famous 'connect the dots' problem used in introductory psychology classes.
Every civilization has thought they were the norm, from the Egyptians on up, and that they would be around forever and nothing would ever change. The foolishness of this assumption should be obvious, at least in this day and age when we have access to all the historical records of the world. But alas, it persists.
I suppose its just easier to stick your head in the sand.
Nothing is special about our present moment.
We are the same evolution-bred animals that populated many an earlier and now ceased civilization.
They too, had "all" of history --all up to their time which they were willing to acknowledge of. (Example: Modern school teachers do not teach 5th graders about Easter Island.)
It is also true that the average person tends to view both themselves and the world through slightly "rose tinted" glasses. Thy tend to over-estimate their looks, intelligence and general social desirablility. They tend to think they are richer in a relative sense (income percentile) than they actually are as well as over-estimate their future prospects. Interestingly, the most accurate people at assessing both themselves and others are the mildly depressed.
Which brings up the question: Are TODers mildly depressed?...;o)
Somedays, I'm extremely depressed that my good looks, wealth and intelligence are underestimated by the opposite sex. Apparently, one has to be nice as well.
Nope you have to have money, be an utter bastard, but there's a certain twist to it - some utter bastards are really rather nice people, in other words.... they're utter bastards but not actually mean.
The winning combination seems to be to have money, but be a total tight-ass with it, and yes have the basic lack of consideration for others, but the main thing is, a high level of skill in manipulating others. You have to enjoy getting into people's minds and manipulating them for your own ends or amusement without the slightest twinge of guilt over how you may be ruining their life, health, etc.
If you really want to make it with the ladies, think Sociopath. Not the stupid kind that eventually gets caught and thrown in prison, the smarter kind that goes on and on and leaves a wide wake of havoc well-sprinkled with the bodies and souls of your victems.
Peak Oil Blues - a new site found via Energy Bulletin a couple days ago.
We are a small but growing group of professionally trained psychotherapists who know the stress the dawning awareness of Peak Oil brings.
We invite our readers and colleagues to contribute to the growing body of knowledge regarding the unique social and emotional challenges we face in a post-petroleum age.
<snip>
Our goal is to first normalize, then assist others in learning how to transform any frozen or destructive emotional reactions into more proactive, productive responses. We believe the goal isn't simply to survive, but to thrive in our lifetime and to give to those who come after us. Time is too valuable a gift to waste in confusion or hopelessness.
I like this site. I wish it had been there when I first got the word!
That is a very interesting site, and an interesting development. I think I went through some peak oil stages. I became a "peak oil moderate" fairly quickly, but I worried about those moderate futures a bit more than I do now. I came out the other side when I decided that humility and a little uncertainty were more healthy than trying to nail what "the" future was going to be.
It's possible to keep an eye on energy issues without commiting to a single energy future.
The Doomer issue is itself pretty interesting and not identical with peak oil considerations per se. My impression is that most (though by no means all) doomers are middle aged or later and primarily male. Most also appear to be left of center politically (though there have been and continue to be a lot of Christian Fundamentalist Rapture waiters-see the "Left Behind" crowd though not many are posting on TOD). These observations suggest possible roles for a) projected mortality concerns (I am doomed and know it perceived as the world is doomed), and b) disempowerment on a political basis that may be exacerbated by male gender (all you Freudians out there can have a field day with this). Of course, none of this means that the Doomers are actually wrong but may influence the tendency to be drawn to these issues rather than pursue the typical human tendency to maintain denial for as long as possible. (PS. I would advise taking all of the above with a rather large grain of salt given obvious speculative basis)
Of course, none of this means that the Doomers are actually wrong but may influence the tendency to be drawn to these issues rather than pursue the typical human tendency to maintain denial for as long as possible.
This is an interesting and plausible hypothesis.
But since it compensate for the "tendency to maintain denial" that would mean that there is an "optimal" level of doomerosity which has some chance to match reality.
odo, this guy is out of control. People have obviously been watching this play out. I have no idea how to deal with it. I've tried several approaches. None have worked. Although ignoring him seemed to have the best effect.
I agree in that Doomers can be found of just about any age and sex. My suspicion that middle age males comprise the largest doomer demographic is just that, a suspicion based on limited data, but would be interested in a more scientific sampling...
David sir, I would like to respectfully disagree with part of your suppositions. While I would agree that perhaps part of the Doomer crowd is there because of the reasons you provide, I think that it goes much deeper than this. I'll explain in a minute. First let me acknowledge that yes, the potential for `doom' is real. Even probable perhaps. I do think things could get pretty bad for a while, but I think that some sort of civilization will go on. I am an optimist, after all. Many people see the writing on the wall and extrapolate that mentally to doom.
I think that the doomerism(?) extends well beyond the PO community, and that it has both psychological and sociological causes. If you go into an inner city neighborhood, or a poor slum on the outskirts of the city, or any homeless camp, you will run into a significant number of people who are disheartened, defeated, and personally doomed. This is best evidenced in the acting out of the youth of the inner city. What have they got to do besides deal drugs? College? They ain't going to no college. They'll be lucky to finish high school. And they know it. In the past few years this feeling has crept out of the ghettos and into middle class and even some upper class areas. People increasingly have less and less opportunities. They are more constrained in life. This leads many to depression and defeatism. Projected outward, it can become doomerism. Not only that, but doom would have a few benefits -the overhaul of society, starting from scratch. Loss of constraints. More opportunities. I think doomerism and defeatism are two sides of the same coin. As someone once said, the difference between suicide and homicide is the direction of the impulse.
Take this with a grain of salt please. That's my admittedly unprofessional analysis.
I read Will Wilkinsons blogs about economics and happiness for a while. One fragment:
My predictions:
(a) There are multiple bases for good and bad self-reports. For example, some "very happy" people may have very consistently low cortisol levels. (Buddhist happy.) Some "very happy" people have very high status-related seratonin and testosterone levels, with a moderately high amount of cortisol. (Big honcho happy.)
... so remember, if you can't be "honcho" happy, there's always "Buddhist" happy. (And Buddhist happy might require a little less energy per capita ;-)
Now this is some "thought food" for sure, seriously as most tend to view "happiness" as fairly uniform in quality but clearly it is not. I think it is worth noting that the "Big Hocho" kind of happiness tends to be less stable than the "Buddhist" happiness and requires a lot more maintenance and resource consumption. This would suggest that the Powerdown Process needs to promote the "Buddhist" variety of happiness--which is probably more akin to the concept of "contentment" as opposed to the ebulient hypomanic variety.
The idea of Buddhist happiness has come up in past threads at TOD, but it has been a while. I agree that it should be part of the powerdown/consumerism puzzle. I say that without being a Buddhist or knowing all that much about it. From what little I know Buddhist happiness seems to make sense though.
I happened to visit a Buddhist Temple a couple days ago, which why I mentioned it. There is a self-guided audio tour, and a cafeteria for a vegetarian lunch. It was a nice experience. I did notice that the Temple didn't seem to have bike racks though ;-/
I grew up in that area, interesting to see the neighborhood tip toward an asian and Buddhist community ... great strip mall food!
Optimist, I agree with you and my limited speculations were not meant to be all inclusive as to the underlying dynamics of doomerism. In addition, the example you gave shares the underlying dynamic of personal social defeat projected outward. And, again, the potential for doom is REAL and, of course, the "Doomers" will eventually be correct--the world will end or at least "civilization as we know it" one way or another--sun novas, grows into red giant, new ice age, etc, etc. The disturbing issues we face with PO is that the probability of doom appears to be gaining a lot of statistical "traction lately"--or I am I projecting my mid-life crisis anxst...;o) DM
DM, I think you're right in stating that the Doom Scenario has gained traction lately. I too have noticed it.
And the other scenarios you mentioned are also correct. Hopefully though, by the time the sun goes nova we'll have figured out the means to star travel. A ticket to Alpha Centauri anyone?
Catastrophic Utopia, or the Psychology of "Yearning For A New Dark Age"
odograph,
You said, "It's possible to keep an eye on energy issues without committing to a single energy future."
It's not only possible, it is the most realistic and scientific approach. It is a refutation of "Peak Oil" as assured catastrophic death and destruction of culture, which there is no demonstrably provable way to show that it will be.
The issue is whether I accept absolute catastrophic doom as the only possible outcome as an article of faith. You may notice that many people here seem to....and react in a very hostile way to the suggestion that there could be any other possible outcome....notice the response of Kevembuangga to your remarks, "You are not a "moderate" you are a troll with an agenda."
It is shocking that a so called "scientific outlook" would react to any difference with the "accepted dogma" of assured doom and catastrophic failure of all modern society in such a violently hostile way. What does it say about the psychology of the "peak oil" "rapture" theology? Of course, that version of absolutism has nothing to do with science in the normally accepted way of acceptance of new thesis and theories, and then testing them with as much rigor as possible to try to prove their correctness, a tool that relies on acceptance of questioning DEEPLY any theory. It is, in the end, a belief system.
Of course, it was predicted and described many years ago. Rousseau and the cult of the "Noble Savage", the Ruskin/Morris aesthetic of "Neo-Gothic Medievalist, and more directly and recently related to the "Peak Oil" catastrophist theology", Alvin Toffler.
Toffler described in the 1980's what he called "The Yearning for a New Dark Age" as part of the illness he had earlier described as "Future Shock".
This would be, he said, the mental breakdown in reaction to complexity, high cultural speed of change, overchoice of options in lifestyle, career and social choices, and the inability and or unwillingness to stay up with the more technical and modern pace of change.
It was pointed up that those most vulnerable to "Peak Oil" depression issues are middle aged males. These of course are exactly the same ones most vulnerable to "Future Shock", in that they are most mentally acclimated to the older, slower more simple and organizationally stable structure, and they are least shielded (in comparison to females, with their known stronger social based networks, and "people and home" orientation) form the chaos of ultra high speed cultural post modernism in the high tech high information culture.
The reaction becomes to yearn for a simpler, more primitive, slower and less diverse time, a culture that is more comparable to a known model, namely, the past. "Peak Oil" provides a magnificent vehicle to a slower, more primitive world. It may be a harder world, but at least the struggles for life's basics are one the human mind can comprehend. Thus, the collapse of a completely incomprehensible ultra modern system becomes a dream, a fantasy of a way back to a simple world. Notice that the "Neo-Gothic" movement was born in the birth of the super expansion of industrial, commercial, media culture.
Note the virulent language used against anyone who expresses any doubts about the exact nature not of "geological" peak oil (which is a fairly easily demonstrated fact of geology in the past) but about the "catastrophist" vision of the future. First they are completely dehumanized, referred to repeatedly as "sheepies", "screaming monkeys", and no smarter than yeast. They are declared in some state of mental illness or sickness, "denial", "sleepwalking", "brainwashed" or "hypnotized" by giant forces beyond their comprehension.
This type of attack of such viscousness and slanderous nature bespeaks something much deeper than a difference of opinion or technical viewpoint.
It indicates that anyone who perceives any weakness in the "assured catastrophist" theory is actually an impediment to a desired goal, a possible roadblock and a danger to what is a desired vision of existence, that being the return to the mental and social peace that "catastrophe", "powerdown" and the "big dieoff" will bring....a more peaceful and beautiful utopia of a simple, non technical, slower, and local culture.
Of course, like all "Utopias", the dreamed of "dark age" will not come. The technology cat is already out of the bag. The knowledge will survive, the more advanced methods will exist in pockets, and live on to keep the world complicated and much different than the hoped for "simple" dark age of the past. But it lives on as a dangerous dream. There are those who, if they do not see the dreamed of "collapse" coming soon, may begin to try to "encourage it" to come. The emergence of "radical solutions" of the type proposed by "Green Anarchists" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_anarchism indicate that psychologically, the "collapse", or "die off" or "End of The World As We Know It" is not so much feared as a possible outcome of oil and gas depletion" or "Peak Oil" but dreamed of as a preferable new world for humans, an aesthetic choice.
The words of the exploration geologist Greg Croft ring louder...
"The greatest danger from peak oil is that we will do something foolish in response to it."
But what may seem "foolish" to many of us, may actually be a path to perceived beautiful future to some. At this point, the discussion has less and less to do with oil and energy at all, but more and more to do with aesthetics, belief, and desired purposes in life. For those who yearn for "A New Dark Age" so called oil depletion or "Peak Oil" simply becomes a means to an ends, and no solution should be attempted because none is desired.
actually...well, uh, I'm not supposed to say this. We have been observing you for quite some time. And 9 out of 10 agree that you have the necessary skills.
The future actually has been written. It just has some serious continuity errors and wicked spelling and grammatical mistakes.
Will you help us fix these? It only pays $6 an hour to start, but I can assure you the perks are unbelievable.
Put this down to working in the Y2K arena as a mainframe programmer trying to make it a survival situation.
I worked long and hard hours during this event and saw the scary side of what was hidden from most including the idioticy of the Mass Media.
We escaped it but some did not. There was no mention of those that did not. I saw mass layoffs of very key personnel, idioticy by IT management to unheard of levels.
This gave me some insight as to how we react or will react and this gave me my reasons for tending to the doom side of the future.
That being said, I hope and pray that this proposed upcoming event is averted. I have been watching and keenly reading the internet for years and observing as well personally.
Hope is something I keep near but preparedness is something I chose to do just in case.
So I hope for the best and prepare for the worst. I do not do it gleefully. Its hard work and expensive. It detrimental to good mental health and I do not enjoy it.
What I saw after Y2K was that we no longer had a cohesive society. The business leaders threw all morals to the wind and started to take this country economically to its knees.
Our morals shrank to nothing but selfcentered greed beyond belief.
We are not , IMO, no longer a suvivable species in the USA. We have not the core values to make it through.
The folks who populate this website are not the same as the general public. I applaud the attitudes and efforts of those here but realize the difference.
I still work in computer technology, precision farming and other areas. Mainframes no longer exist in meaningful numbers to keep me employed. I am currenly implementing wireless technology to autombile service areas and am amazed at the unbelievable technology in that area(automotive embedded systems) yet realize that the Big Three for all that technology are mostly on the wrong path.
Will our technology save us? I think it still tied to closely to the business side of the equation to offer much hope. If it was diverted? Say thur 'Open Source' avenues? Then we might have a chance.
I suggest the book (online version exists) by Eric S. Raymond .....www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/
titled The Cathedral and the Bazaar and others at that site.
This to me is where we need to be. Using grassroots technology to take control of our future and not waiting for the 'guv/ or biz to make decisions for us. I don't think they really care.
Note the virulent language used against anyone who expresses any doubts about the exact nature not of "geological" peak oil (which is a fairly easily demonstrated fact of geology in the past) but about the "catastrophist" vision of the future.
So, Roger, you are speaking of me as "Yearning for a New Dark Age" and "violently hostile" ?
I am very sad...
Of course, like all "Utopias", the dreamed of "dark age" will not come. The technology cat is already out of the bag. The knowledge will survive,
Agreed 100%, except may be with a toned down "technology cat" (not so miraculous), but alas I expect BOTH a die-off and some persistence of civilisation and technology.
This is what I am aiming for, not out of a craving for "dark age" or a yearning for "a simpler, more primitive, slower and less diverse time, a culture that is more comparable to a known model, namely, the past."
I enjoy too much the current facilities of civilisation to have any desire to give them up.
Though, there is a little bit of a difference in my appreciation with respect to what seems to be the "common greed".
As I am extremely lazy I enjoy to spend very little with almost no effort instead of toiling even more than the primitivists to "keep up with the Jones".
I really don't see the point to have to cling to "complexity, high cultural speed of change, overchoice of options in lifestyle, career and social choices" is this has a very bad EROTI (Enjoyment Returned Over Toil Invested).
And I am fairly sure that CIVILISATION has the best EROTI over "dark ages", primitivism, warlordism and any other apocalyptic credences.
More precisely, rather than aiming for die-off I am NOT WILLING to try to avoid population collapse whether this is to be soft or hard, voluntary or unvoluntary.
Sorry if this is so gloomy but this is unfortunately a TOTAL WASTE of time, ressources and ingenuity.
Overpopulation IS our problem, I seem to agree on this with TechGuy, GreyZone and PeakTO (NOT pretending they partake more than this with me) .
This type of attack of such viscousness and slanderous nature bespeaks something much deeper than a difference of opinion or technical viewpoint.
Could you please READ the arguments between odograph, and me or more recently with slaphappy and Magnus Redin
and alsoStarvid and Magnus Redin (who seems to entertain connivance with both).
Honestly tell WHO is the most viciously slanderous?
Who is either LYING or arguing BESIDE the topic to breed confusion?
and no solution should be attempted because none is desired.
Oh! I do crave for a "solution" but probably not in accordance with the one(s) you are looking for.
I DO CRAVE for a change or restraint on 2 of our most "basic instincts" :
Men are eager to fight.
Women are eager to breed.
This were EXCELLENT options all along prehistoric and historic times, allowing mankind to evolve and spread over a seemingly "unlimited", "open ended" Earth.
The Earth is NOW bounded and closed, these are NOW deadly vicious habits.
If we don't rein in these we are going toward extinction, notwithstanding ANY kind of technology, ressources, peaks or no peaks.
First, to be sure it is understood, I was on no personal attack...as I have said before, you, I, and others have generally managed to keep a civil agenda going without, I hope, real rancor or hostility, and I have always enjoyed reading you and others (the post I am replying to for example was very fun to read, I especially like the concept of EROTI (Enjoyment Returned Over Toil Invested), I wonder if there is any way we can begin statistically measuring that! :-), something for the math whizes to work on...
The nature of the sentence that you seemed to be replying to by odograph seemed pretty mild (and I am not familiar with any other debates you and he may have had, or can't at the moment recall them) to get a return such as "A troll with an agenda", and it provoked me to address the bigger more general theme that I did in my post. My post was intended not as a personal rhetorical insult against any one person, but simply as a discussion of the theory of what some call "green anarchy" and others refer to as "primitivism" for lack of a better description, and the fact that not all people regard "peak oil" or "resource depletion as a "bad thing", if it will act as a means and tool in dismantling the modern technical capitalist type societies.
I only point this up for two major reasons....first, for the benefit of those new to this discussion, who may not be aware that some (certainly not all) who are most able to frighten and depress the folks who are newest to this discussion (and the "Peak Oil Blues" psychological website was the original topic of this string) are speaking more from desire for an event than from knowledge about it (that being catastrophic collapse of modern society), and newbies should be aware that that their predictions are dire and horrifying to them, but for the person doing the prediction, actually a fulfillment of a desire, so the agenda and the "predictions" are naturally slanted somewhat. Secondly, newer folks to the discussion should be informed that there are political and social agenda's involved in the "Peak Oil" discussion, and try to learn to seperate this from the geological, technical and scientific issues of oil depletion. The social and political agenda, and this is purely my view and not scientifically provable, seems to have later began to swallow up the geological and technical agenda. Essentially, this runs the risk of moving "peak oil" away from a technical/geological discussion of energy production/consumption, and into the realm of social philosophical cause. Combined with global warming, the science and the actual facts are becoming less and less important to those involved in this issue, as it becomes more and more a moral/philosphical/political/social crusade. That distinction should be discussed, and I think newer people should be aware of the distinction. It is a fundamental one.
No rancor or hostility from me.
No matter how far apart I am with any contestant I never get upset about HONEST and wholehearted arguments.
If you didn't felt the humorous tone of my "I am very sad..." remark and icon I apologize.
I did get the humor of the "very sad" line, and icon, but was mainly jealous because I can't get my Mac to put smiley's in like that! :-( (see, I have to do them in black and white, like a 1950's TV set! :-)
Perfect. I guess it should come as no surprise that just as the status quo seeks to demonise PO aware as the other, members of the PO aware community will seek to demonise serious powering down in like fashion. Truly the benighted vastly outnumber the cognisant, even here.
I would greatly benefit from a fraction continuance of the techno-orgy. It would give my librarian career security, and would allow me to continue my love of playing the electric guitar. However, I have been able to put aside those attachments in my pursuit of assessing just how sustainable any portion of modern life really is. My position of serious consideration of completely eliminating electricity consumption stems from a holistic realisation of the complexity and resource drawdown that would be required to sustain that luxury. To remain ignorant of the fact that to expect one infrastructure based on finite resources will prevail over one that is in certain short future is, well ignorant. Not to mention irresponsible and indefensible.
The simple reality remains, the host that allowed for the development of human life owes us nothing. Just because we have been able to leverage certain endowments to create a lifestyle, does not mean that that lifestyle is worthy of sustenance. to deny this simple equation is to deny what it is to be human. We came from the mud, and if we have any chance of making past this century, we had better learn to accept that life in a sustainable form will have to resemble that humble origin to a much greater extent than what is being attempted by the supposedly informed members here.
If you do not like that last statement, then by all means show the community through research and calculation how a fractional techno-orgy can be sustained. However, to resort to the making a villian out of a disparate belief only shows your cowardice and fear. It would be better for all if you just kept your self righteous prejudice to yourself and let the chips fall where they may than to strike out at those that have a deep concern for the future of humanity just because their goals force you to critically evaluate the realistic implications of your desires.
There are two things that need to be addressed in order for humanity to make it through this crises. One is an honest and rigorous evaluation of our needs versus wants. The other is to take science and its progeny technology to task and evaluate the just because we can, should we aspect of implementation.
Roger, your post is a very nice approach to the "end-of-civilization-as we-know-it" variety of doomerism wherein the doomer is not him or herself anhilated but rather the alienating hyper-modern globalizing system is brought down. It is not inconsistent with the hypothesis of projection but a nice complement I think.
It's a very good thing to have as a support group for many of us that tune into TOD. I plan on checking it out more thoroughly very soon.
You can tell how the stress level has escalated in many threads here as peak becomes more apparent and there needs to be a psychological outlet. Call it the TOD's R & R unit. Go there when you need some peace and people that understand your mindset.
In regard to people who appear hostile to a cargo trike: This may just be Minneapolis urban/anger/hostility. In all of Minnesota I have rarely seen ugly incidents (e.g. between a bicyclist and a pedestrian), but in Minneapolis they seem to be routine. Road rage in Minneapolis seems to be far far worse than in St. Paul or in the burbs. It is hard even to make eye contact with very many strangers in Minneapolis; I suspect that there are so many immigrants to Minneapolis from other states that the "Minnesota Nice" ethic is seriously eroded. Also, in Minnesota the city of Minneapolis has a uniquely troubled history of race relations (that goes back at least to the nineteen thirties) and today has a per capita murder rate more than double that of St. Paul, the last time I looked.
My experience has been that the nice neighborhoods of Minneapolis are way too expensive to live in, and the affordable neighborhoods are too scarey.
Of course I am biased, but people in St. Paul seem to me much lower pressured and much nicer and more tolerant than those in the bigger Twin.
If and when peak oil brings hard times, get out of Minneapolis. Some neighborhoods I like in St. Paul border the fairgrounds, especially the Como Lake district which has many students and a history of stability and "Minnesosta Nice" along with rents substantially less than you would pay in Minneapolis for similar quality.
In regard to peak oil, I think the best advice anyone can follow is to choose one's neighborhood with great care--and get to know your neighbors.
Drivers could easily have a more hostile reaction to trikes than to bikes. There are lots of bikes on the road in my part of Canada (I ride one recreationally) and a growing number of special bike-only traffic lanes.
Bikes coexist with drivers pretty well here. Most of our roads have wide enough traffic lanes that drivers can pass a bike rider near the curb without moving over much. Drivers in the next lane are usually pretty accommodating anyway, and allow a curb-lane car to nudge over the lane divider while passing a bike.
Trikes are completely different. A driver has to change lanes to pass one. They're slow-rolling traffic blockers, especially in rush hour, and especially on hills. I went by one in rush hour yesterday and thought "That's just stupid, an accident looking for a place to happen".
What is funny is that every time I see a car, I think:
How stupid! An crash happening! And the driver probably doesn't even know it."
Cars -- over-used and ill understood -- are involved in costly automobile crashes, costly geopolitical and geomilitary crashes, health crashes, healthcare cost crashes, the economic crash, and most significantly the ecological crash which is the mother of all crashes.
My high school child recently worked hard to earn a trip to Europe with "people to People" (founded by the late President Eisenhower. She noted that the European transportation share includes far more walking, biking, scootering, and transit than in the USA. She also noted that in Italy and France many of the cars were small relative to USA personal "comfort bubbles." My guess is that the Europeans were becoming more like the USA in terms of transportation over the last 50 years, but that this trend will reverse. Even so, Europe is still more dioverse in terms of transportation mode share.
It is this variety that all of us must get used to. No longer can we afford to say that a trike or a bike-trailer are stupid, or an accident looking to happen. The accident is already happening, and many of the people on bikes or trikes or quadHPVs are actually doing something about it.
The Global Accident is no accident. It is more like a Global Crash in which the automobile plays a very central role.
I am not anti-car -- my family of 4 owns one hybrid, used lightly -- but I am working for the day when car use is much less of the transportation mode share.
I am not spoiling for a fight, but I am insistent that the car traffic we have is obscene beyond words, and that we must take it upon ourselves to establish a new, far more diverse transportation paradigm.
I like my car, and even enjoy driving it on occasion, but I would much rather walk, ride a bike, take the bus, tram, subway, or any other version of mass transit we can devise. I can't argue with the negative effects of car usage you gave in the slightest (although Mr. Thatsit will probably be right along to tell you how much we love cars).
On "love of cars", let's be honest, many do, or they couldn't sell so many, but of course, many folks hate them to the core of thier being! Europe, which many here often cite as an example of "transport diversity", builds some of the best bicycles, scooters, trains, trams, AND cars in the world, going from one end of the transportation spectrum to the other, and displaying artistic and clever engineering in most case on whatever they build. That to me is impressive, and a good path in the future, be ready with a product for anything!
By the way, if you think Mr. Thatsit can wax poetic on love of cars, don't get me started on trains.....the fast rugged electric locomotives of the old New Haven Railroad....
We will talk about windmills, electrc cars, sailboats and passive solar commercial scale buildings, and Stirling engines, and heat pumps... another day...It is not love of "cars" per se, but just love of good engineering and beautiful design....:-)
On the other hand, about 20 years back I spoke with a Law Clerk at the Supreme Court of Canada who was working on a paper which concluded that the two most effective ways of getting away with murder (he didn't consider getting elected/selected to the executive branch of government) were (a)take the victim hunting and (b)catch him riding a bike.
Six years is a long time and looking at your pics online you are darn conspicuous. The only thing I know that works is riding a set route at a set time and eventually the drivers get used to you and tune you out. Even riding mostly in a defined neighborhood they will eventually tune you out. But 6 years is a long time.
Best I can offer is try to rearrange your routes to be on streets where there is already bicycle traffic. Or try to invite cyclists along to chat as you haul. The group ride thing also ticks off drivers but they do acknowledge defeat.
Good luck. Don't quit.
Yes, imagination is bound by routine. Even the freest thinker is working mostly by rearranging the bits and pieces seen in the foreground every day. Drea
This is basically a variation on the Peter Huber argument, to-wit, that individual sources of energy will peak and decline, but the aggregate energy production rate--which is the sum of individual sources of energy--will never peak and decline.
From fossil fuel + nuclear sources, the world uses the energy equivalent of one billion barrels of oil every five days.
At this rate of consumption, the world consumes the energy equivalent of the entire recoverable oil reserves in the East Texas Field, the largest oil field in the US Lower 48, every 30 days.
At this rate of consumption, the world consumes the energy equivalent of the entire recoverable oil reserves in the Prudhoe Bay Field, the largest oil field in North America, every 30 days.
At this rate of consumption, the world consumes the energy equivalent of all of ExxonMobil's proven oil and gas reserves in less than four months.
We see no problem with this rate of energy consumption, and we predict that the world's rate of energy consumption will increase for the indefinite future.
We advise everyone, especially Americans, to continue buying and financing large vehicles to drive to and from large suburban mortgages.
. . Prudhoe Bay Field, the largest oil field in North America, every 60 days.
I continue to find myself amazed at the blindness of my fellow citizens.
Six years ago I started riding my first cargo trike. I thought that folks would look at me and say -- oh, what a great solution to some of our problems with pollution, global warming, and lack of exercise in our daily routines. "I think I'll try that!" they'd say.
Not to mention other benefits -- "energy independence" and reduction of oil-related geopolitical tensions and also "peak oil."
But no.
Many people think that use of vargo trikes is terrific, but they do not change their own patterns at all.
Many people are indifferent about the cargo trike, and think that it is a funny novelty -- nothing more, nothing less.
A significant number of people are hostile to the cargo trike. It seems to challenge their fundamental beliefs in a way that triggers an immediate emotional response of anger and scorn.
Since I've been riding in my town (Minneapolis), I've sold three used trikes, still have two, and helped the trike maker sell yet another new trike to a person in a neighboring city (St. Paul). I have seen increased bike riding andsome superb "bike-trailer" combinations which are very practical.
I wonder if people who sit at computers and work in climate-controlled offices and who habitually travel by car end up with imaginations bound by these routines.
I truly believe that our collective and individual imaginations are bound by a belief that our civilization is "the norm" from here on out. Other people will eventually "catch up" to us economically, and then everyone will live like this evermore.
So the bankers who make up these reports must think with the same inability to see information and reason out the implications?
The exceptions are few and far between -- Matt Simmons, for example.
Every civilization has thought they were the norm, from the Egyptians on up, and that they would be around forever and nothing would ever change. The foolishness of this assumption should be obvious, at least in this day and age when we have access to all the historical records of the world. But alas, it persists.
I suppose its just easier to stick your head in the sand.
Nothing is special about our present moment.
We are the same evolution-bred animals that populated many an earlier and now ceased civilization.
They too, had "all" of history --all up to their time which they were willing to acknowledge of. (Example: Modern school teachers do not teach 5th graders about Easter Island.)
Which brings up the question: Are TODers mildly depressed?...;o)
The winning combination seems to be to have money, but be a total tight-ass with it, and yes have the basic lack of consideration for others, but the main thing is, a high level of skill in manipulating others. You have to enjoy getting into people's minds and manipulating them for your own ends or amusement without the slightest twinge of guilt over how you may be ruining their life, health, etc.
If you really want to make it with the ladies, think Sociopath. Not the stupid kind that eventually gets caught and thrown in prison, the smarter kind that goes on and on and leaves a wide wake of havoc well-sprinkled with the bodies and souls of your victems.
That, in Amurrika, is Mr. Perfect.
I like this site. I wish it had been there when I first got the word!
It's possible to keep an eye on energy issues without commiting to a single energy future.
This is an interesting and plausible hypothesis.
But since it compensate for the "tendency to maintain denial" that would mean that there is an "optimal" level of doomerosity which has some chance to match reality.
Control???
WHICH control?
WHOSE control?
I didn't know there was "control" at TOD.
So YOU are "under control", mmmm...
I wonder then who is controling the controler.
Of course, it's kind of hard to tell online. On the Internet, no one knows you're a dog, and all that.
I think that the doomerism(?) extends well beyond the PO community, and that it has both psychological and sociological causes. If you go into an inner city neighborhood, or a poor slum on the outskirts of the city, or any homeless camp, you will run into a significant number of people who are disheartened, defeated, and personally doomed. This is best evidenced in the acting out of the youth of the inner city. What have they got to do besides deal drugs? College? They ain't going to no college. They'll be lucky to finish high school. And they know it. In the past few years this feeling has crept out of the ghettos and into middle class and even some upper class areas. People increasingly have less and less opportunities. They are more constrained in life. This leads many to depression and defeatism. Projected outward, it can become doomerism. Not only that, but doom would have a few benefits -the overhaul of society, starting from scratch. Loss of constraints. More opportunities. I think doomerism and defeatism are two sides of the same coin. As someone once said, the difference between suicide and homicide is the direction of the impulse.
Take this with a grain of salt please. That's my admittedly unprofessional analysis.
... so remember, if you can't be "honcho" happy, there's always "Buddhist" happy. (And Buddhist happy might require a little less energy per capita ;-)
http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2006/02/page/2/
I happened to visit a Buddhist Temple a couple days ago, which why I mentioned it. There is a self-guided audio tour, and a cafeteria for a vegetarian lunch. It was a nice experience. I did notice that the Temple didn't seem to have bike racks though ;-/
I grew up in that area, interesting to see the neighborhood tip toward an asian and Buddhist community ... great strip mall food!
And the other scenarios you mentioned are also correct. Hopefully though, by the time the sun goes nova we'll have figured out the means to star travel. A ticket to Alpha Centauri anyone?
Catastrophic Utopia, or the Psychology of "Yearning For A New Dark Age"
odograph,
You said, "It's possible to keep an eye on energy issues without committing to a single energy future."
It's not only possible, it is the most realistic and scientific approach. It is a refutation of "Peak Oil" as assured catastrophic death and destruction of culture, which there is no demonstrably provable way to show that it will be.
The issue is whether I accept absolute catastrophic doom as the only possible outcome as an article of faith. You may notice that many people here seem to....and react in a very hostile way to the suggestion that there could be any other possible outcome....notice the response of Kevembuangga to your remarks, "You are not a "moderate" you are a troll with an agenda."
It is shocking that a so called "scientific outlook" would react to any difference with the "accepted dogma" of assured doom and catastrophic failure of all modern society in such a violently hostile way. What does it say about the psychology of the "peak oil" "rapture" theology? Of course, that version of absolutism has nothing to do with science in the normally accepted way of acceptance of new thesis and theories, and then testing them with as much rigor as possible to try to prove their correctness, a tool that relies on acceptance of questioning DEEPLY any theory. It is, in the end, a belief system.
Of course, it was predicted and described many years ago. Rousseau and the cult of the "Noble Savage", the Ruskin/Morris aesthetic of "Neo-Gothic Medievalist, and more directly and recently related to the "Peak Oil" catastrophist theology", Alvin Toffler.
Toffler described in the 1980's what he called "The Yearning for a New Dark Age" as part of the illness he had earlier described as "Future Shock".
This would be, he said, the mental breakdown in reaction to complexity, high cultural speed of change, overchoice of options in lifestyle, career and social choices, and the inability and or unwillingness to stay up with the more technical and modern pace of change.
It was pointed up that those most vulnerable to "Peak Oil" depression issues are middle aged males. These of course are exactly the same ones most vulnerable to "Future Shock", in that they are most mentally acclimated to the older, slower more simple and organizationally stable structure, and they are least shielded (in comparison to females, with their known stronger social based networks, and "people and home" orientation) form the chaos of ultra high speed cultural post modernism in the high tech high information culture.
The reaction becomes to yearn for a simpler, more primitive, slower and less diverse time, a culture that is more comparable to a known model, namely, the past. "Peak Oil" provides a magnificent vehicle to a slower, more primitive world. It may be a harder world, but at least the struggles for life's basics are one the human mind can comprehend. Thus, the collapse of a completely incomprehensible ultra modern system becomes a dream, a fantasy of a way back to a simple world. Notice that the "Neo-Gothic" movement was born in the birth of the super expansion of industrial, commercial, media culture.
Note the virulent language used against anyone who expresses any doubts about the exact nature not of "geological" peak oil (which is a fairly easily demonstrated fact of geology in the past) but about the "catastrophist" vision of the future. First they are completely dehumanized, referred to repeatedly as "sheepies", "screaming monkeys", and no smarter than yeast. They are declared in some state of mental illness or sickness, "denial", "sleepwalking", "brainwashed" or "hypnotized" by giant forces beyond their comprehension.
This type of attack of such viscousness and slanderous nature bespeaks something much deeper than a difference of opinion or technical viewpoint.
It indicates that anyone who perceives any weakness in the "assured catastrophist" theory is actually an impediment to a desired goal, a possible roadblock and a danger to what is a desired vision of existence, that being the return to the mental and social peace that "catastrophe", "powerdown" and the "big dieoff" will bring....a more peaceful and beautiful utopia of a simple, non technical, slower, and local culture.
Of course, like all "Utopias", the dreamed of "dark age" will not come. The technology cat is already out of the bag. The knowledge will survive, the more advanced methods will exist in pockets, and live on to keep the world complicated and much different than the hoped for "simple" dark age of the past. But it lives on as a dangerous dream. There are those who, if they do not see the dreamed of "collapse" coming soon, may begin to try to "encourage it" to come. The emergence of "radical solutions" of the type proposed by "Green Anarchists"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_anarchism indicate that psychologically, the "collapse", or "die off" or "End of The World As We Know It" is not so much feared as a possible outcome of oil and gas depletion" or "Peak Oil" but dreamed of as a preferable new world for humans, an aesthetic choice.
The words of the exploration geologist Greg Croft ring louder...
"The greatest danger from peak oil is that we will do something foolish in response to it."
But what may seem "foolish" to many of us, may actually be a path to perceived beautiful future to some. At this point, the discussion has less and less to do with oil and energy at all, but more and more to do with aesthetics, belief, and desired purposes in life. For those who yearn for "A New Dark Age" so called oil depletion or "Peak Oil" simply becomes a means to an ends, and no solution should be attempted because none is desired.
Roger Conner known to you as ThatsItImout
The future actually has been written. It just has some serious continuity errors and wicked spelling and grammatical mistakes.
Will you help us fix these? It only pays $6 an hour to start, but I can assure you the perks are unbelievable.
But it had better pay better than $6/hr. I have eight years left on my mortgage.
I know I tend to the doomer side of the equation.
Put this down to working in the Y2K arena as a mainframe programmer trying to make it a survival situation.
I worked long and hard hours during this event and saw the scary side of what was hidden from most including the idioticy of the Mass Media.
We escaped it but some did not. There was no mention of those that did not. I saw mass layoffs of very key personnel, idioticy by IT management to unheard of levels.
This gave me some insight as to how we react or will react and this gave me my reasons for tending to the doom side of the future.
That being said, I hope and pray that this proposed upcoming event is averted. I have been watching and keenly reading the internet for years and observing as well personally.
Hope is something I keep near but preparedness is something I chose to do just in case.
So I hope for the best and prepare for the worst. I do not do it gleefully. Its hard work and expensive. It detrimental to good mental health and I do not enjoy it.
What I saw after Y2K was that we no longer had a cohesive society. The business leaders threw all morals to the wind and started to take this country economically to its knees.
Our morals shrank to nothing but selfcentered greed beyond belief.
We are not , IMO, no longer a suvivable species in the USA. We have not the core values to make it through.
The folks who populate this website are not the same as the general public. I applaud the attitudes and efforts of those here but realize the difference.
I still work in computer technology, precision farming and other areas. Mainframes no longer exist in meaningful numbers to keep me employed. I am currenly implementing wireless technology to autombile service areas and am amazed at the unbelievable technology in that area(automotive embedded systems) yet realize that the Big Three for all that technology are mostly on the wrong path.
Will our technology save us? I think it still tied to closely to the business side of the equation to offer much hope. If it was diverted? Say thur 'Open Source' avenues? Then we might have a chance.
I suggest the book (online version exists) by Eric S. Raymond .....www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/
titled The Cathedral and the Bazaar and others at that site.
This to me is where we need to be. Using grassroots technology to take control of our future and not waiting for the 'guv/ or biz to make decisions for us. I don't think they really care.
airdale--"Thankee Sai, if it do ya."
So, Roger, you are speaking of me as "Yearning for a New Dark Age" and "violently hostile" ?
I am very sad...
Of course, like all "Utopias", the dreamed of "dark age" will not come. The technology cat is already out of the bag. The knowledge will survive,
Agreed 100%, except may be with a toned down "technology cat" (not so miraculous), but alas I expect BOTH a die-off and some persistence of civilisation and technology.
This is what I am aiming for, not out of a craving for "dark age" or a yearning for "a simpler, more primitive, slower and less diverse time, a culture that is more comparable to a known model, namely, the past."
I enjoy too much the current facilities of civilisation to have any desire to give them up.
Though, there is a little bit of a difference in my appreciation with respect to what seems to be the "common greed".
As I am extremely lazy I enjoy to spend very little with almost no effort instead of toiling even more than the primitivists to "keep up with the Jones".
I really don't see the point to have to cling to "complexity, high cultural speed of change, overchoice of options in lifestyle, career and social choices" is this has a very bad EROTI (Enjoyment Returned Over Toil Invested).
And I am fairly sure that CIVILISATION has the best EROTI over "dark ages", primitivism, warlordism and any other apocalyptic credences.
More precisely, rather than aiming for die-off I am NOT WILLING to try to avoid population collapse whether this is to be soft or hard, voluntary or unvoluntary.
Sorry if this is so gloomy but this is unfortunately a TOTAL WASTE of time, ressources and ingenuity.
Overpopulation IS our problem, I seem to agree on this with TechGuy, GreyZone and PeakTO (NOT pretending they partake more than this with me) .
This type of attack of such viscousness and slanderous nature bespeaks something much deeper than a difference of opinion or technical viewpoint.
Could you please READ the arguments between odograph, and me or more recently with slaphappy and Magnus Redin and also Starvid and Magnus Redin (who seems to entertain connivance with both).
Honestly tell WHO is the most viciously slanderous?
Who is either LYING or arguing BESIDE the topic to breed confusion?
and no solution should be attempted because none is desired.
Oh! I do crave for a "solution" but probably not in accordance with the one(s) you are looking for.
I DO CRAVE for a change or restraint on 2 of our most "basic instincts" :
- Men are eager to fight.
- Women are eager to breed.
This were EXCELLENT options all along prehistoric and historic times, allowing mankind to evolve and spread over a seemingly "unlimited", "open ended" Earth.The Earth is NOW bounded and closed, these are NOW deadly vicious habits.
If we don't rein in these we are going toward extinction, notwithstanding ANY kind of technology, ressources, peaks or no peaks.
PERIOD.
Kevembuangga,
First, to be sure it is understood, I was on no personal attack...as I have said before, you, I, and others have generally managed to keep a civil agenda going without, I hope, real rancor or hostility, and I have always enjoyed reading you and others (the post I am replying to for example was very fun to read, I especially like the concept of EROTI (Enjoyment Returned Over Toil Invested), I wonder if there is any way we can begin statistically measuring that! :-), something for the math whizes to work on...
The nature of the sentence that you seemed to be replying to by odograph seemed pretty mild (and I am not familiar with any other debates you and he may have had, or can't at the moment recall them) to get a return such as "A troll with an agenda", and it provoked me to address the bigger more general theme that I did in my post. My post was intended not as a personal rhetorical insult against any one person, but simply as a discussion of the theory of what some call "green anarchy" and others refer to as "primitivism" for lack of a better description, and the fact that not all people regard "peak oil" or "resource depletion as a "bad thing", if it will act as a means and tool in dismantling the modern technical capitalist type societies.
I only point this up for two major reasons....first, for the benefit of those new to this discussion, who may not be aware that some (certainly not all) who are most able to frighten and depress the folks who are newest to this discussion (and the "Peak Oil Blues" psychological website was the original topic of this string) are speaking more from desire for an event than from knowledge about it (that being catastrophic collapse of modern society), and newbies should be aware that that their predictions are dire and horrifying to them, but for the person doing the prediction, actually a fulfillment of a desire, so the agenda and the "predictions" are naturally slanted somewhat. Secondly, newer folks to the discussion should be informed that there are political and social agenda's involved in the "Peak Oil" discussion, and try to learn to seperate this from the geological, technical and scientific issues of oil depletion. The social and political agenda, and this is purely my view and not scientifically provable, seems to have later began to swallow up the geological and technical agenda. Essentially, this runs the risk of moving "peak oil" away from a technical/geological discussion of energy production/consumption, and into the realm of social philosophical cause. Combined with global warming, the science and the actual facts are becoming less and less important to those involved in this issue, as it becomes more and more a moral/philosphical/political/social crusade. That distinction should be discussed, and I think newer people should be aware of the distinction. It is a fundamental one.
Roger Conner known to you as ThatsItImout
without, I hope, real rancor or hostility
No rancor or hostility from me.
No matter how far apart I am with any contestant I never get upset about HONEST and wholehearted arguments.
If you didn't felt the humorous tone of my "I am very sad..." remark and icon I apologize.
I did get the humor of the "very sad" line, and icon, but was mainly jealous because I can't get my Mac to put smiley's in like that! :-( (see, I have to do them in black and white, like a 1950's TV set! :-)
Roger Conner known to you as ThatsItImout
I would greatly benefit from a fraction continuance of the techno-orgy. It would give my librarian career security, and would allow me to continue my love of playing the electric guitar. However, I have been able to put aside those attachments in my pursuit of assessing just how sustainable any portion of modern life really is. My position of serious consideration of completely eliminating electricity consumption stems from a holistic realisation of the complexity and resource drawdown that would be required to sustain that luxury. To remain ignorant of the fact that to expect one infrastructure based on finite resources will prevail over one that is in certain short future is, well ignorant. Not to mention irresponsible and indefensible.
The simple reality remains, the host that allowed for the development of human life owes us nothing. Just because we have been able to leverage certain endowments to create a lifestyle, does not mean that that lifestyle is worthy of sustenance. to deny this simple equation is to deny what it is to be human. We came from the mud, and if we have any chance of making past this century, we had better learn to accept that life in a sustainable form will have to resemble that humble origin to a much greater extent than what is being attempted by the supposedly informed members here.
If you do not like that last statement, then by all means show the community through research and calculation how a fractional techno-orgy can be sustained. However, to resort to the making a villian out of a disparate belief only shows your cowardice and fear. It would be better for all if you just kept your self righteous prejudice to yourself and let the chips fall where they may than to strike out at those that have a deep concern for the future of humanity just because their goals force you to critically evaluate the realistic implications of your desires.
There are two things that need to be addressed in order for humanity to make it through this crises. One is an honest and rigorous evaluation of our needs versus wants. The other is to take science and its progeny technology to task and evaluate the just because we can, should we aspect of implementation.
You can tell how the stress level has escalated in many threads here as peak becomes more apparent and there needs to be a psychological outlet. Call it the TOD's R & R unit. Go there when you need some peace and people that understand your mindset.
My experience has been that the nice neighborhoods of Minneapolis are way too expensive to live in, and the affordable neighborhoods are too scarey.
Of course I am biased, but people in St. Paul seem to me much lower pressured and much nicer and more tolerant than those in the bigger Twin.
Minneapolis is truly economically segregated.
In regard to peak oil, I think the best advice anyone can follow is to choose one's neighborhood with great care--and get to know your neighbors.
Bikes coexist with drivers pretty well here. Most of our roads have wide enough traffic lanes that drivers can pass a bike rider near the curb without moving over much. Drivers in the next lane are usually pretty accommodating anyway, and allow a curb-lane car to nudge over the lane divider while passing a bike.
Trikes are completely different. A driver has to change lanes to pass one. They're slow-rolling traffic blockers, especially in rush hour, and especially on hills. I went by one in rush hour yesterday and thought "That's just stupid, an accident looking for a place to happen".
What is funny is that every time I see a car, I think:
How stupid! An crash happening! And the driver probably doesn't even know it."
Cars -- over-used and ill understood -- are involved in costly automobile crashes, costly geopolitical and geomilitary crashes, health crashes, healthcare cost crashes, the economic crash, and most significantly the ecological crash which is the mother of all crashes.
My high school child recently worked hard to earn a trip to Europe with "people to People" (founded by the late President Eisenhower. She noted that the European transportation share includes far more walking, biking, scootering, and transit than in the USA. She also noted that in Italy and France many of the cars were small relative to USA personal "comfort bubbles." My guess is that the Europeans were becoming more like the USA in terms of transportation over the last 50 years, but that this trend will reverse. Even so, Europe is still more dioverse in terms of transportation mode share.
It is this variety that all of us must get used to. No longer can we afford to say that a trike or a bike-trailer are stupid, or an accident looking to happen. The accident is already happening, and many of the people on bikes or trikes or quadHPVs are actually doing something about it.
The Global Accident is no accident. It is more like a Global Crash in which the automobile plays a very central role.
I am not anti-car -- my family of 4 owns one hybrid, used lightly -- but I am working for the day when car use is much less of the transportation mode share.
I am not spoiling for a fight, but I am insistent that the car traffic we have is obscene beyond words, and that we must take it upon ourselves to establish a new, far more diverse transportation paradigm.
Third line above should read"
"How stupid! A crash happening....."
Hey, I resemble that remark! :-)
On "love of cars", let's be honest, many do, or they couldn't sell so many, but of course, many folks hate them to the core of thier being! Europe, which many here often cite as an example of "transport diversity", builds some of the best bicycles, scooters, trains, trams, AND cars in the world, going from one end of the transportation spectrum to the other, and displaying artistic and clever engineering in most case on whatever they build. That to me is impressive, and a good path in the future, be ready with a product for anything!
By the way, if you think Mr. Thatsit can wax poetic on love of cars, don't get me started on trains.....the fast rugged electric locomotives of the old New Haven Railroad....
http://www.lib.uconn.edu/about/exhibits/railroad/locomotive/UC181181s.jpg
Or the remains of a great heritage, Amtrak in New York, New Jersey and Conneticut:
http://www.subwaynut.com/mnr/newhaven/newhaven5.jpg
http://sixbellsjunction.co.uk/photos/030505_04.jpg
http://www.trainweb.org/railpix/ampix/cat-604h.jpg
http://www.trainweb.org/railpix/ampix/acela-2005r1-tacony-4-20-00.jpg
http://www.nationalcorridors.org/df/df08082005b.jpg
consider above an ode to Alanfrombigeasy :-)
We will talk about windmills, electrc cars, sailboats and passive solar commercial scale buildings, and Stirling engines, and heat pumps... another day...It is not love of "cars" per se, but just love of good engineering and beautiful design....:-)
Roger Conner known to you as ThatsItImout
Best I can offer is try to rearrange your routes to be on streets where there is already bicycle traffic. Or try to invite cyclists along to chat as you haul. The group ride thing also ticks off drivers but they do acknowledge defeat.
Good luck. Don't quit.
Yes, imagination is bound by routine. Even the freest thinker is working mostly by rearranging the bits and pieces seen in the foreground every day. Drea