150 comments on DrumBeat: November 24, 2008
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Show without comments | PDF version
150 comments on DrumBeat: November 24, 2008
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
- What "Lower Consumption" Means
- Tricking and Treating the Future
- Meeting Energy Decline Part-Way - Potatoes?
TOD:Europe
- The Future of Nuclear Energy: Facts and Fiction - Part IV: Energy from Breeder Reactors and from Fusion?
- The US stimulus and "green jobs"
- EROWI - energy return of water invested
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- The Bullroarer - Saturday 7th November 2009
- The Bullroarer - Friday 30th October 2009
- Details of Solar Flagships Released
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- The Energy Blog
- Entropy Production
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel.”
—Saudi saying
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.










GAIA Host Collective
The solution to energy security: Work
sounds like the ccc with a little looting of the treasury on the side. the wpa with halliburton as manager.
dommer,
I see one rather large flaw with Stage 1. The gov't can pay to retool plants and hire all those folks to build new drilling equipment but he question would remain: who will buy all this equipment? I work in the oil patch and see daily there is no pressing need for more equipment. An occasional local shortage due to increased activity over he last couple of years. But the key problem now is the lack of skilled workers for the drilling contractors and service companies. The latest oil price drop and credit tightness has caused a major contraction in drilling activity. The industry solution is standard and been utilized for decades: cut back and lay off staff. The gov't the philosophy of "If we build it they will use it" is seriously flawed.
If they think throwing money at our problems they should throw it at alternatives IMO. I doubt they'll be effective at it but at least it has some positive possibilities.
I have a Kuwaiti friend who told me a story about his first job. He was brought to an office where they dragged in a new desk and chair to add to the dozens of others. A report of some sort would come in to the room and each person had to read then sign it. Soon it became obvious that none of the others read it so he asked about that and they said that the same reports are circulated over and over. In the months he was there they kept dragging in desks adding people until the room was packed then they expanded to another office.
He said that very soon this situation became so disheartening that he begged his family to send off to American university. He said he knows that if he goes back he will likely be promoted to the guy who brings in the report.
Obviously, there are many real positions in Kuwait but in much of the wealthy OPEC countries there is make work which is more detrimental to the human spirit than not working.
IMO over half the jobs in the developed world, perhaps 2/3s of jobs are makework. The FIRE industries, finance, insurance, realestate for example.
We need to get more creative in coming up with legitimate ways of occupying our time to deal with the massive unemployment that is starting to happen.
Give people back their dignity.
Getting people to work seems to require getting rid of machines, and a return to the pre-industrial age. Everyone agrees we don't want that (except Derek Jensen, etc. -- but he flies around on airplanes, so we can't take him too seriously.)
At first, we were told that machines wouldn't cause unemployment, they would increase efficiency. And they did.
Then we were told that machines had made so much stuff that we could all join the Leisure Class. Trouble is, we got leisure but no money, and the stuff piled up but no one could buy it.
So we had the Great Depression. Terminated, apparently, only by the wartime command economy --
Then they invented the "information society" because it was time to stop fighting and so they started a Cold War to do something with all those active minds. On the civilian side, there was still not all that much to do, so they invented "Foundations" to give "grants" and a new class of work arose-- Grant Writing. The successful grant applicants got some money and produced some stuff. Lots of reports and studies that no one ever looked at-- just like Kuwait?
All that activity produced the need for office buildings and computers and such, but what was actually going on in all those millions of offices in all the high rises of the cities of the world?
A few cartoon strips give us insight into the cubicle world-- but mostly its pretty isolating and lonely, I would guess.
But then, all that turned out to be built on gas-inflated seafoam, and it is all collapsing back into the ocean. It was such a pretty dream. I haven't really found the flaw yet, though there are a number of candidate flaws, of which "greed" might be the leading contender.
Good points.
Greed though is simply human nature and there are degrees of greed which vary from harmless to disastrous.
Who in the fifties or sixties dreamed that cell phones, Ipod's, cheap airfares, supermarkets, fast food, color television and commuting 40 miles a day from the suburbs would be as everyday as eating breakfast?
The only good thing to develop was the internet and it has come too late.
Basic human nature is to first establish our security....food, clothing and shelter and we achieve that to varying degrees of excess. After that we are basically pleasure seeking creatures. A major problem is that what "makes us happy" appears to have grown exponentially with the continuing availability of cheap energy.
What made us happy in the fifties or sixties or one hundred years ago was certainly far less energy intensive that what is expected now.
Like those things I mentioned above, they are all a part of our "developed/developing world" lifestyles.
The only way to curb our excesses is to drastically reduce our expectations of what we regard as being essential for us and our offspring to be happy.
Human nature will of course tell each individual to expect someone else to bear the "inconvenience".
I suspect there is no chance of an orderly powerdown.
I could not agree more, Antidoomer, but the Obama plan is idiocy. The building needs to be in things that will:
1. give people work, and the more the merrier
2. reduce consumption of fossil fuels
3. increase renewable energy generation
To that end, pay/help pay for improvements in efficiency/micro power generation improvements in every household. A large number of people would have to be trained to do design, building and installation of these projects. The would not do all the work, but help private citizens/communities to do this. This would provide a huge number of jobs, would make transition to an renewable electric system faster and more affordable as well as saving fossil fuels, and build community connections.
Rather than build roads (some money repairing what we have is OK, I suppose, particularly in cities) we should be building electrified mass transit - both short and long-haul. Obviously this would employ large numbers of people, but also would reduce consumption of oil in the long term by a large amount.
A massive back-to-the-earth movement to promote sustainable agriculture would do wonders. Natural farming methods act as carbon sinks. Small farms/"victory gardens" would ensure the food supply for the entire population - as well as shutting down Monsanto and their ilk. Further, large amounts of land could be cultivated using natural methods and the food exported, helping with the US trade deficit.
Build out: The Grid vs. The Household - Towards a Community-based Solution to CC and PO
And all this would cost less, in the long run, than any form of BAU while at the same time creating communities, giving us a chance to avoid globally catastrophic climate change and moving in the direction of sustainable, steady state economics.
Cheers
what does antidoomer's post have to do with obama's policy ?
and since you posted that it (obama's plan)amounts to idiocy, please tell us about it.
wouldn't your 1) work against your 2) ? unless you meant give people work tending gardens.
Similarity.
Involves growth as a given, for one, and too much focus on roads, for two. Etc.
Google it.
No. Why would you think so?
Cheers