Weekend Open Thread...
Posted by Prof. Goose on October 2, 2005 - 2:38am
Topic: Miscellaneous
keepin' it real...
112 comments on Weekend Open Thread...
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
112 comments on Weekend Open Thread...
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
- Medical Dark Matter
- Does it Make Sense to Move to a New Location because of Peak Oil?
- Men's Response to Shifting Roles after Peak Oil
TOD:Europe
- Offshore Wind taking off - some background on installation issues
- What difference would Nord Stream mean to European energy supply?
- Peak Fat
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
- Meet Trev: A two-seater renewable energy vehicle
- The Bullroarer - Friday 5th February 2010
- The Bullroarer - Monday 1st February 2010
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
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- Early Warning
- The Energy Blog
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
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
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.
“Pessimism of the Intellect; Optimism of the Will.”
—Antonio Gramsci
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Dave Murphy, Engineer-Poet, Glenn, Heading Out, Jason Bradford, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Nate Hagens, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:ANZ: aeldric, Big Gav, Phil Hart
- 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
I think we (the US) are in deep shit right now. First off, I am thinking about NG prices this winter. I believe we are looking at a big tragedy there for people who can't pay their bills just to stay warm. Second, oil prices are going to sooner or later (this will be sooner - by 12/05) hit the roof (over $100/barrel) given the GOMEX shut-ins and the world-wide tight demand/supply situation. I think it is time for people to accept these realities. I think it is time to get really creative about how this (the US) society is going to go forward without major recession (also called depression). I think that people on this website (TOD) should address the issues in these terms - there is a (perhaps) small crash coming, we can't avoid it and what the HELL are we going to do about it?
NG prices are frightening, but there is at least one feasible approach if there is the political will: federal or state govts can subsidize heating fuel costs, as has been done in various programmes for a long time. In an unregulated market you can't control the price, but you can control what at least some vulnerable people pay. Most folks will just have to get by somehow. Don't forget, NG also fuels all of the peak capacity electric generation capacity, so it will bite there as well.
As for getting creative on how to avoid recession or worse: no flash ideas here. I think all the usual tools have already been used, and I'm not sure there is much ammunition left. There is an extraordinary amount of fiscal stimulus around: low interest rates (still), tax cuts in place, huge government spending, hurricane reconstruction efforts starting that will help offset the blows the storms dealt, even a war or two. If a downturn comes (and there has been a recession every time there has been a sharp run-up in oil prices), I'm not sure there is a lot of real action that can be taken except to hunker down.
To make it all worse, both the federal budget deficit and the trade deficit are totally out of control. In essence, both the government and the economy are borrowing enormous sums just to keep going. If this gets worse, and it looks like it will, the US dollar will have to fall, making the cost of all imports (both oil and Wal-mart varieties) rise, thereby fueling larger deficits. It could become a self-sustaining meltdown, like the Arctic.
I don't want the US economy to tank, but the fundamentals have been grossly mismanaged for a long time. I think 70's style stagflation may well reoccur, and I can't see a quick, easy, or creative way around it.
Ora Pro Nobis -- from the Latin meaning "pray for us".
cheers, Dave
A growing economy by definition requires more energy - its really that simple.
Therefore, unless the energy supply situation 2005 - 2006 improves dramatically, a recession will occur due to high energy prices, or will be forced to happen using high prices. There really is no other alternative.
One could have an economy where folks trade jokes and folk stories with one another.
Take a look at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics
There are sectors of economic life where energy consumption decreases with growth. Take for example, the transition in the electronics industry from vacuum tubes to highly integrated transistor circuits. Vacuum tubes wasted great amounts of energy in heating their electrodes.
The point I am making is that the overall economy, and certainly the U.S. economy and all similar 'western' economies, are inextricably tied to the availability of increasing amoungs of energy. Less energy = less potential growth.
That's today's picture and has been the picture since the industrial revolution. The picture is not going to change overnight, no matter how many jokes we tell.
Can we substitute energy and reduce dependence? Sure, but it will take time, much time, and time we may not have.
Extend this problem to less developed countries - those transitional economies are actually in a worse pickle, particularly those that are importers of oil. They use more energy (oil) per GDP $ than we do, although one might argue that its use is concentrated more on basic needs than our use is, except to the extent where developing economies energy use is directed towards fueling the west's insatiable desire for replacable coloured covers for our cell phones, et al.
A growing economy needs to produce more. If it can squeeze greater production out of less energy, that's still growth.
You can twist the figures around and make it seem like we live in a golden age where more GDP output occurs with less energy, and that would be true.
But more GDP output with less energy is not the same thing as using less energy. There has not been a single case in my lifetime where the economy has expanded without energy consumption expanding. I expect this is a truism dating back to the dawn of time... some laws simply can not be refuted. It takes energy to produce; the more you produce, the more energy you utilize.
It doesn't matter how efficient we become - at least not in the short term, because we can't become highly efficient overnight - increased economic growth will require more energy.
Now... off what baseline are we measuring? I suggest we've nothing to pick from, except when we reach peak production world wide, we'll then have a convenient measuring post i.e. when world wide economies next start growing, post-peak, we'll have been successful in the transition.
Clearly if the peak is tomorrow, this will be a long time coming. If the peak is a decade or two away, we've got a chance to mitigate potential world wide disaster.
There's no point in putting a fine point on definitions when we have decades of economic output to look at and in every case where economic expansion ruled, energy use went up. Turning that ship around will not happen over night; I question if it can even happen in a decade.
Note that only some kinds of energy are in short supply at the moment, and we can raise efficiency of some things easily. We can boost the amount of e.g. wind power with a relatively short lead time, freeing coal and gas for other uses. We can insulate and cut heating energy with no loss in utility. We can stop buying Explorers and Tacomas and buy Focuses and Civics instead; at a 17-year vehicle lifespan and a bias of miles driven toward newer vehicles, doubling fleet MPG means cutting motor fuel use by perhaps 4% per year.
Oil is the biggie here; consider the amount of low-hanging fruit in transportation.Consider my concept, then: instead of burning gasoline in engines at 17% efficiency, build cars as plug-in hybrids. Efficiency under engine power goes up by a third, and 80% of their driving is done on grid power; direct fuel consumption falls by 85%. The remaining energy (about the same 80%, due to losses) is met by burning oil in 70% combined-cycle powerplants at 55% efficiency and 30% simple-cycle gas turbine powerplants at 40% efficiency. Total relative oil consumption is:- 15% of baseline used directly.
- 17.3% in the CC plants.
- 10.6% in the simple-cycle plants.
Total: 42.9% of baseline. If you get 30% of the additional grid power from non-petroleum sources like coal, wind or solar, this falls to 34.5%.Things look almost absurdly rosy if you postulate cogenerating furnaces to generate electricity during the heating season. There are a lot of things we could do that we are not. Yet.
Embarking on a plan like this would lead directly to economic growth because the money that would have gone to the oil-producing countries would go instead to the battery makers, gas-turbine manufacturers, and other uses inside the industrialized countries (including our own).
Solutions will only be worked on if a problem is perceived to be there, and I'm not convinced that the political leadership around the world is convinced that we face now, or in the next X years, anything more than a speed bump.
People need to feel more pain before they will really demand action; after all, most everyone dumped their Mazda's for Ford Explorers and big vans over the past 30 years... ;-)
Contrast this with the government paying a piece of every natural gas or heating oil bill. This punishes folk that conserve (because they might not have a bill, but still pay taxes).
If tax heating fuel like crazy, but handout money (ie. cash) to everyone to offset the tax, we encourage conservation without punishing the poor.
There might be some market distortion is such a scheme, but I'll leave that to someone more expert than myself to explain. It certainly isn't obvious to me.
The economic impact of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita will be felt on natural gas bills in October, as PG&E's residential customers can expect to pay $17.45 more for the fuel in October, compared to October of 2004 - an increase of 70.8%.
But then they go on to reassure:
In the immediate aftermath of the hurricanes, natural gas prices have surged nation-wide, but the level of the increase in cost seen in October is expected to fall in the coming months. PG&E is currently estimating that natural gas bills for December and January will be 40-50% higher compared with last year.
And, stop yer whining, others have it worse, and hey, California is, for the most part, warmer than most other places in the country:
While the price of natural gas in California is high, costs in the other parts of the country have surged even more, with some utilities reporting bill increases in the triple digits.
Comment: One can only hope there are reasons for NG to come down from 14, or at least not rise further. Do they have more info than we do? One supposes, but I think they'd say this stuff even if it were flat out false... just to stave off panic.
The market she is a fickle beast - if I had to guess-whats holding oil down (relatively), we are still so close to Peak production (meaning we are still increasing on a global level) that any meaningful demand destruction or energy switching (Im heating with wood this winter FYI), will cause near term contracts to drop, possibly sharply. Since the mkt is priced at the marginal barrel - we really could see Mike Lynchs prediction of $30, at any time, at least in the front months. IMHO, the next few months will be a race between measuring how much supply we have lost vs how much demand we are losing. This FIRST oil crisis will be a fire-drill because we are still on the Hubbert upslope - lets hope its a wake up call for stark policy changes- Id rather have to eat a nasty pill than get a nasty disease.
But of course I need to see a different doctor for natural gas....
My only "inside" information is what I read on TOD, but if my guess is correct, it seems to me that the traders (or the people feeding them information) are overly optimistic. I think it's still possible that enough of the damaged infrastructure can be repaired in time to avoid outages or very high prices (meaning at least 50% higher than they are today) this winter. But the odds are looking worse by the day that the energy companies can pull off that miracle.
My fear in the very short run is what happens if the conventional wisdom toggles from "everything will be fine" to "we're in a crisis". That's when markets go nuts, to use a technical term.
At $14 per million BTU, and 3412 BTU/kWh, even a (generous) 70% efficient peaking plant implies 6.8 cents/kWh. Shouldn't that be enough to tip many scales toward growth in reliance on wind, for example, with or without subsidies, with or without successful green marketing, with or without top-level political will?
Yes, I expect wind to be driven very strongly over the next few years where generation previously relied on gas (though solar follows the A/C load peaks a lot better). If coal winds up in demand for Fischer-Tropsch synthesis of motor fuel and it becomes hard to increase production, wind will wind up being valued where generation is coal-fired too.
It may still be a good idea to have production credits for the next few years (perhaps 5). It pays to think of the future even if utility accounting rules won't let them, and a tax credit is probably easier than un-screwing the screwy system in time for next year. When conditions suddenly switch over to wind, solar or cogeneration being a REALLY good idea due to whatever event, I'd much rather that installation had begun 5 years before than 18 months after the crisis.
A quick search shows that the midwestern electric and energy companies are investing heavily in alternative sources. Very large windfarms, ethanol, biodiesel and methane are on line in Il, IA, MN, SD, and Ne.
For those interested, Midamerica is owned by Warren Buffet's Berkshire Hathaway. http://www.mindfully.org/Energy/2005/Buffet-Berkshire-PacifiCorp24may05.htm
Berkshire has been buying lots of electric/energy companies recently and investing in alternatives.
Path track:
http://euler.atmos.colostate.edu/~vigh/guidance/atlantic/early1.png
SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) - Despite high gas prices, 56 percent of Americans refuse to downsize and plan to stick with the cars and trucks they have, according to a report published Sunday.
By 2010, the number of SUVs on the market will increase 24% to 109 models, the magazine said, citing auto researcher J.D. Power and Associates. Meanwhile, just 44 different hybrids will be offered by then.
By the end of the decade, J.D. Power predicts hybrids will account for less than 4 percent of total auto sales. At the same time, SUVs will grow from 24.6% to 26.6%.
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story.asp?guid=%7B62F85C82%2D592F%2D45A7%2D83F4%2D89D3D8A003C8%7D&am p;;siteid=mktw
I have two hondas, with combined mileage of over a quarter million miles, and the newest one was built in 99 model year. But there just isn't any money to invest in another car (trading one in wouldn't change the equation much)
Looking around my college town, I'm very aware of the very high number of late model trucks - a wide range of SUV's, lots of Suburbans and Excursions, lots and lots of half ton or 3/4 ton trucks (near ranch country). Of cars, one of the popular new ones is the Mustang remodel this year (same idea that VW had of coming out with a "new" beetle, but these are the "new" mustangs styled to look like the late 60's models)
And yes, on Saturday the wholesale club was out of gas. Hmm.
Even if gas goes to 2, 3, 4$ a litre, we'll still find it more cost effective to drive the family over to the next province over than to fly, in the future, and crossing the Canadian Rockies also brings us to areas where we enjoy our leisure time.
In-city driving we've already reduced as much as possible; for a while it was near zero but my wife's office is in a difficult and dangerous to cycle to location that is not served by mass transit. One day this ought to change... so we fill up a couple of times a month, somewhat more in the winter, less in the summer.
I sold our second car over a year ago on concerns about what we are facing here... me and the kids get around fine on our single bikes or on the family tandems.
I have posted elsewhere that I think raising awareness is of utmost importance and that theoildrum can play an important part. I am impressed with the calibre of debate and this site is regularly checked upon by me.
I believe that we have entered a new era with respect to the reality of energy. This site can provide leadership but with that comes responsibility (note that raising awreness appears to be a part of the mandate of this site given the give em hell Harry thread - plug this site). So, I suggest:
- Be constructive and not personal in any rebuttals
- Try to welcome newcomers to the site despite what you might feel is naive commentary - suggest sites to give the basics but do so positively
- Keep people coming back to this site, do not descend into a clique that shuts out others.
I say this because I genuinely believe that we are at the cusp of mainstream awareness and I am doing my part - as for the theoildrum: the talent is there, far more then I so educate the world...I completely agree, thanks for the reminder.
A related point involves search on this site so that new visitors can read "great posts" from the past, but that's a bigger issue...
Also, I would like to see a "thorough" discussion on the various theories pro/con peak oil. I undertand that this site seems to have a bias that the concept of peak oil exists, but there are other contrary theories, for example, that oil may not be decomposing plant material or upper level reservoirs are being filled from older oil migrating from closer to the center of the earth. For example, even the thread entitled "A Nice Counterexample" seemingly makes reference to a possible problem with the peak oil theory.
Further, there seems to be several competing issues that we in the US are now experiencing. There is the concept of peak oil, which may take a few years for it to really be felt. However, the more pressing problem seems to be coming from the recent disruption to GoM production and pretroleum refining capacity. These events seems to be causing problems at a much speedier rate than the typical peak oil concept. Unfortunately, this disruption thought/theory is more an economics discussion than an engineering concept even though engineering does impact the supply side.
So, in my inarticulate manner, I would like to see in one place links to educational materials pro/con about peak oil and the various competing theories in order that I can try to reach my own conclusion about whether peak oil exists or whether oil is a renewable resource.
Thnx.
Here is the top find:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_peak
Here are the search results (not all are relevant):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=peak+oil+debate&fulltext=Search
Wiki explanation of an Oil Drum or Barrel:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrel_%28unit%29
Wiki explanation of Petroleum:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crude_oil
Lot's of interesting details in these Wiki pages,
example: a synopsis of Daniel Yergin's book:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Prize:_The_Epic_Quest_for_Oil%2C_Money%2C_and_Power
http://www.energybulletin.net/primer.php
It'd be great if there was a "Peak oil outline" page on this site with a prominent link from the front page. Hm... the page doesn't even have to be on this site, and doesn't have to be done by the editors. Is there anything wrong with the Wikipedia page?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_peak
It's easy to add information, and easy to correct wrong information. And it can be improved a bit at a time.
Thoughtful and well-reasoned skeptics are welcomed here, and we have a couple in residence. They strengthen our thoughts. But how should we deal with those who are most interested in lobbing verbal Molotov cocktails?
It is the so-called "troll" problem. Someone who hangs around and teases with the toads (The Three Billy Goats Gruff) rather than contributing meaningfully to the dialog.
There are no easy answers. One man's troll is another's philosopher.
I'm not sure if the software at this site can do it, but one solution is to add Next> and <Back buttons to every comment.<p> Then if you start reading a long winded coment that YOU consider troll fod, just hit the Next> button and you have skipped it by.
Alternatives can include Collapse and Expand buttons for each posted comment.
[Next-->] [<-- Prev] [<-- Expand -->] [-->Shrink<--]
That aside, there are cases of people who will use any public discussion as a way to get attention. The way they handle this on dailykos.com is with an unofficial policy of "not feeding the trolls". Some people still argue with them, but many don't, and some will post a recipe in response. I think the recipe thing is a little silly, but it's a lot better than, "To hell with ME??? Well, to hell with YOU!!! Hah!".
I guess I would prefer to see things unregulated, with the editors stepping in only when someone is directly being abusive to a person or group, or is provably lying. "Stepping in" would take whatever form seems right to the editor--deleting the post, nuking the person's account (or threatening to do so), etc.
Great idea.
It's not perfect, but habitual trolls tend to wind up dropping out of sight fairly quickly.
If there was ranking, a potentially decent system would be: there would only be ranks of 0 (hide) or 5 (don't hide) with no choices inbetween. Scores would not be displayed, but comments with 3 or more votes and less than a ranking of 1 would not be displayed except for a "hidden comments" page (this way readers could make sure non-troll comments weren't being hidden) which would only be viewable by registered readers. This way, it allows members of the community to police the trolls, but it doesn't propogate a system of karma whores.
Indonesia has just implemented a radical, instant shift in their pricing for gasoline, diesel, and kerosene for cooking. Gasoline rose by 87% overnight. The subsidized pricing policy has been costing the govt about $14 billion annually, and they are trying to reduce that.
Pricing in US dollars:
kerosene per litre was $.07, now $.20
diesel was $.79/gallon, now $1.59/gallon
gasoline as $.91/gallon, now $1.70/gallon
The very poor will receive a subsidy of about $10 per month for 3 months to try to help them make the transition.
There are obvious differences in the nature of the economy, wage structures, and price expectations in Indonesia vs. the developed world. However, this looks like a good natural experiment that is worth following. We may learn something.
This time of uncertainty brings tremendous risk of bad policy making, on a global scale. Indonesia's national energy companies, for example, may take over foreign assets in a binge of nationalization... this has certainly happened elsewhere in the past.
Like em or hate em, international oil companies won't be able to thrive (and thus keep exploring for more) if a wave of energy resource nationalization starts to take hold in the less developed areas of the world.
Bad policy and short term actions to secure energy for a country might indeed have a negative medium to long term impact - by reducing exploration activity and productive capacity for countries/regions over the longer term. Without the capital, experience and brain-power available to them from the experienced explorers, some newly nationalized energy programs are going to fail to meet growth goals for some time. We've seen fields mismanaged in the past; it can happen again.
In the panic to stave off domestic chaos or coups, weak governments in some of the worlds last energy frontiers may end up shooting themselves - and the globally connected energy supply chain - in the foot, and hasten the peak, or steepen the drop.
First, is NG as price inelastic as petrol? Are we certain people won't modify behaviours? What is the difference between in terms of economic impact of someone maintaining a 64 degree house with $15 chinese-manufactured sweaters all around vs. a 72 degree house and shorts?
Would NG, if it is as price inelastic as petrol, be subject to demand-driven spikes? Will the richest in Wisconsin pay $20 or $30 or $40 if a shortage manifests and the temperature plummets?
Also, do we know how NG prices will impact other prices -- e.g. how long does it take for NG cost impact fertilizer cost and, some months later, food costs; how about electricity generation?
Is the situation dire or does it indicate increased drag on the economy, factored in over months?
As for the Indonesia case study -- should we include the coincidence of terrorist attacks in our case study of rising fuel costs? I mean, as long as we are speculating about things, is it at least possible there is a direct relationship? Who benefits from bombs today?
We don't have to go back too far in time for a parallel - remember the California energy crisis? This one we can't blame on Enron traders gone wild. Back in 2001 California's electrical system (PG&E) almost collapsed into bankruptcy due to high natural gas prices. Then prices were 1.04 per therm (10.40 per mmbtu); today's prices are 40% higher and perhaps headed much higher.
Government price controls and all sorts of non neo-conservative policies may be the only solution. Having consumers dial back the heat works to a point, but not if there's no gas company to ship the fuel to them in the first place.
I have found the peak oil primer at Energy Bulletin to be excellent. I tend to recomend reading to people rather than sites. One that really got me going was "The oil we eat " by Richard Manning, published in Harpers. It has a very good albiet a little impassioned synopsis of just how dependent we are on oil. Solution wise, those who are prepared will fare the best. Try to use less in your everyday life, and be less dependent everyday on something you can't control. I think for a lot of westerers debt will be the first big stubling block in a transition to a less energy intensive way of life.I found it very hard at the start of my thinking about peak oil not to be very despondent and depresssed, but now I feel that knowing what will unfold helps me to understand what to do next. I feel blessed to live in an underpopulated well organised country, the nearest starving hordes will be about a weeks sailing away. Having said that, we get through unbelievable amouts of fertiliser growing our food, and in my town public transport is a joke. I don't think anyone other than the super rich will escape lightly.
I disagree that only the rich will get away lightly, I wholeheartedly believe that a primitive lifestyle is not to be discounted but positively embraced.
Our reconnection with the planet and its natural cycles is I believe essential.
Good riddance to supermarkets, obesity and the wasted land, coffee,cocoa,flowers and recreational drugs.
And of course the huge waste in animal farming.
Post industrial society?
Bring it on, before its too late...
There will have to be some hard decisions made soon as every day the problem will grow larger. However saying that now is not the time to panic.
Maybe readers of TOD could begin suggesting ways to get through this. Once a sizeable list is created we could then start sending it to family, friends and associates. It requires a global response and the internet allows us to do it faster than mainstream press.
Is this a good idea?
http://news.google.com/news?lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=Pemex&sa=N&tab=wn
On the other hand, as we can see with McQuaig's book getting the "Peak Oil" title, there is increasing interest in the subject over here. The Nikkei has studiously ignored peak oil until now, but presumably the editors finally decided they had better carry something on it. So the review concedes that peak oil theory as a social phenomenon deserves attention. The author goes on to remark that Japan is just behind America and China in its consumption of oil, but that it has a weak level of concern for energy security. The campaign leading up to the September 11 election in fact barely featured any comment in the contending parties' platforms. The author says the limited concern is due to endaka (increasing exchange value of the yen), which limits the effect of oil-price increases in the domestic economy. The review concludes with a warning that the country risks being left behind in the global race for energy security due to negligence, and so grants a smidgeon of praise to the peak oil books as warnings of the need to pay more attention to oil issues.
Let's just hope they feel obliged to review Simmons' book if it ever gets translated into Japanese. There are several more peak oil articles and so on coming out over here in the next while, so if the Nikkei and other mainstream publications are pushed to deal with a very persuasive work like Twilight in the Desert the result might be very interesting.
Obviously, executives at Toyota and other Japanese car makers are very aware of the world to come. They are putting their money where their vision is.
GM is sucking off the US Government (and tax payers)for hydrogen research dollars.
http://www.bellona.no/en/energy/37717.html
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techinnovations/2005-03-30-fuelcells-test_x.htm
But concern for oil depletion and its implications are not part of the package, and that's an important point. Perhaps the Bush-backing but very nationalist foreign policy elite counted heavily on increases in Iraqi production to boost the global flow. They do have deals in Iran, for example (which really annoyed the neocons), but Japan is still doing nothing comparable to China's frenzied "resource diplomacy." The fallout from Katrina and Rita will of course extend to here as well, since makers of just about everything are now having to pass on higher oil costs. And declines in US growth might also gut the nascent Japanese recovery. Peak is simply off the radar here. The past suggests the Japanese state could probably restrict consumption more readily that in the US, but if we're really running into peak Japanese political and business circles will be at least as blindsided and unprepared as anyone else.
Remember how long it took for the full implications of peak oil to sink in, after each of us first learned of the subject? Literally billions of people all over the world (many / most of whom are not nearly as well educated as a Scandinavian or a Japanese) (former collective farmers in Lithuania, I'm looking at you!) are going to have to absorb this and start responding, and soon.
Anyone reading/posting to TOD is pretty well educated... but how does one best get the word out to the other 99% of the population??
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-10-01-dems-gas-prices_x.htm
I think more and more politicians are catching on to the idea that "Houston we have a problem". Maybe some start out using it merely as a political ploy. Eventually they start realizing there is more to it than originally met their eye.
Thus the public just continues to repeat the mantra of less foreign oil more alternative energy sources without looking at the whole picture!! Now I know, the average joe, could care less about peak oil or oil depletion and will do nothing for the most part until its too late.. Its called lack of leadership and both parties are to blame at this juncture.. We'll see if this winter opens the eyes of more people..
http://www.beg.utexas.edu/mainweb/presentations/2005_presentations/tinker-peakoil0605.htm
I guess the article was written in a long-ago pre-Katrina era ... er June 2005
http://www.pastpeak.com/archives/2005/07/feingold_fundra_1.htm
Virtually everyone in the U.S. is net food consumer and a net energy consumer. Also, the majority of Americans live off the discretionary spending of other Americans.
We are at the start of a massive paradigm shift in the U.S. economy--from an economy focused on "wants" to an economy focused on "needs." To the extent possible, we all need to aim toward becoming net producers of food and/or energy. The first step is to start reducing our use of energy. To do that, we need to educate the public. I thought you might be interested in my experience along those lines.
After watching End of Suburbia, and after realizing that both Simmons and Kunstler had new books coming out, I proposed a joint Simmons/Kunstler conference here in Dallas, with both of them speaking. I contacted both of them and they readily agreed. My wife and I worked to nail down dates and we contacted the Greater Dallas Planning Council (GDPC) and Southern Methodist University (SMU), who both agreed to be cosponsors. I then arranged for some underwriting support from various environmental groups and oil companies.
The GDPC and SMU have done the lion's share of the organizing work, including finding a perfect venue that will seat 750 people. They are charging $20 per person ($5 for students). SMU is handling all of the money. Simmons is going first, then Kunstler, and then an extended joint Q&A. SMU and the GDPC hope to do a professional DVD of the presentation.
All of you can do the same thing, with a range of very able and articulate PO speakers. I would suggest that you get a small organizing group together and then contact cosponsors, civic organizations, environmental groups, universities, etc.--who have a high degree of credibility and who can arrange for a suitable venue and who can handle the money and online billing, if you need to charge admission to cover expenses.
The critical message I want to spread is the following: "stop the dumb growth." The poor suckers who continue to buy suburban tract homes at great distances from their jobs are committing financial suicide.
For the Simmons/Kunstler event in Dallas on 11/1/05: www.smu.edu/esp
Stop right there. There is your problem. Your brain has been warped. You no longer can think like "they" think. You no longer posses "common sense". You now know this stuff called "science". It changes your whole perspective of the world.
AN IMPORTANT FACTOID: "In 1999, the total number of scientists and engineers employed in the U.S. was 10,981,600, although more than half (7,440,800) were not employed in S&E occupations. "Altogether, approximately 3.5 million individuals held S&E occupations in 1999. Engineers represented 39 percent (1.37 million) of the S&E positions, and computer scientists and mathematicians represented 33 percent (1.17 million). Physical scientists accounted for less than 9 percent of those working in S&E occupations in 1999."
source: http://www.aip.org/fyi/2002/126.html
3.5 million / 200 million is about 1.8 per cent. So roughly 2% of the people work in "science and engineering". 98% DO NOT.
For many of the non-science masses, "creationalism" is an equally valid argument as is "evolution". Besides, they have no idea what evolution is. Wasn't it something about how giraffes have long necks because they stretch to get the higher hanging fruit?
Chevron is running its WillYouJoinUs? TV ads all the time now. (Two oil workers in the dessert, a dip stick, and long hole to climb down.) When one of the ads runs and I stop a family member (those who are sure I have joined the peak freak cult) and ask, Did you see that, did you see that? Their eyes are still glazed over. Huh? No. I wasn't paying attention.
Funny you should ask whether or not they were paying attention because most people are not! I make it a point to bring up gas prices at work and then add "it looks like the era of cheap gas is over" and most people acknowledge that fact. Yet I wonder if they really know why its over?? I don't think so..
And boy has there been a slew of propaganda ads on the TV and radio by oil companies..
Problem is, as Harm explains, they do not teach "geography" in American schools anymore. That is why the public does not have a clue. That is why the public is willing to buy this new theory that The World is Flat (a theory attributed to Tom Friedman of NYT fame). In the Flat Earth model, all things are equally possible everywhere. If you found oil there, just drill some more and you'll find lot's of oil here. Sad.
If you're planning to drive up and back that day, I'd be happy to carpool along with you and split the gas money.
Email me at don_negro at yahoo if you're interested
We should all be doing these sorts of things locally...
I invite more folks to start contributing to the NYC site if you are from the general area. I believe all you have to do is submit a story and either Ianqui or I can post it to the mail page. Write us an email if you want to contribute more and we can start talking about ideas.
this is my first post, though I've been reading right along since the hurricanes.
Just saw this news story on Yahoo, posted 20 minutes ago, claiming Iran threatens to cut oil exports if sanctions are imposed by the United Nations. China (not surprisingly) opposes sanctions.
Salt in the wound??
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051002/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_nuclear_oil
Could the story be true? Sure.
(10-02) 08:16 PDT DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) --
A Dubai-based newspaper said Sunday it stands by a story in which it quoted Iran's president as saying he might curtail oil sales if his nation is referred to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions over its nuclear program.
However, the Khaleej Times acknowledged that the confusion might have arisen because the reporter, a freelance journalist, told the president she was working for another paper.
After the story quoting Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad appeared Saturday, the president's office issued a statement saying he "never had an interview, either oral or written" with the newspaper.
On Sunday, the newspaper said the reporter on several occasions "presented herself (to Ahmadinejad) as a reporter with the American-based Arabic News, and not as a Khaleej Times reporter, though she has given this report exclusively to Khaleej Times."
The paper's editor, Prem Chandran, told The Associated Press: "We support what we published."
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/10/02/international/i054716D97.DTL
I have no faith in politicians, i genuinely think they are are all self serving. That aside: they will spend more time and money trying to investigate price gouging than they will on creating some postive solutions on peak oil. I don't think they realize any implications on taxing oil and gas co's. All they seem to see are $$$ signs. Now the govt will likely target those mean and evil Oil and Gas co's.
Case in point, Microsoft and Tobacco settlements. the money the states received from the tobacco settlements was squandered within approx 18 months. Nothing to show for it. The states squander lottery sales money. Best of my knowledge, FEMA stated they never had a plan drawn up for a serious hurricane. And Katrina's effects have shown them how ill prepared they really are. And that was a CAT 4 just before landfall, and i believe it was a CAT 3, just under a CAT 4 on impact.
A few posts previously someone stated something to the effect "everythings just fine" and quickly changes to
"we have a crisis"
You know your in for bad times when someone comes up and says "I'm from the govt, and i am here to help!"
Sorry for being so negative, but those darn politicans get on my nerves. thanks for letting me Vent!
http://www.fcnp.com/530/peakoil.htm
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2005/10/02/INGSHEVEM91.DTL
Could we be reaching the tipping point?
Good to see that more news outlets are starting to bring this to the attention of others.
1. Can we see a something like a small box in the side of the screen that contains updating info like:
It has been x number of days since Katrina made landfall.
It has been x number of days since Rita made landfall.
x % of oil production shut in.
x % of natural gas production shut in.
x number of refineries are offline.
x number of rigs are lost.
x number of platforms are lost.
And by clicking on the box, we are taken to a page with links that gives more detailed info on GOM damage and production. Also links to the eia site that gives current energy reserves such as the in ground natural gas figures
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/oog/info/ngs/ngs.html
would be included too.
2. With all the experts involved with this site and with the issue of peak oil, I'm suprised no one has come up with a "Peak Oil Lifestyle Planner". Think of a guide book that gives instrucion on peak oil preparedness to varying degrees, starting with simple auto tips for gas conservation, to tips on investing or wealth preservation, and then going to the end of the spectrum with the creation of a self sustaing community using organic farming and alternative energy resources. The book could use lifestyle examples such a single suburban, single urban, single rural male or female, a suburban couple, an urban couple, a rural couple, and lastly, a suburan family of 5, an urban family of 5, a rural family of 5. Each lifestyle example would have it's own unique set of planning instructions.
The San Francisco article was shockingly blunt. The PO issue seems to be going mainstream and the spin masters are losing control. I am thinking of proposing a course in sustainability but with a strong PO component. If I do, I will post on this site for ideas.
Enjoy life NOW the party aint over just yet:)
Idyllic? Hardly. I don't think city folk have any idea of what scratching out a living on a farm is going to be like when oil is way more expensive.
Farming is hot sweaty work for very little return. I'd like to take people who idolize farm living and give them a gift of one hour sitting on a tractor in the hot sun. They can learn the joys of slapping off sweat bees.
And the farm of the future probably will be using horses so they can also learn the joys of horse flies. Infinitely worse than sweat bees.
This is not to say it won't be a far better life than that of a beggar in a large city. But it will be a big step down for most people and I doubt there will be a lot of smiley faces.
animals require feeding and watering.
vegetable allotments in england have been part of our culture for a long time.
couple of the old boys (in there 70's) on my allotment told me off how there 1/8th of an acre would feed more than half of the families food requirements.
there are certain staples that have been overlooked by many people.
http://www.ibiblio.org/pfaf/D_search.html
links to a downloadable database
of
7000(usa indiginous) edible plants, happy foraging:)
I am an anarcho primitivist and my friends and I have been planning to live in small "eco-village" for over a year.
peak oil is just an eventuality like any other, if people are scared thats not my fault, it is not me using loads of resources, so I have no guilt.
If technology is going to save us what is this site for?
I have yet to hear from any of the main contributors how the current system can be maintained.
Not that I care, I am heading off to the forest regardless..
If my posts are in some way "trollish" then say so. I am here just to see if there is anyone else intrested in a sustainable future
See http://www.theoildrum.com/story/2005/10/3/174332/396#16 (another comment by me on this site) for more info.
Chris
Please don't take my note as a criticism of what you have to say. Anyone who wants to live in an eco-village should be free to do so. I don't get the impression that you're saying we all have to. What I find counter-productive is the doom-crying that fits in with the Olduvai Gorge-think. One of the quickest ways for critics to shoot down peak oil arguments in the public debate is to pretend that it's a claim that oil supplies will suddenly run out and pull the rug from under industrial society. Perhaps that kind of simplistic dismissal of peak oil is inevitable, but the doom-crying doesn't help.
It was even reasonable for large farms about a hundred years ago to use steam powered winches(spelling?).
Farming can mostly be electrified or use biomass based fuel withouth using the biomass to feed a horse.
I do not think small farms can compete commercially with large farms in the future since larger machines are more efficient giving more work per litre of fuel and running them around the clock gives more work per invested dollar and kg of steel. It is also a sector that will get priority for fuel since people will pay almost anything to not starve.
But for some it would of course be cheaper to subsistance farm fields that are not suitable for large scale farming.
Also, a horse has a huge advantage over any kind of electrical or biomass driven machinery: you don't need the technological base to get another horse that you need to get more machinery (or even maintain your existing stock). Also, horses naturally provide a natural source of fertilizer to fields that machines don't.
I have wondered for months now whether steam has the possibility of making a comeback post the peak. After reading this it might. Zimbabwe has some big Garrets so it may even work for them.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1580389,00.html
In WWII these magnificent locomotives hauled tons of freight and is it now time to bring them back into service to help out once again?
Any thoughts?
Is it possible?
Secondly, to those that want or would like to see the latest oil&gas on line, may i recommend: http://www.321energy.com/reports/flynn/current.html
for all the latest prices on NG, Oil, gasoline etc. very informative. Someone posted that site here a while back and now i check it out all the time through the day. Thanks, who ever you are!
When I can't be at the computer, i watch cnbc market watch through the day, they display the current oil and NG prices as well as gasoline.
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_at5+shtml/025020.shtml?3day
How worried should we be about Cantarell?
But I know so many people that can not live on the credit they have, and the wages they earn. And Drive more miles a day than I drive in a week. This is going to hurt their spending power. They are going to bundle up and watch netflix, instead of going out to the movies, or the mall. Their few dollars not spent on the few things they did last year are going to snowball. By mid Jan 06: You'll see several things.
1) credit bills getting paid less (even less than recently reported ) ( why does KFC take credit cards, or the Sonic near you, such horse hockey these days. )
2) More mortgages lost due to lack of funds to pay them, the job loss due to fewer sales at the mom and pop, 75% of annual sales coming from Christmas shoppers, who did not shop, but paid the heating bills and gasoline bills instead.
3) The poor getting poorer, or just doing less, but having to depend on the "wally worlds" out there to sell them cheap stuff from china, only to find out it is no longer cheap.
4) College guys and gals finding out that their dreams of a High Tech job making Mega-bucks has been sold to China, or India, and The local Pizza joint is not Hiring cause they lost business this winter, "Hey mom and Dad, can we move back in again?", being a big question asked this next year.
5) A lot less guys running up and down my street playing loud music, because they just can't afford the "tooling around" gas money.
6) Me going further to ground. I can handle the cold with no heat, or the hot with no ac (I've already done that this summer).
7) A national depression before summer of next year, This should really be # 1, but why depress you all at once, Don't pardon the pun.
Charles.
When your neighbor gets a pink slip, that's a "recession".
When you get the pink slip and find out your further employability has been shipped out to China or India while you were sleeping, that's when the great "depression" begins. Welcome to Tom Freidman's "FlatWorld" (as in flat and empty wallet).
I haven't heard so much talk about 'going back to the land' since the 1960s, when it seemed that every other hippie thought that it would a snap to establish a rural commune and live in a permanent state of self-sufficient bliss. The occupants of the few communes that actually tried this found out all too soon that going back to the land ain't all that much fun, and in fact can be a living hell. (I get a brief reminder of this simple truth every time I dig a hole, chop down a tree, or have to do any sort of sustained hard manual labor. Those early American pioneers must have a bunch of tough SOBs!)
Even if one were to accept this premise, the current population of the US is roughly almost three times it was at the turn of the century, and the amount of usuable farm land has shrunk by about as much due to land development and the growth of the suburbs. Furthermore, the crop yields of 'natural' farming is so much lower than that of the modern factory farm (for all its faults) that there probably just isn't enough land and resources to pull it off. There are just too many people today to go back to the simple life. Some trends are largely irreversible, and I think the trend of lower-tech to higher-tech is one of them.
Our intelligence and ingenuity got us into this mess, and if we get serious and start soon enough, it might get us out of it. However, given human nature, I am not too optimistic. And as far as I can tell, the only real energy policy the US has is to use its military might to gain control over large portions of the world's oil reserves. As I doubt that China and India are willing to freeze in the dark, this policy just about guarantees armed conflict over oil at some time in the future.
Adam Smith sold each of us a bill of bull, by saying, "Guess what? You do not need a well rounded education. Specialize and you will become "wealthy". A magical Invisible Hand will take care of everything."
99% of us listened to Adam Smith. We got a speciality education in: computer science, or finance or health care or etc. and we trusted that the Invisible Hand will perform its magic.
Before hearing of Peak Oil, I knew close to zilch about oil exploration, extraction, transport and utilization. I still know close to zilch (zero). These TOD pages are highly informative. The more you learn, the more you have a chance of grasping what is going on. The worst thing is to walk around with you head buried in the sand, believing that "specialization" will save you and that Adam Smith and his stooge cronies are taking care of everything.
To learn more about the magical "Invisible Hand" take a look at the below sites:
(P.S. I'm not a commie. We know that that system of trading personal favors leads to absolute corruption and collapse. But American capatilism is also full of corruption and heading toward collapse. Feudalism sucks. Is there any hope for a new social order that advances humanity rather than dragiing it down by virtue of humanity's greed and self-centered blindness?)
http://www.ualberta.ca/~publicas/folio/36/13/focus.html
http://207.99.115.72/story/2001/4/24/42315/2695
http://www.irs.princeton.edu/krueger/08_16_2001.htm
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/02/24/IN83497.DTL
That theory is more or less that if lots and lots of people each in their own way tries to find something to do and sell that other people needs, that is values, the multitude of local optimizations gives workable global optimizations and creates value producing structures that are more complex then a single human can handle and yet they work very well.
You are guaranteed nothing, you have to find out what other people needs and try to become good at providing that. The invisible hand does nothing without lots and lots of intellectual work.
Myself I am investing in education and I soon need to choose wich part of the energy field I shall try to work and find my fortune in.
In a post oil society, surely being multi skilled will be a huge asset?
knowing plumbing, carpentry, electrics (12v). will help bring your costs down when you start using solar power.
vegatable gardening is good for free food and exercise.
we may end up as a less specialised society but we could become a more self confident society.
I really envy the americans on this site, as a country you have far greater land per person ratio than here in the uk.
we have 60 million people, you have mabye 4 times that population with nearly 40 times the area!
It is taken on blind faith that with all those, lots and lots of people each clawing away for his or her own private gain, the mythical magical Invisible Hand will provide whatever society needs or wants.
Now you are saying, THERE ARE NO GUARANTEES?
That contradicts with the block quoted dogma.
Good luck with your education. I would recommend a class in "Directing a Capatilist Economy to Provide the Energies that its Citizens Want or Need".
Of course such rigid study does not account for "externalities". Maybe you should also take some social consciousness courses like, "How the Adam Smith Religion Contributed to Global Warming and Extinction of the Human Vermin". May you become as wise and just as Solomon.
To those of you who think I am joking, I am not. I am deadly serious.
To those of you who think this comment is off-topic, I respectfully and emphatically disagree. Everyone who reads and writes into this site is, on some level, doing so with a view to searching for a basis for some kind of hopeful future. In response to this issue just having been explicitly raised, I am offering in deadly earnest what I believe is the true basis of hope.
On a purely natural level, humanity is doomed. There is too much evil and corruption afoot in the world for any of the idealistic visions for the future that are of a purely natural sort to be viable. I refer here to things such as forming a society based on sustainable living, or one based on the equitable distribution of scarce resources, or one approaching a hunter-gatherer ideal of living in perfect harmony with nature. Human nature being as corrupt as it is, these are all vain chimeras. Does a critical look at history tell us any different?
Only an influx of grace into the world, brought upon by Christ's return in glory, offers the basis for a geniune hope. But this hope is a sure and solid one! Christ's supernatural intervention WILL transform and save the world, turning it into something beyond the wildest hopes of all the purely naturalistic visions that one runs into among peak-oil types.
Maranatha! Come Lord Jesus!
http://www.thenazareneway.com/index.htm
shows jesus's intentions towards animals, his essene's background would have helped in these coming aescitic times.
meanwhile my envy stretches to your price of diesel.
we are paying
$7.40 a gallon for diesel
My brother was, and he gets paid 72k a year and owns the house I rent from him, and he has a debt load that is almost 4 times his salary. But he'll be over to dinner when the times get tough and we are eating out of the yards instead of the grocery stores.
Charles, Cattails aka the Wild asparagus,
For any "back to nature" group to survive, they can't go that far back to nature, They have to bring with them things from the here and now and use them as well as the basics, Like seed saving, hand tillage, chickens, goats, one or two cows, and maybe just maybe a horse, for long distance travel. Anyone wanting to do this better know how many plants growing on their land they can eat, becaue they will be doing a lot of hunting and gathering, as well as some farming, but nothing on the scale of even the smallest truck farms. If they are doing all the work themselves.
Its possible, but you have to face the facts that you will be down to a 1,000 cal. diet/day on average and you need to know a heck of a lot more than they teach you in most schools.
But saying it is possible only means it is possible for just so many people, no where near the 300 million we have living here today.
Most school kida grow plants in the little cups, But they don't eat the plants growing in their front yards on a daily basis.
I don't think it is going to be pretty when our technology begins to fail us due to lack of energy imputs, be that from wars, depressions, lack of oil, or whatever.
I am not a gloomly person by nature, but I also can't see this going on for another 20 years with out some sort of correction.
Ps, I have taught myself which plants growing in my front lawn I can eat, where the plants in the area are that will at least give me a small meal are and many other useful things, but even I would be hard pressed to do it forever, but it is possible.
Charles. winter sorel great in salads, high in vitamin C.