<Advice to Pres. Obama #1: An Actuary's Impractical Perspective The Oil Drum DrumBeat: January 13, 2009>

79 comments on Introduction to a Series: Energy Policy Advice for The New Administration

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version

fordprefect on January 12, 2009 - 12:23pm Permalink | Subthread | Comments top

1) Be VERY careful who you listen to, virtually everyone has an ideological axe to grind.

2) Money MATTERS. You have only so much to spend on solving this problem, $1 spent on a costly and ineffective solution is $1 you cannot spend on cheap and effective solutions. Think in $/kwh.

3) Acknowledge that many standard of living items may have to decline or not improve. It may not be practical to send every person to college when the marketplace shifts back toward manual tasks. It may not be practical to provide healthcare for everyone when there is a question of providing FOOD for everyone.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Nate Hagens on January 12, 2009 - 12:32pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

2) Money MATTERS. You have only so much to spend on solving this problem, $1 spent on a costly and ineffective solution is $1 you cannot spend on cheap and effective solutions. Think in $/kwh.

Take it a step further. Think in kwh/kwh. Money is going to be rapidly moving target and not matter as much as you think. But be careful who you listen to...

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Gail the Actuary on January 12, 2009 - 5:46pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I think we are going to have to think "energy cash flow". We will only have so much energy in each year. If we lose imports, it will be a lot less than now. Building anything new will be an energy sink, at least during the time it is being constructed, even wind turbines and solar PV. We may need to come up with energy budgets, the way we currently come up with cash budgets.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
RobinPC on January 12, 2009 - 8:04pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

we are going to have to think "energy cash flow"

I see this as a most crucial point that many people don't get and which is not conveyed by the customary "peak oil" term (which I consequently don't favour myself).
A bankrupt business (/society) is no less bankrupt for having lots of notional capital just a few years ahead. The global society could easily end up in an irrecoverable energy-insolvency within the next few years.

But a more crucial point I see in Gail's comment in the first of these posts, that her recommendations won't be implemented. From my studying of such matters, I conclude that the competence of these "leaders" is vastly overreckoned, not least because one of the few things they have any competence at is in being experts at fooling people that they are competent.

Some commentators here and elsewhere fail to grasp the vast distinction between knowledge of information and understanding of ideas. These "leaders" are among the most informed of people, but that in no way guarantees any soundness of understanding;; two people given the same facts can come to vastly different conclusions.

Personally, from too many years' experience of campaigning, I think these advice columns will be a waste of time. With our Planet Titanic already starting to crash into the iceberg, we should quit appealing to the captain and instead organise our lifeboats per the "campfire" series.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
steve from Virginia on January 13, 2009 - 3:04am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Ha, ha ha ha ha ha!

RobinPC, I'm laughing with you, not at you!

Since the lever is credit/investment capital, the new standard for investment must follow the Iron Law of Sustainability. For too long have liabilities hidden as 'externalities' (that consumption has been labeled as 'investments'). It's past time for these hidden liabilities to come out of the closet.

With the externaliites factored into investment calculations, it is easier to set investment priorities. It is inconceiveable that ethanol could capture investment when its effects of its production on soil and water are measured.

From my studying of such matters, I conclude that the competence of these "leaders" is vastly overreckoned, not least because one of the few things they have any competence at is in being experts at fooling people that they are competent.

Once it is clear that circumstances are driving the ship - if the recession isn't ended by the Obamaplan, for instance - then the opportunity arrives for Obama himself to change direction, or for others who can face the risks of unpopularity to replace him.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
aangel on January 13, 2009 - 4:05am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

we should quit appealing to the captain and instead organise our lifeboats per the "campfire" series.

It's possible to do both, no?

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Egregius on January 13, 2009 - 10:47am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Hear hear. It would be foolish not to, as long as there is a glimmer of hope we might only scrape alongside the iceberg instead of colliding head first into it. The former situation allows us time to man our lifeboats, the second has us tumbling over the bow due to the impact. (I hope I didn't take that metafor too far)

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
RobinPC on January 13, 2009 - 8:31pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

André+Egregious, Indeed one can do both but the experience of decades of campaigning, plus the context of historical experience, is that any time/energy staked on influencing the "leaders" is at odds as long as the uk national lottery (ie anyone with a sense of proportion would invest elsewhere). I certainly wouldn't like to be responsible for stopping a vital worthwhile effort, but I just don't see it as such. How much more evidence is needed of the utter uselessness of these leaders? In uk the regime is right now trying to force on the people (very far from just going along with the people) expanded airports and roads and olympic flying-pig-fleets and rescuing auto-osaurs, not to mention spending as supposed cure of a problem caused by excessive spending.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
aangel on January 14, 2009 - 2:52am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Robin,

I was part of the business delegation that helped give Schwarzenegger political cover (from "Business") so that he could sign AB32, the carbon emission legislation. We were told later by his office that if we hadn't gathered the key business CEOs of Silicon Valley (Google, Intel, HP, Intel, etc.) to say that they were in favor of AB32, he "couldn't" have signed the legislation. (It would have appeared that "all of business was against it" which wasn't true but he needed to hear that.)

The same group of business leaders is forming once again (and gathering others) to deliver to Obama the same message: the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which resists virtually everything that would preserve the natural world, is not speaking for all business. I am doing my best to get this group in touch with the information I know about oil and I'm in conversation with the key organizer...we think we see a way. I hope to report some progress in a few months. (Cross your fingers.)

This won't ever make it to the newspapers but there are surprising pockets of people out there who can influence matters. Is it a slam dunk? No. Will it go nearly far enough? Almost certainly not. But it might just influence some key decisions and help lessen the blow that's about to hit.

Now, where did I get much of what I've learned about oil and am making sure I pass along? Here on TOD. Wasn't that exactly what the founders of TOD hoped when they began the site?

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
RobinPC on January 14, 2009 - 4:57am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

André, Your reply exemplifies the problem which it's trying to disprove. The standard paradigm is that lots of effort is put into getting the "leaders" to agree some marvellous legislative wonder - and meanwhile the reality gets worse rather than better. In your case, they've agreed to those legislations, but in the real world the airlines have only contracted due to economic failure, the dependence on cars has continued to increase rather than reduce, the automakers haven't been told to find something more useful to do.

Just empty hot air as so often encountered in the uk too. Just one example, the Road Traffic Reduction Acts were passed after a huge campaign. The govt then just ignored it and carried on with actual policies that would obviously increase traffic. I repeat, these garbage people are not worth wasting your time talking to. And the Titanic is already crashing!

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
aangel on January 14, 2009 - 11:09am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Hi, Robin.
Some of the people I have worked with here in California are wonderful committed people, not garbage.
Thank you sharing your opinion on the whole matter.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
souperman2 on January 13, 2009 - 12:27pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Dear Obama

I believe you have attained the highest position in the land at the most fortutious time in history.

I am certain that all other living Presidents are envious.

You get to deliver the speech that will be talked about for generations.

“Ask not what the Planet can do for you, Ask what YOU can do for your planet.”

Then talk about how we will address the massive issues facing mankind;

Peak Oil
Resource Constraints
Climate Change
Environmental Degredation

You get to be the first person in history to DECLAIR that the economy works for the people, not people working for the economy. And make it so.

Finally you are especially blessed with being the first President in history to be able to address the biggest threat to our species, POPULATION.

Congratulations, and know that you have the hope and support of the entire world behind you.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
rube cretin on January 12, 2009 - 12:48pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

food is definitely going to be a critical factor. Maintaining soil fertility through the adoption of well established practices such a permaculture is definitely in our near future. look to the cuban model. time to start the victory gardens.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

79 comments on Introduction to a Series: Energy Policy Advice for The New Administration

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version