Three Cheers for $4 Gasoline

[coberst]

Three Cheers for $4 Gasoline

Of course you must keep in mind that I am a retired engineer, living in the Smoky Mountains, who drives 10 miles to town once a week for groceries; these facts make it possible for me to develop a Solomon like understanding of reality from an Archimedean point of view.

Quickie from Wiki—“An Archimedean point is a hypothetical vantage point from which an observer can objectively perceive the subject of inquiry, with a view of totality. The ideal of "removing oneself" from the object of study so that one can see it in relation to all other things, but remain independent of them, is described by a view from an Archimedean point.”

Does $4 gas signify the beginning of the ending of a civilization of adolescent life styles divorced from the reality principle? Does it presage the beginning of the ending of a self-absorbed and largely fictional pattern of social behavior?

I doubt it but I can dream can’t I?

This morning I listened to NPR interviewing the mayor of Houston Texas speaking about anticipated efforts for completely remodeling the living and cultural standards of the citizens of Houston in anticipation of creating a city where citizens might work, shop, and live within walking distances of shops, supermarkets, and jobs.

Reality seldom challenges salient points of hero-systems largely because the earth has been so bountiful; natural bounty has thus far allowed Americans to live largely in a world of playful fantasy that may be beginning to crumble around a commercial-military hero-system of fantasy.

Socrates was sentenced to death by hemlock because he tried to awaken the youth of Athenian society to this very reality-principle; he died a hero in the eyes of history because he asked the youth to question their own hero-system.

Will $4 gas lead you to question your own commercial-military hero-system?

[coollikeme]

drilling. What are we waiting for Its time to take care of ourselves. Stop depending on other countries.

[Dan.Linehan]

Drilling won't affect gas prices for about ten years.

[Dharma]

Using what we already have now would drop prices fast. See video. We don't need to drill anything. Want to see the connection with Iraq and Iran? Watch this.

The Energy Non-Crisis - 75 min - Oct 24, 2007

Lindsey Williams talks about his first hand knowledge of Alaskan oil reserves larger than any on earth. And he talks about how the oil companies and U.S. government won't send it through the pipeline for U.S. citizens to use.
The Energy Non-Crisis

[coollikeme]

we said ten years ago. Start drilling now and the rest of the world can't hold us hostage. You are probably right it won't help that much now, but I am thinking long term. If the rest of the world sees that we are going to drill are own oil. It might change the way they think?

[JSB]

Originally Posted by coollikeme

we said ten years ago. Start drilling now and the rest of the world can't hold us hostage. You are probably right it won't help that much now, but I am thinking long term. If the rest of the world sees that we are going to drill are own oil. It might change the way they think?

The US doesn't have enough oil reserves do make much of a dent, given its current consumption. The US has large enough coal reserves that using the Fischer-Tropsch process to convert coal to petroleum, it could provide all its oil needs at the current consumption rate domestically for over 100 years (approx. 900 billion barrels). The downside is environmental pollution and destruction far in excess of current levels, so we'd probably poison ourselves before we ran out of coal.

Best strategy: algae and genetically engineered bacteria based biofuels, combined with highly efficient rechargeable electric hybrids, wind, solar, 4th generation pebble-bed nuclear reactors, and, if we're lucky, nuclear fusion (see Daily Kos: State of the Nation -- I know KOS posts a lot of crap, but this is a legit).

(If oil gets too much more expensive, expect Hugo Chavez to suffer an unfortunate accident, and Citgo to agree to exclusive US contracts. Chinese protests will be met with a vigorous recital of the Monroe Doctrine.)

[ogrekilleat]

Originally Posted by coollikeme

If the rest of the world sees that we are going to drill are own oil. It might change the way they think?

Yes, but it won't change the way WE think. I agree with the mayor of Houston that instead of starting to drill, we should start to walk and bicycle. Why do you think we should try to change other people's brains rather than starting with our own? Just think, expensive gas gives us the opportunity to be a shining beacon of sustainable transportation.

What are we waiting for Its time to take care of ourselves. Stop depending on other countries.

I agree with you on this one, though, it IS time to start depending on ourselves...and our own two feet.

[coollikeme]

And I am all ready in good shape. Who cares what the mayor of Houston thinks. If he wants to ride a bike, then let him ride a bike, don't force it on me. He is one of the reasons why we depend on other countries for oil.

[JFKDemocrat]

Drilling won't affect gas prices for about ten years.

Wrong. There are some places we can start drilling and see the first barrel within 18 months, and yes some in 5 or 10 years. No one cares about the environmental bullcrap when they are paying $4 at the pump. Save the planet? People don't care about saving the planet if they are worried about not being able to afford groceries for their kids. We won't allow it to happen and not a single politician will stand in the way (i.e. Barrack Obama). McCain said he was willing to drill. What is Barrack Obama's solution for energy? He hasn't said.

[JSB]

It's not like we should be surprised by high oil prices. We've always known that demand would outstrip production at some point (i.e. oil is not an infinitely renewable resource), and we've known that OPEC has the rest of the world by the short hairs since the embargo of 1973.

So what did we do about it then? We talked and talked about how to fix the problem and when the price of oil plummeted in the 80's, we ignored all of the proposed solutions, stuck our collective heads back up our collective a**es and pretended everything was fine.

And if oil prices crash again, we will again most likely go back to driving monster cars and pissing away the world's fossil fuels. And one of these days, when demand has outgrown the global geological limit of production capacity, the price spike in oil isn't going to come back down, and oil will keep climbing.

If we haven't got our act together by then, the high costs of petrochemical fertilizers and food transportation will drive global food prices to outrageous levels, and we can all watch in horror as over half the world's population dies of famine and the rest suffer through global wars over resources.

So, do we do we do what is necessary to transition the global economy, or do we continue to fiddle while Rome burns?

[newmark]

The United States has had cheap gas prices for a long time. However, despite one thread on this forum, Americans are not dumb. People will adapt quickly ( at least the younger ones ) and lifestyles will change for the better (environmentally speaking ):smaller cars, and more care in using energy generally, as is the case in the rest of the world.
I think it's harder for America, being the world's superpower, to feel that they depend on the rest of the world, but I hope the government resists the urge to drill and spoil the environment instead of developing alternative forms of energy and better relations with other countries.

[JFKDemocrat]

The future of energy.

YouTube - Inventor: Lines are blurring between humans and machines

[Dan.Linehan]

Closing the Enron Loophole would drop prices by 25% to 50% right now.

Seems prices are currently high because of speculation and insider trading.

For example, Morgan Stanley is the biggest heating oil owner in New England -- they can artificially inflate the prices.

[Brutha]

I don't really think that oil is to expensive.
A high oil price that hurts enough to let people shift their energy use is a good thing.

[JSB]

Originally Posted by Brutha

I don't really think that oil is to expensive.
A high oil price that hurts enough to let people shift their energy use is a good thing.

If oil had hit $100/barrel and stayed there, I'd agree with you. $100 had a psychological impact, and was enough to prompt serious interest in alternatives.

With oil poised to hit $150-$200/barrel in the next year, there is a real danger of throttling the global economy. Increased fertilizer and transportation costs will continue to drive up food prices. There are many people living a bare subsistence lifestyle as it is, with no economic breathing room to absorb higher food costs, and millions could starve.

Widespread famine throughout the developing world would also lead to widespread political unrest and war, compounding the problem --- not a pretty picture.

[Brutha]

Increased fertilizer and transportation costs will continue to drive up food prices.

Maybe it will also increase the incentives to grow food more locally.
Developing countires should grow their own food anyway. Maybe the prices will raise to fast but I don't think so because demand doesn't increase that fast especially when the prices rise.

and was enough to prompt serious interest in alternatives.

I actually don't see that there is enough interest in alternatives to fossil fuel.

[JFKDemocrat]

Literally they can repackage food in a way to cut costs delivering it by almost half. Most foods (non-raw) are packaged with air and water. Wal-Mart has promised it's food producers that it will still give their food firms the same amount of ad space on the shelves even if they downsize their boxes (leaving less air).

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

I don't understand why so many people are adament that we continue to pursue oil when it's well known that it's a dwindling resource???

Wouldn't it be more prudent to spend our money and time developing alternates that are renewable, sustainable and less hazardous to the environment?

It seems like the only reason we are still all about oil is that the people who make the decisions are getting rich off of it.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by coberst

Will $4 gas lead you to question your own commercial-military hero-system?

Coberst, your posts with the bold question at the end remind me of Sex and the City.

I don't know about the c-m h-s, but I quit my job on April 15th and still have 1/4 tank of gas in my car. It has become a game. That's partly due to price, partly due to dwindling resources, partly due to cussed rebelliousness, and partly (mostly) because it's fun to play this game. Plus, thanks to all the walking, etc., I am down to a junior's size 7 for the first time since high school. High gas prices make you thin! Too, my food choices are much more local. When it gets dark, it gets dark in my apartment -- the day is not artificially stretched out around here (unless there's a new episode of Law & Order Criminal Intent on tv.)

Maybe it's not entirely the high price of gas, but it feels good and right to be playing these games and so I don't mind.

[JSB]

Originally Posted by Brutha

Maybe it will also increase the incentives to grow food more locally.
Developing countires should grow their own food anyway.

Ideally, yes, however the "Green Revolution" of the mid-20th century drastically increased crop yields per acre, resulting in cheap and plentiful food worldwide, and putting a huge dent in perennial famines throughout the third world. The downside is that these techniques depend on economies of scale and artificial petrochem fertilizers, so modern "industrial farming" methods are necessary; this may not be environmentally sustainable in the long run (e.g. water is pumped from aquifers hundreds of times faster than these aquifers are naturally replenished.)

I'm not trying to be all gloom and doom (honest!), but there is the real question of whether or not it is even possible to feed 6.5 billion people without modern industrial farming.

I'd love to see universal organic, sustainable, locally-based agriculture, but that might not be possible unless the global population drops back down to 2 billion or so. And this "dropping down" is unlikely to be an orderly process. It would be nice if everyone agreed to a 1 or 2 child policy, such that population would shrink slowly over the next century, but I tend to think that won't happen.

More likely is population growth driving resource demand and increasing prices, eventually resulting in global famine and the disease outbreaks and conflicts driven by famine.

The wealthier nations may be immune (or at least not as seriously affected), but the problem will be widespread and severe enough that they will be unable to prevent or ameliorate it. Literally billions of the world's poor will die of starvation, disease and war.

Technology could theoretically prevent or soften this, but even technology has its limits. Can we sustain 7 billion, 10 billion, 20 billion, 50 billion? At a certain point, the carrying capacity of the environment is overtaxed, the system runs on a deficit, and everything crashes.

Collapse can certainly be avoided if we take action, but I don't see the proper actions being taken right now.

[JSB]

Originally Posted by {aspiring_to_clarity}

I don't understand why so many people are adament that we continue to pursue oil when it's well known that it's a dwindling resource???

Wouldn't it be more prudent to spend our money and time developing alternates that are renewable, sustainable and less hazardous to the environment?

It seems like the only reason we are still all about oil is that the people who make the decisions are getting rich off of it.

Yes, people are getting rich off of it, but the other problem is that there currently is no alternative to switch to, not one that is scalable, economical, and sustainable anyway. There are plenty of potential alternatives, but it will take time, money, and effort to develop them. This truly is a monumental task.

Hopefully, we can pursue these alternatives and slowly reduce oil consumption to zero over the next few decades, without causing massive economic disruption and suffering.

[Tuumble]

Ah, the curse that is the gas price...




...now feel free to laugh at the Limeys...



Remember, that price is in Pounds not Dollars and for litres not gallons. How does $10 a gallon grab you? Grrrr!

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Originally Posted by JSB

Yes, people are getting rich off of it, but the other problem is that there currently is no alternative to switch to, not one that is scalable, economical, and sustainable anyway. There are plenty of potential alternatives, but it will take time, money, and effort to develop them. This truly is a monumental task.

I get that we don't have anything in place now, but I wonder why we don't seem to be pursuing these alternatives in a focused way instead of drilling more (which will also take plenty of time and money to show results).

I'd personally like to see us shift our focus from drilling to these alternatives. If we start now, we can completely be free of oil in the near future, right?

[SomeRandomGuy]

In my opinion, increased domestic drilling is a very shot term solution. With the increased global demand for oil, and the way in which we waste oil in this country we will be in this same situation again soon, even with increased drilling. The only way to lower energy prices is to change our mindset and start to use our resources more responsibly. The increase in gas prices did not happen overnight. With some foresight, we could have been in a much different position than we are now. By purchasing smaller, more fuel efficient cars, pushing for more mass-transit, etc we could have decreased our reliance on oil in a way to help offset this increase in global demand. Instead, we continued buying inefficient cars (there was enough demand for this type of vehicle that GM created an entire Hummer line). Now GM is talking about losing the Hummer line, as sales have dropped. I am glad to see that demand for these vehicles has decreased enough that the manufacturers are starting to see them as unprofitable. I wish, however, that the demand had never been created in the first place. The oil shortage of the 70s should have taught us a lesson, but apparently it did not. If tomorrow gas prices dropped to $1 gallon how long do you think it would take before the demand for these vehicles started to increase again? We need to learn lessons from the past, and not so easily forget them when our situation improves.

Very often I hear mention of us needing to reduce our reliance on foreign oil. In my opinion, that is missing the point entirely. We need to reduce our reliance on oil, period. Part of that will come with investing in alternative energies. We have to stop waiting for the government to step in and solve the problem, though, and take some personal responsibility. I understand that not everyone can afford to sell their car and buy a more fuel efficient car. But how many people have purchased their inefficient car during the past 5 years? In hindsight, was that a mistake? Most likely yes. So now you're stuck with an inefficient car, and soaring gas prices. Rather than wait for the government to fix it, why not makes changes to the amount and way you drive.

I drive a relatively fuel efficient car (35 mpg). I have found that by just slowing down when driving on the Interstate, increasing the air pressure in my tires, and driving less aggressively in the city I can get 40 mpg. Just by making those small changes I have decreased the amount of fuel I use by 15%. I have also made arrangements to work from home a few days a week, which has allowed me to cut my fuel usage to nearly of half of what it was previously. I know that not everyone can make these same changes, but my point is that it is possible for individuals to make changes that impact not only the amount they spend on fuel, but also reduces the overall demand for oil.

I know it is not a popular stance, but I am glad to see high gas prices. Sometimes it takes a slap in the face to motivate real change. I am hoping that we will start seeing that as gas prices continue to rise. I am very curious to see how this period in our history is viewed 20 years from now. My hope is that it is viewed as a short period of hardship, which served as the catalyst for real change that had a significant positive impact on the future of our economy and environment.

[JSB]

Originally Posted by {aspiring_to_clarity}

I get that we don't have anything in place now, but I wonder why we don't seem to be pursuing these alternatives in a focused way instead of drilling more (which will also take plenty of time and money to show results).

I'd personally like to see us shift our focus from drilling to these alternatives. If we start now, we can completely be free of oil in the near future, right?

Actually, there is a LOT of venture capital funding going into alternative energy sources and fuels right now, as many investors see this as the next potential cash cow to get in on. This is great, but it may take a few years before we see the results.

[JSB]

I can't remember if this link was posted already, but it's pretty cool.

Detroit has been saying more efficient cars are impossible, prohibitively expensive, would kill the industry, etc. This is, of course, a bunch of lies.

This guy spent $400 and a weekend, and doubled his mileage.


How to Get 70 MPG Out of a Honda Civic : Gas 2.0

[coollikeme]

drill for oil, and look for Alternative energy at the same time. I am tired of depending on other countries. It is really sad, that we have to wait, and see if the Saudis want to give us an extra drop of oil. So why can't we do both, at the same time? Domestic oil and alternative energy we are going to need both over the long run anyway. I like solar energy it would be nice to see are cars power by solar energy. But until we find other forms of energy. Lets drill for are own oil, so we don't have to depend on someone else. May be if we drilled 10 years ago we would not be at war today? Lets not let this history repeat itself.

[Brutha]

I'm not trying to be all gloom and doom (honest!), but there is the real question of whether or not it is even possible to feed 6.5 billion people without modern industrial farming.

There is no need to transport food hundreds of kilometers to have industrial farming.

But no, industrial farming is no vision for the future. It also not about going backwards but about going forward.
Industrialism is so last century. (I'm studying bioinformatics by the way)

Technology could theoretically prevent or soften this, but even technology has its limits. Can we sustain 7 billion, 10 billion, 20 billion, 50 billion?

With more countries getting wealthy childrate drops.
There are some calculations that show a realistic scenario of having fewer people in hundred years than today (longnow has a talk about the longterm thread of underpopulation)

[Dan.Linehan]

THIS IS NOT A SUPPLY SIDE ISSUE. There is plenty of oil supply side. So please stop going on about drilling. Drilling more will just give the same speculators a LARGER market to corner and BIGGER PROFITS to reap from doing so. It will NOT lower costs in the short term, and it might not lower them at all.

This whole issue is really simple. YOU ARE BEING RIPPED OFF BY BIG BUSINESS. Speculators now account for about 70% of all benchmark crude trading. Banks are driving up the prices because they can -- they know demand won't go down.

Gas could fall to $2 if Congress acts, analysts say - MarketWatch

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Originally Posted by Dan.Linehan

You are being ripped off by big business.

I was never under any other impression. As long as it is something that is seen as necessary by a ton of people, someone is going to be making as much money as they can off of it. In a way, I'm glad because I would like to move away from oil anyway and this may be the catalyst. On the other hand, I have seen plenty of people in their Hummers filling up as if it was no big deal.