Four must-read paragraphs on the greening of the automobile.

[chaska]

I found this god knows where, by god knows whom. It was a comment by an anonymous poster to some article I read. Pay particular attention to paragraph 3 (and note the Kunstler quote - paragraph 2).

You may not yet appreciate the truth of these statements, but give it time. I'm coming to think that this just may be the ultimate truth of our situation.

...which is not to say that I think that transitional strategies such as electric cars aren't a good idea, just that they may very well need to be recognized and acknowledge as just that: transitional strategies.



Not to sound like an alarmist, but JH Kunstler's term "The Long Emergency" fits very well . So many have fallen into the trap of trying to rearrange deck chairs on the Titanic by trying to cling to the outmoded economic structure defined by cars, trucks and cheap energy.

'Expand your view beyond the question of how we will run all the cars by means other than gasoline. This obsession with keeping the cars running at all costs could really prove fatal. It is especially unhelpful that so many self-proclaimed "greens" and political "progressives" are hung up on this monomaniacal theme. Get this: the cars are not part of the solution (whether they run on fossil fuels, vodka, used frymax™ oil, or cow shit). They are at the heart of the problem. And trying to salvage the entire Happy Motoring system by shifting it from gasoline to other fuels will only make things much worse. The bottom line of this is: start thinking beyond the car.' JHK in a recent AlterNet Post.

Thomas Homer-Dixon falls into this class, underestimating the scope & depth of what Peak Oil means to every segment of our economy. Only Gasoline/AvGas and Diesel fuel have shown themselves capable of supporting the economic matrix we have erected throughout the developed world and they don't come from coal, hydro, wind or nuclear.

Hydrogen and batteries are only means of storing energy and are not practical for flight or personal transport. The production of gasoline from coal, shale or tar sands is energy inefficient and environmentally expensive. Natural Gas will quickly prove to be far too valuable as a source for chemicals & fertilizers to be used for mere heating.

[chaska]

1. With every new car (hybrid or not) a great deal of the energy it consumes...

over its lifetime happens in the manufacturing of the vehicle. And unless I miss my guess, hybrids are worse in this regard.

What is REALLY needed is the remanufacture (on a small or large basis) of used cars repurposed as electric vehicles.

[Bruce McAuley]

14. I've done some thinking about that idea...

It wouldn't be hard to transplant a motor from an electric forklift into an older Chevy or Ford truck, then use the bed part for batteries. Charging overnight ought to get enough juice for driving around for quite a while before recharging is needed. Certainly enough for those things you need a truck for, which is carrying stuff to your place from somewhere else, and not much more. Some parts are pricey like the controller and batteries and motor, for sure.
A range of 100 miles ought to be doable, and if the retro-fit kits are subsidized...
Why throw out a usable rolling chassis just because the motive power is dirty or expensive gasoline. Gimme a boxed up kit to do it that's sold at WalMart or Schucks, and get out of my way! I really want one for my Volkswagen.

Bruce

[chaska]

15. I would so love to get involved in a project like this...

I have a friend in CA who has two electric motors that he's planning to use for electric cars. I told him I wanted to be there every step of the way to learn how to do it myself. But I had to go and move to the other coast. Damn me to hell.

I think something like this would have to be done by the little guys (small businesses). American capitalism, with its inability to see beyond the conventional could never do this. "Used electric cars??? Americans would never buy a used car!"

[ljm2002]

16. You should take a look at this book...

..."Getting to Zero Waste" by Paul Palmer:

http://www.gettingtozerowaste.com/

His basic thesis is that the "recycling" concept is a scam, or more politely a misunderstanding of the nature of the problem: we don't need to recycle, we need to reuse. Things should be designed with that in mind. Recycling a glass bottle by smashing it, remelting it, and making it into something else is unnecessarily wasteful, especially when the thing is still useful in itself.

I don't agree with everything in the book. But I am in violent agreement with the basic thesis, we need to make reuse a habit and recycling a rarity.

[Bruce McAuley]

17. A 1956 Buick electric car? That'd be cool...

I'd consider making ANY kind of old car into an electric, but I like Volkswagens for their interchangeability. A little newer brake system helps too, like disc brakes for a starter for older rigs.
How many cars does this world need? There is a limit, and if we don't throw out the old ones, but keep re-using them until they're too outmoded and unsafe, then we don't need a lot of new production.

Bruce

[TheMadMonk]

21. There have been a few repurposiung ideas in our family.

One was using a condemned (because of valve fire) LPG transport or storage tank as a submersible. Refitting cars with steam power, not perfectly clean, but properly done, at least it's about half as dirty. Steam also lends itself to multiple fuels. So Hydrogen (if we can figure out a decent way to generate it) would work for short haul and LPG for long distance in the same vehicle.

But something which has been stirring about over the past year or two is pneumatics. Cheap, clean, low carbon load, efficiency, very environmentally friendly.

Ditch the complexity. Aim for the simplest and most robust solution for general commuter and short haul freight usage. Pneumatics suits this application to a T. As it gives us the simplest drive chain and "fuel". An auxiliary battery runs electronics and lights. 100 to 200 km range (depending on load) is quite doable and at about 1/3 (or less) the cost of a comparable electric (with an enormously smaller load of environmentally hazardous chemicals).

Most people rarely if ever need or use the long distance capabilities of the petrol powered car. Why own it unless you need it on a regular basis? Why not hire for the rare occasions it's necessary?

[Jed Dilligan]

2. We have to live closer to where we work,

closer to where we shop, and closer to each other.

The reason we don't want to is that, in our decades of suburban isolation, there has evolved a new and virulent strain of asshole. Even those of us who are not it do not want to be forced into a little box with it.

[chaska]

5. Some say that it is the way our society is structured today...

Our isolation and even our recognition of each other (to the extent it's incorrect, that is) as assholes is a byproduct of the machine-like societal structure we've created.

We aren't machines, why do we let them (the corporations) treat us like we are?

[underpants]

6. Will the 'burbs find themselves stranded?

That is the question that popped up in my head from your post.

Yes city living would seem to get around the fact that you don't need a car (let's assume the electric rail will keep working) or don't if you can walk where you need to get to.

So where does that leave us in the 'burbs? We may have to find other ways to get to where we work or change where/how we work or we may very well just be f**ed-especially the lower paid people who do most everything in the places we stop before and after work will have no way to get to where they do these things for us.

Interesting-the life out in the burbs may very well be a thing of the past.

[chaska]

9. Here's an article that will interest you both.

http://casaubonsbook.blogspot.com/2007/05/rural-exodus.html

Unfortunately, I think one of the first effects of Peak Oil will be massive unemployment ... another reason why I find it strange that people are so fixated on the survivability at all cost of the automobile. I mean, where the heck do people think they're going to be going? You'll have no job (many (most?) of us) and a great many stores will close forever. And everybody will have less money (except the rich ... who must die :evilgrin:)

[Jed Dilligan]

11. I foresee a reversion to agriculture

in today's suburbs. Maybe aquaculture, too, using the existing pools to raise fish and other food products.

You could stay on if that floats your boat, or move closer to the kind of job you like if not.

[chaska]

12. Here ya go, Jed...

http://www.kurtsaxon.com/foods007.htm

I'm going to give this some serious cosideration. I loves me some catfish!

[underpants]

13. I was thinking the same thing

put this together with chaska's article posted above.

Most will try to move back nearer to the working areas but some will just scrap it and try to self sustain maybe pick up some extra cash with what isn't needed-that is IF they can get access to the land.

Who knows.

[ThomWV]

3. Thank You! People are just going to have to understand, communications will replace transportation

We will move ideas by wire instead of people by road, rail, air, and water. We'll save the road ways and the airways and waterways for moving essential goods the shortest possible distance when outside energy sources are required for that movement.

[Jed Dilligan]

18. Unfortunately

by then there may be a lot more waterways... when the ice caps melt, I mean. Highway 10 from Florida to Texas will become the Royal Canal...

[Ezlivin]

4. We are not doomed

Just our way of life.

And this is not something that most Americans are even willing to entertain. Dick Cheney was right when he said "The American way of life is non-negotiable." He knows that most people are loathe to change the way they are living. Hell, most people won't even adjust the thermostat to achieve energy savings. Thinking that they will voluntarily move to mass transit (if it even exists) is ludicrous.

[chaska]

7. Alas, I suspect you're right. But...

at some point only those who can and will change will survive.

[Ezlivin]

8. Ding, ding! We have a winner.

Exactly. I'm getting ready and have been for the past miserable six years under our Glorious Leader.

But it's cold comfort; I don't relish the thought of watching others "drown" as I don my life preserver and step into my lifeboat. We have a lot of good, decent and incredibly naive people in this country. They truly deserve a better fate.

[TheMadMonk]

22. Of course it;s non-negotiable. Sheesh, where do Dick the prick...

...and his cronies make their money. The "American Way of Life" was manufactured in the post war (#2) era and people have been brainwashed to demand it ever since.

Plenty of societies somehow manage without resorting to the "American Way of Life". It's not impossible. And hell with the right mix, it doesn't even really need sacrificing. Except for one thing. You Americans have to get over consuming for the sake of consumption. No more updating car and white goods on a bi/tri-annual cycle. At the very least you're gonna enormously increase your discretionary spending for the things it's FUN to update.

If you really must show the neigbours the bird, stick your hand over the fence. It's a hell of a lot cheaper than a new washer-drier.

[kestrel91316]

10. People who CAN telecommute at least part of the time

will definitely need to do so. For folks like me who CANNOT do our work in any manner other than in person will need to LIVE WHERE WE WORK, or within easy walking/biking/mass transit commuting distance. Period.

I long for the day when traveling by car when there are viable alternatives is seen as virtually criminal and the best way on earth to lose one's friends.

[Gregorian]

19. Is this not what I have been saying? My mantra?

Somebody pinch me, I can't believe I'm reading this.

Can we not see the forest for the trees? We were given eyes for this kind of thing. But this goes beyond the simple physics of making a car move. There is much more to our energy situation.

I'm afraid I can't do this justice right now. I've written and deleted several complete posts in an attempt to say something meaningful.

Simply put, we are where we are due to how we live, and how many are living it. And both halves of that equation are increasing each moment.

Even if we had free energy to run cars with, there is still so much that is needed for all billions of us to survive. I'm thinking beyond the scope of the automobile. But to stay in that subject, we would still need tires, bearings, copper for motors, batteries, glass, roads, shipping of all of the parts. No matter what kind of car, it takes nearly 10% of the energy it uses in it's lifetime just to manufacture it.

We're living outside of the equilibrium of nature.

I don't know how to make others see what I have seen. Maybe one must be raised. Maybe it's a strong sense of aesthetics being pummeled into oblivion. And maybe it's just observation combined with several thermodynamics courses.

There is one thing I find at the central core of this discussion. Modern living is violent.

[librechik]

20. we have too much shit. And offal of all sorts. How about methane production?

it's interchangeable with natural gas.

Oh wait--ADM can't make money off that like it can with methanol.

So Tough shit, so to speak'

[TheMadMonk]

23. The solutions I think will come out of India and China,

While we in the West will keep applying patches to a broken system. We will become the guest workers in their countries whilst their wealthy buy up (or just call in the loans America has outstanding and reposes) America, and move there to drink daquaries on the beaches of Arizona.