Drumbeat: January 15, 2010
Show without comments | PDF version
201 comments | Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Drumbeat: January 15, 2010
Show without comments | PDF version
201 comments | Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Advanced search
Google search
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- OilPrice.com
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- Aleklett's Energy Mix
- The Archdruid Report
- Bit Tooth Energy
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf**k Nation
- The Cost of Energy
- Culture Change
- David Strahan
- Do the Math
- Early Warning
- European Tribune
- FT Energy Source
- GetRealList
- GraphOilology
- Gregor.us
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Our Finite World
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- Question Everything
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
- The Oil Drum - ANZ
- WastedEnergy
Finance & Economics Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
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.
“A third of humanity doesn't want to ride bikes anymore; that has profound geopolitical implications.”
—Anne Korin, the co-director of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security (May 1, 2005)
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.








GAIA Host Collective
Very interesting and topical article (for TOD readers) by James Kwak over @ Baseline Scenario:
A large thread among the peak oil community is transition, which (voluntarily or not) create large numbers of entrepreneurs. The transition from BAU to whatever future will require taking unmeasurable risks of all kinds. Programming the future is now divided. The ultra- high technology push- button solution future lies down one fork in the road with the desperate Mad Max stray- dog hunting and beetle gathering future down the other. The required conceptualizing is freaking people (politicians, businessmen, economists, hunter/gatherers) out!
Consider:
This appears to be the same kind of trading risk faced by a cubicle drone considering shifting to off-the-grid, shotgun toting, deer hunting, oxen- following sustainability. The leap of faith itself is extraordinarily risky. It cuts 180 degrees against default 'USA Jetsons Future Narrative' of flying cars and unlimited convenience @ very low prices. It does so as advertising keeps insisting that the flying cars are right around the corner. The sustainability process itself discounts measuring the risks associated with it; the measuring process is part of Jetsons' lexicon. The process - as Gladwell suggests - rewards caution and trend- following rather than risk- taking, eventually, no changes take place because there is no way to manage associated risks. Like Paulson's ABX shorting, there is too much to invest, we each only have one life.
Here's Sharon Astyk:
From the Malcolm Gladwell perspective, the best that Oil Drum can do is illuminate risk management approaches and simplify the entrepreneurial rewards process.
As I have spent most of the last 25 years as a cubical drone, this really hits home for me.
I have always tried to balance the cubical existence with outside activities like nature conservation work, because I always knew that the future would be low energy. It was always the flaw in those star trek technologies.
Now my cubical world is disintegrating, we are moving to short time working, or in my case, short short time working as I already cut my hours, and it is obvious the drop is not far away.
I still commute home (on my cycle) each day to my comfy suburban (super-insulated) home and (adopted) family, to feed the chickens and the woodburner, but I know my adaptions to date are little more than greenwash. I can't grow vegetables to save my life, I have no viable plan B.
Do I brush up my PHP or do I practice my hedgelaying skills?
Its hard to leap before you are pushed.
Wonderful quote, RalphW! It captures much of the human nature that lies at the heart of inaction. Thanks for that.
Find someone that can grow vegies and trade eggs for vegies. Pick up skills in hand tool use be it wood working, or sewing, or something that be traded for vegies. You can also go see your local Master Gardener classes and see if you can pick up the skills needed to grow vegies, it is not as hard as it looks. Given time and training you should be able to pick up enough to grow things even though you don't think you can now.
A long time ago I was afraid of the water, and I forced myself to go deeper and deeper. I didn't like the idea of being pushed into the water, so I changed it so that I could leap in whenever I wanted to. Change is not easy, habits are hard to break, but you can change and you can break habits. The best way is slowly, we don't want to be forced into it, it'll hurt more that way.
Charles.
Great piece Steve.
This is the area of focus that,IMO needs to be sussed out.
Entrepreneurs who make the leap, take the biggest risk in implementing any one of the numerous "right" things to do for the "new paradigm" quickly come up against the economic realities of the current paradigm. Many people harbor a near religious belief that we will soon hit an inflection point where the economics of the old paradigm collapse and this signals the beginning of the new paradigm economics where we can all make good money doing the "right" thing.
First there may not be an inflection point at all, or at least not one that is perceived as such. Second is that there is only a "chance" of shifting to a more conducive economic paradigm, and there is also a good chance of a shift to the more negative.
The point is we need to aggressively address the economics of the collapse situation and aggressively force it in the "right" direction. Think about it. Who makes these decisions now and do we trust them to steer the economy in the direction where all of what we see needs to be done can flourish? If there is an inflection point will they see the error of their ways and say "Ok, we messed up. you can take over from here"?
We need to actively engineer a new SUPERSYSTEM monitary system to organize ourselves under in order to effect and other positive outcomes.
All good points, until that bit about the SUPERSYSTEM monitary system.
I am an entrepreneur, the sort of cautious small business owner who will never make glossy magazine covers because I try to be as boring as possible. What used to be risk was just ignorance and lack of research experience.
Greer put it well when he said that any business model has to work in the here and now or it isn't going to work. It also has to be appropriately scaled. At the small business scale it's possible to try various transitional alternatives and see what works. It's possible to keep revisiting strategies and asking "is this sustainable yet?" If I were dragging along a whole corporate beast, most of the things I try (and yes, a lot of them don't work) would just be counterproductive.
Hamster - It sounds like you are successful...for now, and therefore dismiss alot of the negative potential of a supersystem that is so all pervasive that it may not transition to "sustainable" as you imply. There is a certain bravado that makes it difficult to accept that the monetary might be the underlying driver of a lot of what is wrong in the world, and not just a matter of winners and losers. By the way I am one of the winners in case you want to dismiss what I say as sour grapes.
Good luck to ya.
I agree that the dog eat dog nature of the monetary system is a core problem that if not remedied will continue to plague mankind.
There are so many layers of potential manipulation and obfuscation (when finance is included) in the abstract third element called money in a value for value transaction that it creates more confusion and opaqueness than anything else.
Just the expression "The terms of a transaction are just as or more important than the items being transacted" speaks volumes to the possible tricky and deceit introduced because of money and interest etc.
If money is to be used it should be the property of the people and treated like a utility to facilitate economic activity and fair and efficient trade and not a giant skim mechanism used to enslave and exploit the many by the few worst elements of the human race.
There should be severe penalties for the behavior that is now somehow not only condoned but glorified.
But hey I guess since the same psychopaths that control the money also control the lie box (media) it is just part of the brainwashing.
Control of Money has been a method to control power. Power in the hands of someone that is looking out for the common man is not something you find very often. Very few people who have had power have been able to deal fairly with all those under them. It is not human nature to share and be nice to everyone. We might be able to be armchair power people, saying that we would be fair and kind to everyone we would have control over. But when we got to the top of the heap, and declared ourselves king, would we be able to keep our ideals?
Banking and money lending as we know it today got it's start when the world had lots of kings and courts and serfs and slaves. Just because we say we are free peoples these days does not mean we are free. Most people are still wage slaves of some sort or another.
Charles.
Thank you eeyores for the kind thoughts.
Actually, I suggest that money is a way of keeping track of debt and not all money scales well. The one size fits all euro is an ongoing disaster for Europe's traditionally poor countries. The dollar only works for 50 states because the states get to set their own minimum wage and other monetary controls that allow some wiggle room between the value of a dollar in NYC and in Arkansas.
Argueably, we already have lots of SUPERSYSTEM money. What we need more of is local money. Local money has historically often coexisted with national money. Hence contracts from prior centuries specifying payment in British sterling or gold florins, while local transactions were in local currency. Or transactions might be valued in shillings but no actual shillings changed hands. The debt was settled with labor or goods.
The really cool thing about local money is that it is a do it yourself project, as opposed to waiting for the Finger from On High to reach down and solve the problem. Money is just a way to track debit and credit. I heard today about a mental health professional, who years ago wasn't making "enough" money because his patients needed his professional help before they could get and keep a job. So he set up an exchange and accepted payment in services and food.
The recent thread here about the Depression labor exchange is an example of how well local money can work for paying local debt.
The way I see it, any "opportunity" that there might be beyond the inflection point, tipping point, paradigm change, or whatever you want to call it, is more likely to be along the lines of an opportunity to avoid losing your shirt.
Yes, we will hear of a handfull of people who took some incredible big risk and made out like bandits. What you are less likely to hear about will be the hundreds of thousands of others who tried to pull the same stunt and ended up flat on their face, broke, and maybe even homeless.
The best "opportunity" one gets in a hurricane is the opportunity to evacuate before it hits.
In an economy in long term decline, there are almost no upside risks, and many downside ones. Avoiding and minimizing risks becomes all-important. Managers who can clearly see potential risks and and are careful to minimize exposures will be highly valued and in high demand.
This is 180 degrees different from how things have been in our economy up to now. Risk taking has been rewarded rather than punished; in the future, the opposite will almost certainly become the norm. Those businesses that thrived and prospered in an environment of high risk will almost certainly be squeezed into extinction within just a few year's time. On the other hand, the types of businesses that have been considered "staid", "plodding", and "boring" are exactly the types that might just survive, and even do well, in a declining economy.
It is a massive paradigm shift, I cannot even begin to emphasize how profound and important it is. Almost nobody really gets it, yet.
"Those businesses that thrived and prospered in an environment of high risk will almost certainly be squeezed into extinction within just a few year's time."
Large investment banks being one of the first major waves.
In a context where there is ever more energy available every year, a lot of things that would be risky in a low or no-energy-growth environment are viable, for a while at least.
In a context where the energy available is steadily contracting, even things that wouldn't seem risky in a no- or low-energy-growth environment become quite risky.
Paradigm shift indeed.
Which "boring" businesses do you see as most promising in this new scenario?
Businesses that can help other businesses, organizations, and households to minimize or avoid risks should do well.
Security threats to property and people will be of particular concern, and businesses that can help with that will do well. This includes everything from security guards, nightwatchmen, and bodyguards all the way up in scale, and also includes technologies such as locking hardware, intrusion alarm systems, window bars & grates, etc. Unfortunately, things like "protection rackets" are also quite likely to thrive in such an environment.
Another group that will thrive are accountants, inventory control specialists, etc. Businesses will have to do a better job of keeping track of their money and inventory, both will have a tendency to "grow legs" in this environment.
Those engineering disciplines that are focused particularly on preventing bad things from happening - safety engineers, traffic engineers, structural engineers, etc. - should also do quite well. There will be much less emphasis on building new stuff and much more emphasis on re-designing, modifying, and retrofitting existing things so that they are more likely to last longer and not cause problems or hazards in the future.
Sudden disruptions to supply lines, especially energy, water, food, communications, and other essential service supply lines, is another huge category of downside risk that must be anticipated and avoided or minimized at all levels, from households up to national governments. Anyone who is in the business of securing any of these supply lines from any type of disruption risk should see good demand for their services. Those who make systems or systems components that are relatively more hardened against disruptive forces, or that are more robust and resillient, should be able to command a premium. There will also be a demand for systems that reduce people's dependence upon large-scale supply chains and reduces their vulnerability to disruption; this, rather than mere cost/kWh savings, is likely to be the primary driver for PV system sales. Sales of backup/emergency systems like generators should continue to do well.
In general, people who make and sell basic necessities that are designed and built to last with minimal problems or hazards should do fine.
People who make or sell basic necessities----
yes!
There is a tiny little leather-goods shop in a near-by town. The owner makes everything he sells and he lives in the back of his shop. He is doing fine.
The build your house for cash over ten years while you live in a shack , drive a new pickup twenty years to the town job, borrow nothing against the home place, borrow only to buy more efficient machinery, keep on growing your own food when it is cheaper to buy it-This is the Scots /Irish/ Baptist heritage of the southern mountians, intermixed with a little too much whiskey and gunpowder for "normal" times.
But we have been lucky for so long that abnormally good safe prosperous times are nowadays mistaken for the norm.
If you want to survive consider acquiring a few southern hillbilly buddies old enough to remember how thier daddies and grand daddies and great grand daddies got thru got the last part of the nineteenth century and the first half of the twentieth.
People with long term roots in Arkansas and Texas will understand whereof I speak.( HL Mencken once remarked not altogether tongue in cheek that among other adventures he had been shot at several times and actually been to Arkansas three times.)
( I can see Buffalo Mountian from a hilltop behind my house.Local lore , fairly well documented, has it that the Buffalo was the meanest place anywhere in the hills during the Prohibition era.The actual most intensive moonshining occurred a few miles to the east and south .)
The murder rate around here in those days was (per capita) high enough to make any modern city seem safe as a Sunday school picnic.But if you didn't actually give somebody reason, you were reasonably safe-it's just that disputes weren't settled in court.
If ts really htf the rules are going to change so drastically about ninety percent of the nice civilized believe-in-dialogue-and-negotiation office dewlling types will die in the first six months of anarchy.
You sound like you are in the Ozarks, or in Tenn. somewheres.
Charles.
I'm in Central Arkansas.
I think OFM is in W. Va. (Rather than WV). Things around there aren't all that different from the way things are here in WNC.
Steve, that was good. Considering what we are wanting to do, suppose you are the banker and I come in with a business plan. I have 5 investors, and together we have 2.5 Million USD, and need another 5.
I am breaking from BAU, and tell the you that I propose to set up a sustainable company, making eco-wigets, and propose employing local people at liveable wages, with no growth projected. In fact, we plan to reduce in size gradually, as our local population level declines.
What is the chance of you okaying the loan?
In a declining economy, your business plan should be premised on avoiding indebtedness altogether. Debt is going to be every bit as bad as risk - worse, actually, because many downside risks won't come to pass, but debts WILL have to be paid. Don't expect bankruptcy laws to continue being as forgiving as they are now for much longer, either. The easy forgiveness of bankruptcy made sense in a growing economy, where risk taking was encouraged. It makes no sense at all in a declining economy, where you want risk taking to be minimized. No, I figure that within the next decade, the bankruptcy laws will be changed in such a way that if you are responsible for your company to go bankrupt, that will have serious constraining consequences upon what you can do and how much income you can retain and enjoy for the rest of your life. We won't have debtor's prisons, your wages will just be garnished until your die.
Your business plan will need to anticipate 100% equity financing. Commercial banks might very well be in the business of helping you line that up. They will be interested in having you do your banking with them, and this may be one way to get it.
Which means, of course, that I do not get the loan.
OTOH, you are absolutely correct about avoiding debt like the plague. My business is cash only. All investors are partners, not shareholders, and share in risk and reward. We minimize risk ... and because of this we share decision making as a partnership must. All must agree. Otherwise, either the deed is not done, or the dissenter is paid off.
Contracts for these type endeavors will be dicey, and it will be very important that the owners of new businesses be like minded. This will help in building community - see the many posts, above.
For an interesting read on a possible future, check out Julian Comstock. Prophetic? Perhaps. Scarey? For certain.