My worst fears are wrapped up in that story. Not my expectations, but my worst fears. But one has to take the worst case scenario into account when preparing - lest they be caught in the hurricane with no supplies on hand.
Robert - The idea of survivalism is no new passion. My best friend in High School was Mormon and they have been encouraged by the church to prepare for bad times ahead going back decades. He still works a regular job (Security Mgr. for a Casino)but from what I understand they are beginning now to prepare for the worst. Globilization cannot survive in it's present form with $10.00 gas.
Far out, PeakOil.com picked up by the AP. Maybe that's why the site's down at the moment...
We're much leaner now on survivalists than a couple years ago. Surprising we never had a form your own militia thread.
What bothered you about the story, Robert? In lean times you'll get a segment of the populace locking and loading, sure, but the story also talks about people learning how to make soap and herbal medicines.
Hmm, what's this, "peakoil.com hits MSNBC.COM"? Now that'll do a job on your site traffic!
I agree - the peakoil.com site is sloooooow. I posted a request for questions for James Howard Kunstler there but the site is not responding.
Very good to see links to these sites on mainstream media!
Can you help me out? Here is my request:
Mr. Kunstler commented on my show in a recent podcast. I provided a video response/request and he has agreed to an interview. I would like to hear the thoughts of this community: what questions do you have for Mr. Kunstler?
I know this oil drum may not be the site for such a request so feel free to comment at http://www.kriscan.com or wait for peakoil.com to come back online.
LOL, the peak oil strip video was my favorite, I didn't understand a single word she was saying... lol, just kidding, it is nice to see women so passionate about a subject like this.. All the college women my age are too into getting wasted at frat parties to consider, much less understand, such issues. Good work though
I run a Peak Oil website (http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net) and am starting a cult . . . excuse me - "post oil sustainable commune" - in the woods here in Northern California. Perhaps you'd be interested in being the cult's . . . excuse me "community's" Alpha-Female. If so, feel free to contact me via the website.
Until now, I've been concerning myself with oil supplies and boring stuff like that. The real solution is for the "enlightened" to form cults and let the vast majority of people die.
New Cult Checklist
--------------------
1) need a name (Calgary Cargo Cult?)
2) some land (shouldn't be a problem)
3) cult vision (repopulating the planet)
4) supreme leader (I was just elected)
5) female/male ratio (10:1, 20:1, 50:1 ?)
6) financing (I'll think of something)
Great time to be starting a cult.
After all, somebody has to do it. :))
From page 311 of The Entropy Law and the Economic Process by Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen:
"..only in the late twilight ofthe human species, when human society will very likely disintegrate into small packs of humans, will the social factors which produce the circulation of elites fade away, too."
Is NOW the "late twilight" that G-R means?
Anyone else read this book? I found it haunting, interesting, prescient. It was published in 1971, by the way!
I thing you are going to need more than a website and some land.
The culture hasn't yet made the shift to: sustainable lifestyle = superior mate.
During this transition period, you are probably going to have to spice up your offer with some of the more traditional attractants. Diamonds and gold make good bait, especially in an inflationary environment.
Now you just hold on one minute, Matt Savinar! I'm the one that's gonna be puttin' together the post apocalyptic peak oil cult! I'm gonna call it "The Church of Unlimited Credit," and I'm the "All Knowing, All Seeing One Of Great Vision."
Hey Kris;
Thanks for posting here. Sorry to see that noone really tried to give you any Kunstler Questions.
I don't know what to ask him myself. I don't really find his tone useful.. while he does get a lot of attention with it. There's something to be said for that, I guess.
I've heard him say he lives in, if not suburbia, then a populated area. Aside from his writing, what does he do to get his household AND his community more prepared for what might be coming?
Good luck with the interview.
Many Thanks for your efforts to get the word out.
My fear has always been that the Doomers are right. This story gives a taste of the world in case they are. The suffering will be unbelievable, and I have to try to navigate my family through this. That's why I pay close attention to stories like this. I want to know what people are doing; how they are preparing.
My hope is different. My hope is that we will muddle through this, and while we no doubt have some difficult times ahead of us, we have a massive amount of fat to cut.
In fact, I just posted a thought experiment on my blog:
The purpose of the thought experiment is quite simple. I want to find out - in desperate times - just how much people can cut. Interested in your thoughts on that if you want to post them. For me, it's a window into whether the Doomer view is more or less likely. When people say "I just don't have much room to cut", then I am more pessimistic. But in my own life - and I have already made major cuts - I still have a ways to go before I have cut out all the fat.
Robert, lots of people can cut lots of spending and lots of driving. The problem is that lots of people will then no longer have a job. I fear that anything other than exponential growth in energy usage and spending will almost immediately result in a depression or worse in the United States. This country will not cope well with a economic collapse.
i think an additional issue is that people will have lost their financial ability to put alternatives in place to allow themselves to maintain some features of their current standards of living. In other words, most alternatives aren't free. Further, time is of the essence. You can't immediately install a PV system or solar hot water or start to grow a large proportion of your food, much less, preserve it.
To me, the word "doomer" prevents/puts off many people from taking needed action from a risk management perspective. It biases discussions in much the same way that "peak oil theory" is used to deflect the serious issues raised by reduced energy supplies. I feel self-reliant is a better word without the baggage that doomer carries.
I think this is a hugely important point that the technocornucopians seem to willfully ignore.
nobody ignores it. if anything the doomers ignore the fact that you need peak oil to make these new energy sources viable.
there will always be people with money. think how many cars and homes will be bought this year even though there are high gas prices and the worst housing market in forever.
there is always the old technologies of conservation, car pooling, cutting back and etc.
In my 2006 Net Oil Exports Revisited article, I talked about "tiny houses," as small as 100 square feet, along mass transit lines, as huge swaths of the 'burbs are basically written off:
I propose a sort of triage operation: "tiny" homes and multifamily housing along electric mass transit lines. In my opinion, it is the only way that we can preserve some semblance of a civilized society. The suburbs are, by and large, a lost cause.
That was pretty much the response when I first raised the subject in 2006, but I somehow suspect that super efficient small, low cost, houses are looking more and more attractive now.
Having said that, what is preventing us from downsizing is what the commercial showed--SNS, Spousal Nesting Syndrome. The cost of admission to a New Urbanism community, where I could walk to my office is a townhouse which costs twice what our current abode costs, so we have a stalemate.
I was recently chatting with a senior petrochemical executive and his wife, who live in Detroit. They bought a McMansion in 2005. When I suggested that they sell now for whatever they can get, the wife almost screamed (I am not exaggerating) "House prices will recover!" Cognitive Dissonance in full force. Two problems: they would have to take a huge loss and it would be a loss of social standing, to move a smaller house than their peers.
Yeah, we can all live in tiny super efficient housing and mine oil shale/sands for a living just like 1750's London when coal mining/burning was the trendy thing to do. I think when people look at the tech fixes such as super efficient housing ect they underestimate the amount of people that are going to be unemployed in the future. I know people can't predict the future, but I wouldn't think it too much of a stretch to say that. Think of all those people working at the hordes of restaurants, spa's/salons, coffee shops, car dealerships, advertising, retail sales and a plethora of service/luxury jobs that encompasses the entire American economy. With the Fed building up the debt and altering interest rates and keeping economic downturns since the 1930's rather small by comparison, we have taken out the natural selection of the economy, meaning the businesses that shouldn't be there have been aloud to prosper because of a huge debt build-up. The economy works a lot like an ecosystem when hard times happen those that are most fit to survive will and keep the population lean and smart, but all our businesses have fattened up just like our people. When the inevitable down-turn starts like it has, recession, much more businesses are going to be weeded out and more people laid-off, because their are too many restaurants and coffee shops. People are not going to live in ultra efficient housing because they can't afford any housing cause they don't have jobs. They won't be able to afford PHEV's either, so those won't be saving the day anytime soon. I think perhaps a government CCC or something might help where people can work decent probably hard jobs building new energy infrastructure and can live in government small ultra-efficient housing. I don't know if I like that proposition but that's better than nothing. I wasn't directing anything towards you westexas, just speaking in general.
No, ultra efficient housing will not be stopped by a weak economy-a weak economy will kill large, energy inefficient houses of low property value, i.e. once the cost to heat and/or cool a dwelling exceeds a certain % of the dwellings value the dwelling value quickly spirals to zero (Detroit has more than a few of these buildings).
I think you don't make enough allowances for human ingenuity.
You don't need to insulate the whole darn house - if money is tight then people will live in single rooms, and insulating those will not cost a fortune.
So there is a job - insulating properties.
If EV cars are not affordable then electric bikes and scooters will lead the way.
There are jobs there.
So there is some chance that not everything will be kaput, and so maybe we can move on form humble beginnings to EV cars and efficient houses.
We had massive unemployment in the UK in the 80s - on the whole people cope better with adversity than prosperity.
You had massive unemployment in the UK in the 1980s while at the same time global oil prices were collapsing and oil availability was increasing. Given the incredible reliance our entire civilization has upon oil, you might want to ponder that fact a bit longer.
I don't believe that I indicated in any way that the high unemployment in the UK was caused by oil.
The reference was simply that people are quite ingenious at getting by, and that some of the thought processes of an informal economy took root at that time, and may be helpful in any depression caused on this occasion by peak oil.
So you might want to ponder a bit longer on making your post relevant to the discussion at hand.
And you miss the point entirely. The unemployment was not caused by oil but the entire scenario was softened by a rising global energy profile. Will the ingenuity you saw be possible in a world of shrinking energy availability?
The key question is "What is the decline rate?" And we do not know. A very low decline rate and the world has time to adapt. Above some threshold though, adaptation cannot occur rapidly enough and the result is disaster. You cannot simply assume that everything will be ok, which is exactly what you are doing. You are whistling as you stroll past the graveyard, hoping, praying, believing any belief-based thing you can grasp that it will all turn out fine.
That's not exactly a heartening prescription for adaptation now, is it?
If you would address what is actually written rather than continually re-interpreting my statements into something else then the discussion might be more productive.
In no way did I imply that anything would be easy, and in no way do I predict outcomes, as they are dependent on a lot of choices which we don't know how they will be made in the future.
In fact we don't even know for sure such basic parameters as how expensive or cheap solar energy is likely to be in five years time or what price great new insulation materials such as aerogel will sell for.
I am at a loss to understand why you conceive that ingenuity will not be important whatever the future holds.
In five minutes in the local pub I got more sensible responses - an older couple when I said that their pensions might not be worth very much and heating might be dear said that in that case they would have to wrap themselves in their duvets in the evening, and do more on their allotment.
I did not say that oil caused previous unemployment nor am I saying that adjustment will be easy or predicting how successful it will be.
If you actually want to address what I did say, fine, but please don't simply invent things I haven't said.
I never once claimed that you said that the unemployment was caused by oil. That is your interpretation of what I said and how you are getting that I have no idea. What I have said twice is that the unemployment of that era occurred during a period of rising global energy, not during a period of declining global energy. That is a very different situation, one in which simply ingenuity may not be sufficient. The general assumption that we can just tighten our belts a bit and all will be fine is one that should be challenged. Without active mitigation, including the adoption of new energy sources at least close to the quality and volume of fossil fuels, just tightening out belts may not be sufficient at all.
However, it appears that we're not communicating here, for whatever reason. And rather than waste your or my time further, I'll leave you to your assumptions.
You cannot simply assume that everything will be ok, which is exactly what you are doing. You are whistling as you stroll past the graveyard, hoping, praying, believing any belief-based thing you can grasp that it will all turn out fine.
and that was based on nothing at all that I said in my post, merely your interpretation of where you thought I might be coming from.
In actual fact I make no predictions on whether we will successfully adapt, I do however think that there is scope for actions which will mitigate whatever is coming down the track.
I'll leave you to your assumptions, unless they involve entirely misrepresenting what I have said.
Another website I comment at is CommonDreams.org, and they've started to pick up more items about Peak Oil as more are published. I view these as an opportunity to educate and direct others here for more data and discussion. This and this are the two most recent articles and associated comment threads. There's also a very important, IMO, speech transcript by David Korten, author of The Great Turning and When Corporations Rule the World that references Peak Oil as a catalytic event for change. I wholy agree with that point-of-view and elaborate on how it could be used politically in the second link's comment thread:
"When will folks storm the castle? I expect the oil/energy/economy crisis to continue escalating as we get ever closer to November and await its being linked to the Iraqi Holocaust during the debates between Obama and McCain, if not outright in the Democratic Platform. Obama certainly will be pushed by activists to articulate how he proposes to Change our way out of what is the USA’s Achilles’s Heel. My advice to Obama, posted elsewhere already, is for him to come clean to the country about Peak Oil, its challenge, and how it can be mitigated, as it cannot be solved since oil is finite and will eventually become uneconomical for most usage.
"Peak Oil can best be mitigated by electrifying rail-goods transport, rapidly building up rail-based public transit, and the associated electrical generating capacity comprising wind, solar-thermal, wave, tidal, and geothermal; by legislating the internal combustion engine out of existence for personal use and replacing it with electric cars; and by redirecting human and animal waste streams to replace fossil fuel produced fertilizers with Organic-NPK (one of the most hidden/forgotten aspects of Peak Oil is the unsustainable dependence of farming on what is being termed Industrial-NPK [nitrogen, phospate, potassium, I-NPK], generated soley from Natgas and rapidly depleting, mined natural feedstocks). The only feasible method of financing such a massive and absolutely needed project given our over-extended deficit-depleted financial condition is to comepletely rollback the US Empire and use the Trillion dollars in annual savings while reinstating the progressive tax structure put in place by FDR during WW2. Such an endeavor will also drasticly reduce CO2 and other greehouse gases, which also must be done. The third benefit from would be the establishment of world peace as the main driver of war–the US Empire–will cease to exist. The fourth benefit would be to promote greater equity both in the US and worldwide as the culture change needed to fuel the Great Turning envisioned by David Korten, and called paradigm change by myself and others, would gain traction as the forces of reaction and Empire are put in their place–under the collective heel of the world’s people.
"Is this idealistic? Yes, but it is also pragmatic. It also provides a comprehensive answer for the ~80% of Americans who want Change in the country’s direction. Furthermore, it MUST happen if we want any sort of viable future for ourselves and our children. Such honesty and vision would ensure Obama’s election and re-election. And it would provide a start at removing the dark stain on us as Americans responsible for our country’s Imperial depredations that have gone
Energy fears looming, new survivalists prepare
My worst fears are wrapped up in that story. Not my expectations, but my worst fears. But one has to take the worst case scenario into account when preparing - lest they be caught in the hurricane with no supplies on hand.
Robert - The idea of survivalism is no new passion. My best friend in High School was Mormon and they have been encouraged by the church to prepare for bad times ahead going back decades. He still works a regular job (Security Mgr. for a Casino)but from what I understand they are beginning now to prepare for the worst. Globilization cannot survive in it's present form with $10.00 gas.
Perhaps people should be frightened. No?
Rumor you can dispel, maybe.
Safeway Supermarket came out of Mormon stockpiling.
Far out, PeakOil.com picked up by the AP. Maybe that's why the site's down at the moment...
We're much leaner now on survivalists than a couple years ago. Surprising we never had a form your own militia thread.
What bothered you about the story, Robert? In lean times you'll get a segment of the populace locking and loading, sure, but the story also talks about people learning how to make soap and herbal medicines.
Hmm, what's this, "peakoil.com hits MSNBC.COM"? Now that'll do a job on your site traffic!
Yes, PO.com is being hammered, ever since the story came out yesterday. It's even worse today.
I agree - the peakoil.com site is sloooooow. I posted a request for questions for James Howard Kunstler there but the site is not responding.
Very good to see links to these sites on mainstream media!
Can you help me out? Here is my request:
Mr. Kunstler commented on my show in a recent podcast. I provided a video response/request and he has agreed to an interview. I would like to hear the thoughts of this community: what questions do you have for Mr. Kunstler?
I know this oil drum may not be the site for such a request so feel free to comment at http://www.kriscan.com or wait for peakoil.com to come back online.
Thanks for all you do!
Kris
Nice web site. You remind me of Obama girl for some reason. Go Peak Oil Girl!
Ya...are you the woman that did the PO video/strip dance thing not too long ago? Good PR stunt I thought.
LOL, the peak oil strip video was my favorite, I didn't understand a single word she was saying... lol, just kidding, it is nice to see women so passionate about a subject like this.. All the college women my age are too into getting wasted at frat parties to consider, much less understand, such issues. Good work though
Kris,
I run a Peak Oil website (http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net) and am starting a cult . . . excuse me - "post oil sustainable commune" - in the woods here in Northern California. Perhaps you'd be interested in being the cult's . . . excuse me "community's" Alpha-Female. If so, feel free to contact me via the website.
http://tinyurl.com/6mzwkm
Best,
Matt
Ha...Matt,
You have no scruples whatsoever. I think she's a bit too intelligent for your band of monkeys!!
Attn Kris & Matt:
I think you two would make an excellent match--just an opinion from an older guy--hope you two can somehow meet & greet in person.
Why, you dirty old man. Wish I had thoght of that.
I'm 29.
If I was 29, I'd be a dirty old man, too. Now, at 63, I'm just old and dirty.
Dude, you are true visionary!!
Until now, I've been concerning myself with oil supplies and boring stuff like that. The real solution is for the "enlightened" to form cults and let the vast majority of people die.
New Cult Checklist
--------------------
1) need a name (Calgary Cargo Cult?)
2) some land (shouldn't be a problem)
3) cult vision (repopulating the planet)
4) supreme leader (I was just elected)
5) female/male ratio (10:1, 20:1, 50:1 ?)
6) financing (I'll think of something)
Great time to be starting a cult.
After all, somebody has to do it. :))
From page 311 of The Entropy Law and the Economic Process by Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen:
"..only in the late twilight ofthe human species, when human society will very likely disintegrate into small packs of humans, will the social factors which produce the circulation of elites fade away, too."
Is NOW the "late twilight" that G-R means?
Anyone else read this book? I found it haunting, interesting, prescient. It was published in 1971, by the way!
I thing you are going to need more than a website and some land.
The culture hasn't yet made the shift to: sustainable lifestyle = superior mate.
During this transition period, you are probably going to have to spice up your offer with some of the more traditional attractants. Diamonds and gold make good bait, especially in an inflationary environment.
Now you just hold on one minute, Matt Savinar! I'm the one that's gonna be puttin' together the post apocalyptic peak oil cult! I'm gonna call it "The Church of Unlimited Credit," and I'm the "All Knowing, All Seeing One Of Great Vision."
Just so we have that understood...
SubKommander Dred
Well, now you've done it!
As a good looking intelligent women in a room full of nerds, it is only a mater of time before the marriage proposals start.
Hey Kris;
Thanks for posting here. Sorry to see that noone really tried to give you any Kunstler Questions.
I don't know what to ask him myself. I don't really find his tone useful.. while he does get a lot of attention with it. There's something to be said for that, I guess.
I've heard him say he lives in, if not suburbia, then a populated area. Aside from his writing, what does he do to get his household AND his community more prepared for what might be coming?
Good luck with the interview.
Many Thanks for your efforts to get the word out.
Bob
What bothered you about the story, Robert?
My fear has always been that the Doomers are right. This story gives a taste of the world in case they are. The suffering will be unbelievable, and I have to try to navigate my family through this. That's why I pay close attention to stories like this. I want to know what people are doing; how they are preparing.
My hope is different. My hope is that we will muddle through this, and while we no doubt have some difficult times ahead of us, we have a massive amount of fat to cut.
In fact, I just posted a thought experiment on my blog:
Coping with Gas at $100 a Gallon
The purpose of the thought experiment is quite simple. I want to find out - in desperate times - just how much people can cut. Interested in your thoughts on that if you want to post them. For me, it's a window into whether the Doomer view is more or less likely. When people say "I just don't have much room to cut", then I am more pessimistic. But in my own life - and I have already made major cuts - I still have a ways to go before I have cut out all the fat.
Robert, lots of people can cut lots of spending and lots of driving. The problem is that lots of people will then no longer have a job. I fear that anything other than exponential growth in energy usage and spending will almost immediately result in a depression or worse in the United States. This country will not cope well with a economic collapse.
i think an additional issue is that people will have lost their financial ability to put alternatives in place to allow themselves to maintain some features of their current standards of living. In other words, most alternatives aren't free. Further, time is of the essence. You can't immediately install a PV system or solar hot water or start to grow a large proportion of your food, much less, preserve it.
To me, the word "doomer" prevents/puts off many people from taking needed action from a risk management perspective. It biases discussions in much the same way that "peak oil theory" is used to deflect the serious issues raised by reduced energy supplies. I feel self-reliant is a better word without the baggage that doomer carries.
Todd
"i think an additional issue is that people will have lost their financial ability to put alternatives in place "
I think this is a hugely important point that the technocornucopians seem to willfully ignore.
And not just on an individual homeowner basis...
nobody ignores it. if anything the doomers ignore the fact that you need peak oil to make these new energy sources viable.
there will always be people with money. think how many cars and homes will be bought this year even though there are high gas prices and the worst housing market in forever.
there is always the old technologies of conservation, car pooling, cutting back and etc.
If they are not able to replace fossil fuels now, they will be even less viable once the full effects hit.
In my 2006 Net Oil Exports Revisited article, I talked about "tiny houses," as small as 100 square feet, along mass transit lines, as huge swaths of the 'burbs are basically written off:
http://www.energybulletin.net/19420.html
I see the future for Mr. and Mrs. Westexas:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lomy7xAVDKE
That was pretty much the response when I first raised the subject in 2006, but I somehow suspect that super efficient small, low cost, houses are looking more and more attractive now.
Having said that, what is preventing us from downsizing is what the commercial showed--SNS, Spousal Nesting Syndrome. The cost of admission to a New Urbanism community, where I could walk to my office is a townhouse which costs twice what our current abode costs, so we have a stalemate.
I was recently chatting with a senior petrochemical executive and his wife, who live in Detroit. They bought a McMansion in 2005. When I suggested that they sell now for whatever they can get, the wife almost screamed (I am not exaggerating) "House prices will recover!" Cognitive Dissonance in full force. Two problems: they would have to take a huge loss and it would be a loss of social standing, to move a smaller house than their peers.
Yeah, we can all live in tiny super efficient housing and mine oil shale/sands for a living just like 1750's London when coal mining/burning was the trendy thing to do. I think when people look at the tech fixes such as super efficient housing ect they underestimate the amount of people that are going to be unemployed in the future. I know people can't predict the future, but I wouldn't think it too much of a stretch to say that. Think of all those people working at the hordes of restaurants, spa's/salons, coffee shops, car dealerships, advertising, retail sales and a plethora of service/luxury jobs that encompasses the entire American economy. With the Fed building up the debt and altering interest rates and keeping economic downturns since the 1930's rather small by comparison, we have taken out the natural selection of the economy, meaning the businesses that shouldn't be there have been aloud to prosper because of a huge debt build-up. The economy works a lot like an ecosystem when hard times happen those that are most fit to survive will and keep the population lean and smart, but all our businesses have fattened up just like our people. When the inevitable down-turn starts like it has, recession, much more businesses are going to be weeded out and more people laid-off, because their are too many restaurants and coffee shops. People are not going to live in ultra efficient housing because they can't afford any housing cause they don't have jobs. They won't be able to afford PHEV's either, so those won't be saving the day anytime soon. I think perhaps a government CCC or something might help where people can work decent probably hard jobs building new energy infrastructure and can live in government small ultra-efficient housing. I don't know if I like that proposition but that's better than nothing. I wasn't directing anything towards you westexas, just speaking in general.
What do you guys think?
No, ultra efficient housing will not be stopped by a weak economy-a weak economy will kill large, energy inefficient houses of low property value, i.e. once the cost to heat and/or cool a dwelling exceeds a certain % of the dwellings value the dwelling value quickly spirals to zero (Detroit has more than a few of these buildings).
Maybe there is a good employment opportunity in converting all of those wasteful "cathedral ceiling" spaces into accessory apartments.
I think you don't make enough allowances for human ingenuity.
You don't need to insulate the whole darn house - if money is tight then people will live in single rooms, and insulating those will not cost a fortune.
So there is a job - insulating properties.
If EV cars are not affordable then electric bikes and scooters will lead the way.
There are jobs there.
So there is some chance that not everything will be kaput, and so maybe we can move on form humble beginnings to EV cars and efficient houses.
We had massive unemployment in the UK in the 80s - on the whole people cope better with adversity than prosperity.
I think that last sentence is profound and very true. It's the waiting thats killing me....
You had massive unemployment in the UK in the 1980s while at the same time global oil prices were collapsing and oil availability was increasing. Given the incredible reliance our entire civilization has upon oil, you might want to ponder that fact a bit longer.
I don't believe that I indicated in any way that the high unemployment in the UK was caused by oil.
The reference was simply that people are quite ingenious at getting by, and that some of the thought processes of an informal economy took root at that time, and may be helpful in any depression caused on this occasion by peak oil.
So you might want to ponder a bit longer on making your post relevant to the discussion at hand.
And you miss the point entirely. The unemployment was not caused by oil but the entire scenario was softened by a rising global energy profile. Will the ingenuity you saw be possible in a world of shrinking energy availability?
The key question is "What is the decline rate?" And we do not know. A very low decline rate and the world has time to adapt. Above some threshold though, adaptation cannot occur rapidly enough and the result is disaster. You cannot simply assume that everything will be ok, which is exactly what you are doing. You are whistling as you stroll past the graveyard, hoping, praying, believing any belief-based thing you can grasp that it will all turn out fine.
That's not exactly a heartening prescription for adaptation now, is it?
If you would address what is actually written rather than continually re-interpreting my statements into something else then the discussion might be more productive.
In no way did I imply that anything would be easy, and in no way do I predict outcomes, as they are dependent on a lot of choices which we don't know how they will be made in the future.
In fact we don't even know for sure such basic parameters as how expensive or cheap solar energy is likely to be in five years time or what price great new insulation materials such as aerogel will sell for.
I am at a loss to understand why you conceive that ingenuity will not be important whatever the future holds.
In five minutes in the local pub I got more sensible responses - an older couple when I said that their pensions might not be worth very much and heating might be dear said that in that case they would have to wrap themselves in their duvets in the evening, and do more on their allotment.
I did not say that oil caused previous unemployment nor am I saying that adjustment will be easy or predicting how successful it will be.
If you actually want to address what I did say, fine, but please don't simply invent things I haven't said.
I never once claimed that you said that the unemployment was caused by oil. That is your interpretation of what I said and how you are getting that I have no idea. What I have said twice is that the unemployment of that era occurred during a period of rising global energy, not during a period of declining global energy. That is a very different situation, one in which simply ingenuity may not be sufficient. The general assumption that we can just tighten our belts a bit and all will be fine is one that should be challenged. Without active mitigation, including the adoption of new energy sources at least close to the quality and volume of fossil fuels, just tightening out belts may not be sufficient at all.
However, it appears that we're not communicating here, for whatever reason. And rather than waste your or my time further, I'll leave you to your assumptions.
Hmm, you certainly said:
and that was based on nothing at all that I said in my post, merely your interpretation of where you thought I might be coming from.
In actual fact I make no predictions on whether we will successfully adapt, I do however think that there is scope for actions which will mitigate whatever is coming down the track.
I'll leave you to your assumptions, unless they involve entirely misrepresenting what I have said.
Another website I comment at is CommonDreams.org, and they've started to pick up more items about Peak Oil as more are published. I view these as an opportunity to educate and direct others here for more data and discussion. This and this are the two most recent articles and associated comment threads. There's also a very important, IMO, speech transcript by David Korten, author of The Great Turning and When Corporations Rule the World that references Peak Oil as a catalytic event for change. I wholy agree with that point-of-view and elaborate on how it could be used politically in the second link's comment thread:
"When will folks storm the castle? I expect the oil/energy/economy crisis to continue escalating as we get ever closer to November and await its being linked to the Iraqi Holocaust during the debates between Obama and McCain, if not outright in the Democratic Platform. Obama certainly will be pushed by activists to articulate how he proposes to Change our way out of what is the USA’s Achilles’s Heel. My advice to Obama, posted elsewhere already, is for him to come clean to the country about Peak Oil, its challenge, and how it can be mitigated, as it cannot be solved since oil is finite and will eventually become uneconomical for most usage.
"Peak Oil can best be mitigated by electrifying rail-goods transport, rapidly building up rail-based public transit, and the associated electrical generating capacity comprising wind, solar-thermal, wave, tidal, and geothermal; by legislating the internal combustion engine out of existence for personal use and replacing it with electric cars; and by redirecting human and animal waste streams to replace fossil fuel produced fertilizers with Organic-NPK (one of the most hidden/forgotten aspects of Peak Oil is the unsustainable dependence of farming on what is being termed Industrial-NPK [nitrogen, phospate, potassium, I-NPK], generated soley from Natgas and rapidly depleting, mined natural feedstocks). The only feasible method of financing such a massive and absolutely needed project given our over-extended deficit-depleted financial condition is to comepletely rollback the US Empire and use the Trillion dollars in annual savings while reinstating the progressive tax structure put in place by FDR during WW2. Such an endeavor will also drasticly reduce CO2 and other greehouse gases, which also must be done. The third benefit from would be the establishment of world peace as the main driver of war–the US Empire–will cease to exist. The fourth benefit would be to promote greater equity both in the US and worldwide as the culture change needed to fuel the Great Turning envisioned by David Korten, and called paradigm change by myself and others, would gain traction as the forces of reaction and Empire are put in their place–under the collective heel of the world’s people.
"Is this idealistic? Yes, but it is also pragmatic. It also provides a comprehensive answer for the ~80% of Americans who want Change in the country’s direction. Furthermore, it MUST happen if we want any sort of viable future for ourselves and our children. Such honesty and vision would ensure Obama’s election and re-election. And it would provide a start at removing the dark stain on us as Americans responsible for our country’s Imperial depredations that have gone