Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What's going to happen as we start running out of cheap gas to guzzle?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
donsu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-27-05 01:42 PM
Original message
What's going to happen as we start running out of cheap gas to guzzle?

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/_/id/7203633?rnd=1111860430596&has-player=true


The Long Emergency


-snip-

Carl Jung, one of the fathers of psychology, famously remarked that "people cannot stand too much reality." What you're about to read may challenge your assumptions about the kind of world we live in, and especially the kind of world into which events are propelling us. We are in for a rough ride through uncharted territory.

-snip-

The few Americans who are even aware that there is a gathering global-energy predicament usually misunderstand the core of the argument. That argument states that we don't have to run out of oil to start having severe problems with industrial civilization and its dependent systems. We only have to slip over the all-time production peak and begin a slide down the arc of steady depletion.

-snip-

It will change everything about how we live.

-snip-

We will have to accommodate ourselves to fundamentally changed conditions.

No combination of alternative fuels will allow us to run American life the way we have been used to running it, or even a substantial fraction of it. The wonders of steady technological progress achieved through the reign of cheap oil have lulled us into a kind of Jiminy Cricket syndrome, leading many Americans to believe that anything we wish for hard enough will come true. These days, even people who ought to know better are wishing ardently for a seamless transition from fossil fuels to their putative replacements.
-snip-
------------------------------


4 paragraphs do not do justice to this article. it should be required reading world wide.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
The Doctor. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-27-05 01:50 PM
Response to Original message
1. Yep, it's gonna get VERY ugly.
Here is something I sent to friends and relatives (sorry - it's a bit long);

".....Ok- so I’m still not convinced, what would posses a group of people to go to such lengths to fix an election.
To rule the most powerful nation on earth you say?
Maybe, but we’ll toss that idea out for now in lieu of something MUCH more important.

Oil.

That’s right – oil.

“Oh, you’re saying that just because Dick Cheney got his money from oil, and Bush got his money from oil, and Condi Rice got her money from oil, and the whole administration stands to make a whole lot of money from oil and weapons sales, that they’re going to war for oil profits.”
That may or may not be true, but that’s not what I’m getting at.

We have a MUCH bigger problem than whether or not this administration is corrupt.

In fact, corruption and vote-rigging aside, they may be trying to SAVE us.
No- not from terrorists; they’ve proven far too incompetent or unwilling to protect us from the terrorists. If you still live in that world – fine. But it’s unlikely that terrorists are going to get you.

Peak oil will.

(Right about now, you should be getting ready to either pee yourself or put your denial circuitry into high Ghz.)

You see, the thing this administration is trying to save us from has nothing to do with terrorism, but the smarter people that this administration listens to know that, frankly, Americans are too plug stupid to wrap their heads around the truth.
Saying we’re fighting terrorism is the best way they have of getting Americans to support their policies, if they told Americans the truth – they wouldn’t be able to save us… from ourselves.

So let me try to explain:

Our problem is twofold – ‘Reserve Currency’ and ‘Peak Oil’.
Working together – these problems will crush American civilization as we know it.
But the one that’s certain to get us all is the Peak Oil crisis.

“What’s peak oil?”
Well, it’s a relatively simple concept a Dr. Marion Hubbert figured out in 1956 that goes something like this:
“Every year, oil consumption and subsequent demand has risen by a considerable percent. Every year, oil producing nations and drilling companies make efforts to increase oil production to service growing demand. There will come a point where oil production hits capacity and ‘peaks’, at this point, oil production will plateau for a time and then begin to decline. This will happen regardless of the fact that demand continues to rise.”

Typical ‘Amurkin’, “So? What’s that mean?”
Me, “It means that oil will no longer be produced fast enough to meet demand and prices will rise dramatically.”
‘Amurkin’, “So’s I have ta pay more fer gas? Geez, guess I’ll have to put in fer overtime soon.”
Me, “Aside from the guy you voted for taking away overtime benefits for workers, it wouldn’t help anyway. You see, your employer will have to pay those higher prices too, so he will be unlikely to pay overtime (neat how it would appear the administration saw this coming), in fact, there’s a very good chance you’ll be laid off if his business doesn’t fold altogether.”
‘Amurkin’, “But we lay carpet, sure we’ll have to pay a little more fer gas, but he can just raise his price a little bit ta make up fer it.”
Me, “And there you have hit the carpet tack on the head. Your employer buys his carpet from a manufacturer. That manufacturer has increased costs because;

A) The cost of his raw materials have increased dramatically because; 1) those materials are petroleum based, 2) it costs more to produce product because of higher energy costs, 3) it costs more to ship those materials due to the higher cost of fuel.
B) The cost to ship those carpets to your company ALSO went up, so your employer has to absorb all those extra costs from the company he purchases from.

Therefore, your employer will be paying the increased costs for all the businesses he buys from, all the businesses they buy from, AND for all the energy he needs to run his business.
Ultimately, no one will be able to afford to buy carpet from him at the prices he must charge to stay in business. He will have to close down.
As energy costs go up, pay rates for labor will not. People will become less and less able to afford expensive goods and services due to the increased cost of energy.”

‘Amurkin’, “Well what about all them other things fer energy, like solar, natural gas, windmills and stuff?”

Me, “Not a bad idea – but those sources do not produce enough energy at the price it would cost to get them running. If we spent every penny we would normally spend on oil on those other sources instead, we would produce less than one percent of the energy we get from oil. Oh, and of course in order to produce those things we would need…”

“Oil?”

“You guessed it ‘Amurkin’, no matter what we try to do now – it will cost oil, and the price will not go down.”

“You make it sound like the whole world needs oil.”

“It does. In one century we have had an explosion of growth and progress, all because of high-yield, low cost oil. The civilization we have now is a direct product of oil. Without oil, we would have never got to this stage of civilization. Without oil, society cannot have all the modern conveniences we have now. Without oil – we lose the ability to sustain society.”

‘Amurkin’, “So we’ll have to go back to farmin’ and usin’ horses… I could do that.”

Me, “Well, that would be very nice… except for one thing… there’s too many of us. The only reason we have been able to produce and distribute enough to sustain society is…”

“Oil…”

“Yep, now… imagine the entire population of this country turning on it’s own resources to sustain themselves. All the wood chopped for heat, all the animals hunted for food. Even if we tried – we could not possibly re-create a self-sustaining civilization unless we lost two-thirds of the population. Meanwhile, every available natural resource will be consumed.”

For a moment, I see a glimmer of real understanding in ‘Amurkin’s’ eye, in the next moment – he starts to chuckle.

“Damn boy! You really had me goin’ there! Well, I gotta get to work, the guys’ll get a kick out of yer ‘end o’ the world’ story. Have a good ‘n.”

So you can see why no politician in his right mind would try to tell a whole bunch of people that we have to ration driving hours by business need, get rid of all the SUV’s, and tell people they only get so much ‘expendable gas’ for recreation.
Besides – even if they did do all that, people would find the loopholes.

‘Yep – all them damn liberals tryin’ ta take away yer rights!’

So I’ll be the first to laugh when someone says, “Why weren’t we warned? Why didn’t our government DO anything?”

- "Cause you would’ve voted them out of office... that’s why."

Oh yeah – and the peak oil production thingy… begins in just a couple of years.

Oh, but don’t worry – Our government has a two part energy plan to slow down our inexorable plunge:

1) Invade countries with oil.
2) Kill anything that gets in the way.

Naturally, they knew Americans couldn’t stomach the truth. Americans haven't thought ahead in terms of ‘giving stuff up’ now to prepare for the future since WWII... That’s just not American anymore.

So, our ‘Commander in Chief’ must see to the success of our agenda, which first meant that he HAD to win the election at ANY cost. Next it means that we are bout to invade another country – I’m thinkin’ Iran. (Hope china doesn’t get too pissed off.) And of course – there will be a draft, it will be the only way to invade and occupy oil-producing nations.


What if Kerry won?
It wouldn’t matter – we still have to pursue a similar policy.
Unless, of course, he had the political brass to stand up, tell us the truth and start putting some very stringent and unpopular orders in place. (But at least he could pronounce ‘nuclear’.)

Abiotic petroleum genesis you say?
I’m still looking for a good argument that that shows supplies will continue to rise with demand, let alone more solid evidence. Besides, that would open the door to speculation of market manipulation.

Nothing would make me happier than to be proven wrong at this point, please do your best to do so, and with good solid facts.

But I’m not usually wrong.

-Dr. Garth Eldritch"


If there's anything you can use - feel free.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fortyfeetunder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-27-05 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. This one post should be among the Greatest.
This is the stuff I tell people about....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rzemanfl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-27-05 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #1
11. Most of what you say was said at the end of a Bell Labs film
shown in schools in the 1950's and 1960's. The film was called "Our Mr. Sun." It cheerfully predicted everything would be solar powered by the year 2000 but said if we didn't go solar all the bad stuff discussed above would happen. A couple of weeks ago I started a thread on this movie and another, "Our Friend the Atom" which resulted in an interesting discussion of school films and film strips in the old days.

I believe that this is my 1,000th post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-27-05 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #1
14. You should post this as its own thread. PM me when you do so I....
....can nominate it.

Thank you.


www.missionnotaccomplished.us
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellenfl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-27-05 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #1
17. i watched 'the end of suburbia' today - a movie about just this issue.
it is VERY eye opening. with all the gas guzzlers on the roads today, i think we could really make a dent if we (meaning 'you' because i have always bought with gas mileage in mind) all went to more efficient cars. this is what happened in the 70s when gasoline was rationed.

it's too bad that shrub and company won't legislate conservation. i wonder what they plan to do with all their money when the dollar is worth nothing?

ellen fl
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mhr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-27-05 01:54 PM
Response to Original message
2. Energy body wants brakes on fuel consumption (i.e. rationing)
Energy body wants brakes on fuel consumption
By Adam Porter in Perpignan, France
Thursday 24 March 2005

The International Energy Agency is to propose drastic cutbacks in car use to halt continuing oil-supply problems. Those cutbacks include anything from car-pooling to outright police-enforced driving bans for citizens.

Fuel "emergency supply disruptions and price shocks" - in other words, shortages - could be met by governments. Not only can governments save fuel by implementing some of the measures suggested, but in doing so they can also shortcut market economics.

An advance briefing of the report, titled Saving Oil in a Hurry: Measures for Rapid Demand Restraint in Transport, states this succinctly.

"Why should governments intervene to cut oil demand during a supply disruption or price surge? One obvious reason is to conserve fuel that might be in short supply.

"But perhaps more importantly, a rapid demand response (especially if coordinated across IEA countries) can send a strong market signal."

Snip ......

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/655B03B0-32C2-4BF7-A3E8-F7EFD8144333.htm

Link To IEA Workshop, March 7-8, 2005

International Energy Agency
European Conference of Ministers of Transport
WORKSHOP: MANAGING OIL DEMAND IN TRANSPORT

http://www.iea.org/textbase/work/2005/oil_demand/FinalAgenPresentations.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NMDemDist2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-27-05 01:59 PM
Response to Original message
3. chilling reading
nominated
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ashmanonar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-27-05 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. indeed, chilling.
guess i better go buy a copy of the firefox series.

*gets ready for the complete shutdown of society*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HysteryDiagnosis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-27-05 02:02 PM
Response to Original message
4. It's already been cast and scored....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jokinomx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-27-05 02:09 PM
Response to Original message
6. We can't say it enough times....
Edited on Sun Mar-27-05 02:10 PM by Jokinomx
Our world is about to change drastically. I feel this is the real reason we invaded Iraq. Losing a few thousand soldiers early on sure beats fighting Russia or China over it later. Now that we are in place it will be hard to get us out.

With that...Congressman Barlett just spoke to congress about peak oil a week or so ago. What he presented should have been headlines in every paper in the country. But, that won't happen.... because this administration knows if you really told people the truth...they would over react to the news and all hell would break out.



http://www.copvcia.com has been very informative about the issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ananda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-27-05 02:17 PM
Response to Original message
7. adapt or perish..
We either adapt or perish.

I think many people would like to return to the goodoledays with the horse and buggies, the nice small towns, and the oldtimereligion, meaning a complete reversion to social darwinism, slavery, and apartheid.

But I'm a cockeyed, romantic, optimist then, aren't I? ;-)

Sue
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dcfirefighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-27-05 02:34 PM
Response to Original message
9. The Remedy
The rich will get poorer, and the poor will go without. While the great mass will still have needs and wants, and a means with which to pay for them, their labor, there will be no work. This despite the fact that their very needs will provide a demand for their labor.

What will keep them out of work? Will it be the owners of factories, and food processing plants, not wanting to put their capital to work? The owners of refineries not wanting to profit from using their capital?

Nope. It will be the owners of land, an artificial construct if there ever were one, who, secure in their own wealth, will withold access to raw materials and natural wealth, until their greed is satiated and their price met.

The landowner often combined, in the same body, with the owners of capital, but it is the function of landowner, not capitalist, that causes the break in the flow of commerce. He breaks the flow by collecting and keeping rent.

The alternative is to tax the rent rent collected by the owners of land, the holders of the rights to extract, and those who profit from natural and community wealth. It's a simple change, a change in a few words in our state's tax code, a few more in the Federal Code, but it will force such landowners to put their land to work, or to sell it. It looks like a property tax, but assessed only against unimproved property value. The others look like auctions for extraction rights, or spectrum rights, or emission rights.

Once the land is put to use, global depression or no, the rate of wealth production will increase, wages will increase, and dependence on oil will decrease.

Men will go to work building windmills, algae farms, maybe nuclear plants. Cities will begin to grow up more than out, employing many in construction, and decreasing transport costs. Many will be employed building rapid transit systems, and railways. Farms will become more efficient, and use fewer resources, with many becoming 'organic', taking less from the land, and more from labor and capital.

The movement is afoot, I'm optimistic. Read Progress & Poverty http://www.henrygeorge.org/chp1.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-27-05 03:00 PM
Response to Original message
10. Rule #1: Make sure your next house or apt. is not in suburbia
Move to a real city or a real small town where you can walk or bike to meet all your needs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radio_Rick Donating Member (52 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-27-05 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
12. The transition will not be seamless
--but we will transition to a "Nuclear + Solar + Wind" economy. Most like Hydrogen will be the "burnable" - generated by nuclear plants with some smaller contribution from wind and photovoltaic.

As to "oil as an agricultural chemical" - you are talking about fertilizers that are synthesized ("Haber Process" for nitrogen fixation) from off gas and by-product hydrogen from oil refining. He will get that hydrogen from the same source as our hydrogen as a "burnable" fuel - electrolysis of water using nuclear power to generated the electricity.

As to "
Painful transition, with winners and losers. There will be changed paradigms - massively so - in how and where we live, how we commute to work and school.

And - the underlying assumption of our society will change from cheap energy to expensive energy.

See--> Geo-Greening by Example by Thomas Friedman in today's New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/27/opinion/27friedman.html

    <snip><
    All the elements of what I like to call a geo-green strategy are known:

    We need a gasoline tax that would keep pump prices fixed at $4 a gallon, even if crude oil prices go down. At $4 a gallon (premium gasoline averages about $6 a gallon in Europe), we could change the car-buying habits of a large segment of the U.S. public, which would make it profitable for the car companies to convert more of their fleets to hybrid or ethanol engines, which over time could sharply reduce our oil consumption.

    We need to start building nuclear power plants again. The new nuclear technology is safer and cleaner than ever. "The risks of climate change by continuing to rely on hydrocarbons are much greater than the risks of nuclear power," said Peter Schwartz, chairman of Global Business Network, a leading energy and strategy consulting firm. "Climate change is real and it poses a civilizational threat that transform the carrying capacity of the entire planet."

    And we need some kind of carbon tax that would move more industries from coal to wind, hydro and solar power, or other, cleaner fuels. The revenue from these taxes would go to pay down the deficit and the reduction in oil imports would help to strengthen the dollar and defuse competition for energy with China.

    It's smart geopolitics. It's smart fiscal policy. It is smart climate policy. Most of all - it's smart politics! Even evangelicals are speaking out about our need to protect God's green earth. "The Republican Party is much greener than George Bush or Dick Cheney," remarked Mr. Schwartz. "There is now a near convergence of support on the environmental issue. Look at how popular Schwarzenegger, a green Republican, is becoming because of what he has done on the environment in California."
    <snip><


Read the full article.

I am NOT saying nuclear + solar +wind is a quick fix. I am saying it is part of the only fix -- and combined with "downsizing" from a life style based on cheap, abundant energy -- it is the only fix.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftofthedial Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-27-05 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
13. Step One
We'll guzzle expensive gas
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
osiristz Donating Member (109 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-27-05 05:47 PM
Response to Original message
15. once the criminalize poverty, everything will be fine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
neonplaque Donating Member (204 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-27-05 07:21 PM
Response to Original message
16. Mad Max, baby! It's coming.... n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 09:31 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC