<DrumBeat II: October 19, 2006The Oil DrumElectrified Rail: An Overlooked Mitigation Strategy for Peak Oil?>
<DrumBeat: October 19, 2006DrumBeatDrumBeat: October 21, 2006>

130 comments on DrumBeat: October 20, 2006

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

sendoilplease on October 20, 2006 - 8:56am Permalink | Subthread | Comments top
Should the day arrive when the price of shale oil becomes competitive, this could turn out to be an extraordinary giveaway of federal revenue (most oil shale lies under federal land) and a huge incentive to wreak environmental damage.

Tragedy of the commons.  

Maybe as the cities become uninhabitable we could railroad the refugees to the shale deposits - and give each refugee a pup-tent, shovel and maybe a couple bic lighters to heat the shale...

 

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Leanan on October 20, 2006 - 9:10am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I used to think that environmental rules would be thrown out the window as soon as the energy crisis really started to bite.  Example: Bush suspending EPA rules on gasoline after Katrina.  

But stories like the ones about the protesters in Ireland and South America make me wonder.  The people who are paying the price for environmental destruction are often not the ones benefitting from the resources extracted.  Maybe the locals will end up helping avert the Tragedy of the Commons.

Though anything that can be extracted by an individual or small group, such as firewood from a forest, is probably doomed.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
joule on October 20, 2006 - 9:40am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Generally, in the US environmental regulations aren't blatently thrown out the window. Rather, when powerful economic/political interests are unhappy with certain environmental initiatives, their lobbyists get to work in Washington, and if successful, proposed regulations are re-written, diluted, delayed, and shot through with exceptions favorable to certain groups. This happened all across the board when Reagen took over from Carter, and I see it all the time on the local level.

While local protests can make a lot of noise, cause a lot of bad publicity, and delay things, in the long run the fundamental principle that 'money talks' usually wins out.

The promulgation and enforcement of environmental regulations on a national scale is a very complex, tedious, and highly political process.  The fact the much of the oil shale is on federal lands does not give the locals much clout.

Based on over 30 years in the environmental consulting field, I can say with great confidence that  if we start having serious trouble meeting US consumer's demand for fuel, those oil shale projects are going to be completed come hell or high water.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
roel on October 20, 2006 - 9:48am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Leanan,

Wouldn't you think the protests might evaporate when it threatens to be permanently dark out, and people get cold and hungry and thirsty?

Protests may last only as long as at least some of the basic needs are still provided for. It's hard to imagine people waving banners on a freezing empty stomach. They'd be much more likely to go scrambling for food and water. And anything that burns to keep them lit and warm.

In that sense the protests can be regarded mainly as a luxury. In a well fed human, reason may be the driver, but in a hungry person, the reptilian prevails.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Leanan on October 20, 2006 - 9:52am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I wonder.  When I lived in Peru, there were many Indian tribes that lived with minimal contact with "civilization."  I wouldn't count on them starving or freezing any time soon.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
roel on October 20, 2006 - 10:46am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Oh, I absolutely agree. Whatever shape or form the coming crisis may have, it'll be worst for those who face the most dramatic changes. And that's not those who go in to it with a "primitive" lifestyle.

Though for them climate changes and other kinds of pollution may be tough, "we" will have all that and then some. Though, don't forget, Africa, Asia and South America, where life is most basic, have been our chemical and nuclear waste dumps for decades, and the Peru tribes may find their water starts killing people.

But since you mentioned Ireland as well, I got to thinking what I thought. Bangla Desh and the Niger Delta have seen large protests as well, in various ways. ANd undoubtedly, much more in on the way.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
LoveOregon on October 20, 2006 - 11:34am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Leanan:  would enjoy comparing notes on Peru, where I lived for two years and which I visit regularly.  Please email privately (go to my TOD user info).
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
elwoodelmore on October 21, 2006 - 3:51am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
 we are dynosaurs  
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
jokuhl on October 20, 2006 - 9:40pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
"In a well fed human, reason may be the driver, but in a hungry person, the reptilian prevails."

I'm not so sure of your police-work there, Norm.  I think the well-fed in our society can show a remarkable amount of social disinterest and a preference towards 'protecting what you've got', while in hard times, I see people (and myself) more inclined to offer and to ask for support.  Your example jumped to the extreme of people already desperately starving, of course, but unlike a mass of drowning people who'll be dunking each other to keep air in their lungs, I don't see starving societies operating on that same purely solo death-match.

Bob

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
elwoodelmore on October 21, 2006 - 4:01am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
i thought norm was the husband    and the questionable police work was done by the 1st deputy on the scene of the crime who misinterpreted the  dealer licence plate
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
jokuhl on October 21, 2006 - 7:26am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I'm just glad someone got the reference.  Years since I saw it.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
elwoodelmore on October 21, 2006 - 9:07am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
its a really funny and trajic movie  i must have watched it about 6 times so far     and since it is getting  close to the long winter here in the midwest of a   maybe it is time to rent it again      
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
jokuhl on October 22, 2006 - 8:24am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Don't know if you saw my note to Robert Rapier the other day, but if you haven't seen it, check out "Local Hero".  Really good 'winter evening' movie, any time of year.

"Firness will be the petrochemical capital of the free world!"

Great soundtrack by Mark Knopfler

Bob

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
PhilRelig on October 20, 2006 - 10:43am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I think whether Leanan is correct or not depends to a considerable extent on how ruthlessly authoritarian governments become in coming decades.  
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
optimist on October 20, 2006 - 11:25am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I always tend to question the assumption that we will cut down forests and such when PO hits. I suspect that there will be localized damage, but not widespread and massive like some imagine. Why? Three reasons really:

-Most people don't have fireplaces these days. Firewood doesn't do you any good if you don't have a place to burn it. Sure, you can always do so outside, but do you want to be the one huddling around a campfire in a New York winter?

-Cities don't have forests (save a few parks and random trees) and that is where most people live. The vast majority of our population is clustered in a few urban centers.

-To get firewood in the city you have to either have it brought to you, or go get it yourself. There might be a few people bringing firewood into sell, but by the time this becomes necessary I suspect that fuel will be lacking as well, so whoever the merchant was would have to find an alternative means (horse and buggy). Otherwise, the city folk would have to go get it themselves. Without gas, they'd have to walk. How far is it to the nearest forest from most of our cities? What are the odds a group of tired, hungry, and cold people could go back and forth enough to cause damage? Or even get there at all, if they were leaving from, say New York City.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Leanan on October 20, 2006 - 11:35am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I always tend to question the assumption that we will cut down forests and such when PO hits.

It's already happening.

These stories are from last winter.  The URLs don't work any more, alas.

ANCHORAGE - Cutting your own firewood is once again fashionable in Interior Alaska, where residents are firing up their chain saws in hopes of slashing home heating bills this winter.

The Alaska Department of Natural Resources this fall expanded its cut-your-own firewood program to open up more state land in the Interior for people willing to work for $5 a cord.

And from India:

Kiari (Himachal Pradesh): Environmentalists in Himachal Pradesh are claiming that the rampant cutting of trees for firewood is irreversibly depleting the state's forest cover.

Despite a Supreme Court ruling, the illegal cutting of trees in the forest rich Himachal Pradesh continues unabated.

Experts say if unchecked, it will create a serious ecological imbalance in the region.

Nearly 90 percent population of the hilly state makes a living on farming and in the absence of any other viable alternative to firewood, is forced to cut trees.

Thanks to the ever-increasing price of essential fuels like cooking gas and kerosene, nearly 70 percent of the village population uses fuel wood for cooking.

Environmentalists say the villagers use at least three million tonnes of wood for their daily needs causing ecological imbalance.

And over at PeakOil.com, there are people bragging about how they ignore the law and take firewood from national forests near their homes.  They argue that this is more "sustainable" than driving to where the law allows them to take wood.

A lot of houses still have fireplaces.  And a lot of people are installing wood stoves.  

The population is at least three times what it was when we last depended on wood for fuel.  And we deforested a lot of land then.  Even if only a fraction of us convert to wood, we can do a lot of damage.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
tate423 on October 20, 2006 - 11:41am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Leanan,

In my mind I see this happening the farther north you get as NG prices skyrocket in the future.  What do you see as stopping this from happening?  For me it's going to happen as each individual is forced to make his/her decision; damned the collective results.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Leanan on October 20, 2006 - 11:49am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
What do you see as stopping this from happening?

Global warming making it so warm you don't need to heat your house?

You'd still need to cook, of course.  A food scientist I spoke with last year said the reason there are so many raw dishes in Japanese cuisine was because of the scarcity of firewood.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
tate423 on October 20, 2006 - 12:04pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I plan on moving north several degrees Lat.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Samsara on October 20, 2006 - 2:07pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I am reminded of the scene in Dr. Zhavago(?) where Omar is stealing wood from a fence, and a Guard(his step brother ironically)  says,

"One person stealing wood is pathetic,  a million stealing wood is chaos".

I think the movie Dr. Zhavago will have some scenes in common with the future of many countries.

Firewood?  Sh|t,  people will be burning plastic toys, and everything else for heat.  Polution or no polution.

They will also steal everything that is not nailed down.

Maslow's "heirarchy of needs" will be taught in realtime up close and personal to people who never knew what "going without"  is/was.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
iclimbrock on October 20, 2006 - 3:11pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Please, install solar hot water wherever possible.  This is one of the least expensive ways to get energy for heat.  I did some research into this area and space heating can requires 5 times more BTUs than domestic hot water - so heating your house using solar hot water is one way to help.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Nagorak on October 22, 2006 - 6:26am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Do plastic toys even burn?  I think trying to burn plastic toys would be an incredibly futile way of trying to heat your home.  
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
sf on October 21, 2006 - 12:23am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Where forests are managed for wood production, using wood for home heating is not a big deal because about 25% of the wood is not suitable for high value wood products.  These residues can sometimes be used for pulp or electrical generation, but these products barely pay their way out of the woods, and using the residues for woodstoves is often the best economic use.  I get wood from the forest service for $5/cord.  My distant cousin in Germany buys wood in the forest for about $60 per cord and is still happy to get it.  
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.