 | RTE (Ireland) with a High Quality Peak Oil Documentary: Future Shock | The Oil Drum | Thursday afternoon at Clean Tech 2007 |  |
DrumBeat: June 23, 2007
Posted by Leanan on June 23, 2007 - 9:41am
Chavez: Big oil firms to leave Venezuela
Some major oil companies have rejected Venezuela's terms for the takeover of their multi-billion dollar projects and can leave the OPEC nation, President Hugo Chavez said Friday, days before a deadline for them to strike nationalization deals.
India to form crude oil reserve of 5 mmt
Government has decided to make a strategic oil reserve of five million metric tonne (MMT) at a cost of Rs 2,400 crore to meet the demand of the oil sector and has created a special purpose vehicle (SPV) for the purpose.
The Biggest Bang for Your Petrobuck
Washington is finally tackling fuel-economy reform. But any payoff is years away. How best to save money on gas right now? The answer may surprise you.
Branson admits ‘green’ car being run on petrol
Sir Richard Branson’s biofuel company car, used to highlight his green credentials, is being run on unleaded petrol.Virgin admitted yesterday that the £33,000 car - a Saab 9-5 BioPower - was often filled with ordinary petrol rather than bioethanol fuel, made from sugar cane or other crops.
Below is a list of events, subjects, disasters, worries and crises that have been linked to climate change. It's called "A complete list of things caused by global warming." From African devastation to disappearing cod and on to increasing melanoma and the rise of yellow fever, it's all a result of climate change.
Darfur conflict heralds era of wars triggered by climate change, UN report warns
The conflict in Darfur has been driven by climate change and environmental degradation, which threaten to trigger a succession of new wars across Africa unless more is done to contain the damage, according to a UN report published yesterday.
Mayors make environmental moves
Cities in 36 states are going "green," mainly by running cars on alternative fuel and installing energy-efficient streetlights and traffic signals, says a survey by the U.S. Conference of Mayors out today.
'Saudi Arabia of renewable energy' off Scotland's coast
IT HAS been described as the "greatest untapped source of energy Scotland has ever had", capable of generating enough electricity for every home and business in the country several times over.But while the Pentland Firth has been too deep and too dangerous to exploit, the race is now on to develop machines that will harness this "underwater hurricane" and fundamentally change Scotland.
For the past week or so, I've been delving deeply into data on the world's oil production as part of some special side projects I will announce in the not-too-distant future.What I have found has been, shall we say, less than encouraging. But crucially important information all the same.
The question is if WTI oil reaches an all time high of around $80 again. Nobody can look into the future so it is difficult to tell. What we can do is to take a look at the technical situation of WTI. Supported by the fundamentals, WTI could try to attack that level again.
Senate Democrats, flush from passage of their first major energy legislation since their party took control of Congress after the 2006 elections, vowed Friday to resurrect a $28.5 billion tax package that would hit up the oil companies to pay for alternative energy and coal projects.
Price Threshold Language Stricken from Interior Appropriations Bill
The Senate Appropriations Committee yesterday voted 15-14 to remove a provision from the Interior spending measure that sought to force oil and gas companies to renegotiate offshore leases instituted without price thresholds.
PG&E pipeline in delta offers insurance against disaster for company, customers
McDonald Island sits atop an underground reservoir packed with enough fuel to supply all PG&E customers for more than one month. Right now, only one pipeline connects the reservoir to the outside world. If it breaks in an earthquake or flood, the gas would be trapped. Buying replacement gas could cost up to $1 billion.
Ethanol won't be the fuel of the future
Possibly, one of the side benefits of the quest for alternative fuels will be the message sent to oil suppliers that they have competition and that they might lower the price of gasoline at the pumps.
Citgo trial on dirty air tests federal law
A jury will resume deliberations Monday in a criminal air pollution case that accuses Citgo Petroleum Corp. of knowingly breaking federal air quality laws at its Corpus Christi refinery.
Diesel efficiency with an American twist
DaimlerChrysler introduced advanced diesel technology in Canada in the seemingly most sensible way. It started small, very small, bringing forth its Smart ForTwo car in 2004 with a 40-horsepower, 0.8-liter, three-cylinder, direct-injection diesel engine.The thing got the U.S. equivalent of 65 miles per gallon on the highway. It sipped less fuel than anybody's gas-electric hybrid car in city traffic. You could park it in a third of the space required by a full-size family sedan. And if you could live with a top cruising speed slightly north of 60 miles per hour, you were golden -- quite literally, considering the money you saved at the gas pump.
Tax Reform Stirs Controversy in Mexico
Both congressmen warned that unless the tax-driven public solvency plan of Petroleos Mexicanos is modified, the initiative will not be as comprehensive as is required.In their opinion, the change must secure larger investment in Pemex's modernization and hydrocarbon production. They warned they won't yield an inch in this regard because the firm's finances cannot continue being squeezed.
U.K.: Sad sight of a superferry laid up due to soaring jet fuel bills
The boat was taken off the water at the beginning of this year, sparking rumours that rising oil prices were forcing ferry companies to abandon their faster vessels.The HSS uses jet fuel and uses twice as much fuel as conventional ferries - making it much more costly.
Supply issues had 75 tankers waiting several hours for gasoline, diesel or other fuel Friday morning in Sioux Falls, but an industry marketer said consumer prices won't be affected.
Natural gas essential for energy-deficient Pakistan
Visiting Pakistan Foreign Minister Khurshid Kasuri has said that his country requires natural gas on an urgent basis to tide over the current energy crisis, and could not understand public objections to the Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) gas pipeline, which would go a long way in ameliorating the shortfall.
Nicaragua´s energy service will stabilized by the first trimester of next year, President Daniel Ortega affirmed, and reiterated the country will resort to thermal plants to face the current power deficit.According to the president, along with the generators to be supplied by Cuba, Venezuela, and Taiwan, the country is likely to receive others by Iran, where he traveled last week.
The nationwide strike is causing oil exports to decline. There is a nationwide fuel shortage because the fuel truck drivers have been off the roads for a week. If the government rescinds the increase, the government will have to pay for it, because refined fuel has to be imported at a higher price than it is sold for. That argument doesn't fly with the unions or most Nigerians, because they know that most of the oil revenue, over the last half century, has been stolen by corrupt government officials. Cheap gasoline is one way to get some of that oil wealth, if the price is low enough.
Guyana: GPL mum on city power outages
Over the past few days, power outages in the city have plagued businesses and residents alike, for several hours each day, with normalcy returning to some areas yesterday.
Cement firms in UAE turn to coal for want of gas
Cement makers in the United Arab Emirates are turning to imported coal to fire their furnaces as gas is scarce and the petrodollar-fuelled building boom shows no signs of letting up.That is likely to drive world coal prices higher still, producers and traders say.
Dolphin may start Qatar-UAE gas plant this month
Dolphin Energy could start facilities in Qatar to process gas for export to the UAE this month, sources said.Dolphin exports of Qatar gas to the UAE were expected to reach two billion cubic feet per day by the end of the year, boosting gas available for domestic sales in the UAE by nearly 50 per cent from last year.
Oh, no! Peak pizza! Rising cost of cheese cuts into pizza profits
"My sales representative told me this is a record high for cheese," said Jason Bentley, general manager of Da Vinci's Gourmet Pizza in Nashville. |
|
Last fortnight, a leading oil MNC came out with its Annual Statistical Review of World Energy and leading business papers splashed it across their front pages. This is an annual ritual in which the company reminds the world that oil is a scarce commodity and will soon be extinct like the dodo.
Iraqis water down the draft oil law
Iraqi officials said Friday that a U.S.-backed draft oil law will soon be returned to the Cabinet for approval after Kurds agreed to a compromise revenue-sharing measure. But they said many key sticking points remain unresolved — and not even addressed — in the watered-down legislation.
Cars will use less fuel, Senate assures
The cars, SUVS and pickups people will buy in the years ahead are likely to use less fuel, and many will rely on ethanol or household electricity instead of gasoline.
Battle over energy policy still well underway
This week’s Senate approval of a bill to reshuffle billions in subsidies and tax breaks for the oil, corn, coal, power and auto industries marked an important milestone in a sweeping overhaul of energy policy. But with the House preparing its own bill, and final details yet to be hammered out in a joint committee, the battle over how to carve up the energy pie is still well underway.
Eni, Gazprom sign deal on new gas pipeline to Europe
Italian oil company Eni and Russia's Gazprom have agreed to study building a new gas pipeline to distribute Russian gas to Europe, the two companies said on Saturday.The proposed 900 kilometer (559.2 miles) pipeline will split in two in Bulgaria, with one part heading to Austria and Slovenia, while another branch brings gas to southern Italy, Eni Chief Executive Paolo Scaroni said at a news conference.
Head of major Chinese oil company quits
The chairman of China's No. 2 oil company, Sinopec Corp., has resigned abruptly, citing personal reasons....Sinopec has struggled financially in recent years, squeezed by rising oil prices and government controls that limit its ability to pass on costs to consumers.
Saudi Aramco may cut propane prices
The world’s largest producer of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) may cut its prices in July as demand from the chemicals slackens.
Norway presents 'world's most ambitious' climate change plan
Norway unveiled plans Friday to tackle climate change, hailed by Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg as the "most ambitious" in the world but dismissed by environmental campaigners as worthless.
Gore urges ad execs to help fight global warming
Former U.S. vice president and environmental campaigner Al Gore urged the world's top advertising companies on Friday to work commercially and voluntarily on promoting the movement against global warming."Lend us your most creative designers and advertising geniuses and give us their time to help devise the most powerful and compelling messages ...," Gore said in a speech to ad executives at the Cannes Lions advertising festival.
Senate Passes Energy Bill; Compromise on CAFE
The Senate late last night passed the energy bill by a Yea-Nea vote of 65-27, including a compromise version (SA 1792) of CAFE legislation that increases new light-duty vehicle fleetwide fuel economy to an average 35 mpg by 2020, but that eliminates the mandatory 4% per year increase thereafter that had been part of the original proposal.
Peak Oil Passnotes: Let Me Tell You an Inventory
The prospects for oil prices rising have been knocked this week, so we are told. U.S. inventories are at nine-year highs, and the cost of a barrel of Brent crude fell back down below $70 this week, albeit by only a few cents.But this is not the real story. Inventories in the United States are high because the refinery complex in the country is in such a weak state. Due to bits falling off, explosions, gas leaks and the odd death – another one at BP’s Texas City refinery recently – the U.S. cannot process the crude that is arriving on its shores.
Kjell Aleklett, a perky and persuasive physicist at Uppsala University, talks with characteristic Swedish candour. As president of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil, he jokes that all the big "strawberries" in the world's oilfields have been thoroughly picked over. ("Peak oil" just means the end of cheap oil.) Fifty years ago, the world burned four billion barrels of oil a year and happily discovered lots of big berry patches — 30 billion barrels a year. Today, those figures are exactly reversed, which goes a long way toward explaining volatile oil prices and Sweden's determined plan to get off fossil fuels by 2020. "Money is not running the world," the jaunty global player likes to say during his talks. "Money is used to buy energy." Right.
Food execs to examine solutions to biofuel threat
Food industry R&D executives will be meeting in Chicago next month to examine the impact of increased biofuel demand on their business, in an effort to anticipate challenges resulting from a fundamental shift in supply chain dynamics.Organized by the American Association of Cereal Chemists International (AACCI), the symposium and workshop will examine the projected demand for biofuels, and the impact of this on the food industry supply chain, on consumers, on food formulation and on food technology.
Matt Savinar on Coast to Coast with Art Bell
Just confirmed with the producer. Will be on from 10:00 to 11:00 PM on Saturday with Art to discuss the Independent article that broke last week.
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
There are no solutions within the power of food industry R&D executives. The only solution is the elimination of the competition for the food growing acreage. I don't think there is anyone with enough power to take on ADM and win.
Lets hope ADM and other ethanol makers prevail; the health of the world depends on it. Diabetes and obesity are global epidemics due to many factors but one of them is that calories are so cheap. We need to slow this crisis by making more ethanol and less food.
If that's your concern, we're better off killing the car and getting everyone back to walking and biking.
Shhhh, Keitherster100 feels important now - lets not harsh his buzz with facts or reality.
People were never back at walking and biking.
They were back at walking and riding.
Everybody had personal transportation vehicles which consumed cellulosic biofuel: horse and mule engines in carriages and chariots.
Jim Kunstler is ignorant if he thinks that is going to ever change. People had horse-scale suburbia before car scale suburbia. We'll go to somewhere in between with battery scale suburbia.
Everybody had personal transportation vehicles which consumed cellulosic biofuel: horse and mule engines in carriages and chariots
The evidence is very much against that.
I live in an early suburb, developed in the late 1830s, 1840s and early 1850s for the uncivilized Americans. 1.1 mile to the civilized French Quarter, 1 mile to the CBD from my home. My neighborhood (Lower Garden District) was largely upper middle class professionals and middle level merchants.
Several slave quarters remain but evidence of only one carriage house. Taxis were occasionally used, evidenced by a number of extant marble blocks on the curb to make it easier to get aboard (they are all "middle of the block" where they are left, so I assume common use by all).
The Garden District (two blocks away) was the home of millionaires (in 1840s gold & silver dollars). Carriage houses were much more prevalent but still in a minority.
Some may have been lost in the last 100 years, but I am confident that more than half OF THE MILLIONAIRES never had personal horses in New Orleans.
Instead they rode the St. Charles, Prytania and Magazine streetcars and shopped locally.
Best Hopes for more Urban Rail,
Alan
Good Keith! You found a topic you can post on every day!
Keep shining on you crazy diamond!
Thanks. I have taken a page out of the Peak Oil playbook. If you call something a crisis, the alternative automatically becomes reasonable. This propaganda thing is fun!
Don't forget-- you can drink that ethanol. And if you are squeamish, you can mix it with lemon juice and sugar. Lots of people live on that. Half a gallon of ethanol will keep you going for a couple of days, and with the accompanying anesthetic state, you you won't care where you are, and can just park under a bridge or in a cardboard box on the street and not know the difference. If things get bad enough (especially if you are white) someone will call 911 and take you to a hospital where they will patch you up a bit, maybe clean your clothes and even give you some advice about proper nutrition before they send you back out.
Actually, food in America has always been cheap, and junk food has always been available. What has changed is thirty years back we were participants in activities instead of laying back playing our video games or watching our big screen TV's. Go look at the many empty sports fields and playgrounds today. It’s amazing how many fat kids there are today. It’s not too much food, it’s too much laziness.
I don't think there is anyone with enough power to take on ADM and win.
Points at ADM and the lysine price fixing
POLL - concerning the UNs lack of attention or actions taken with regards to Peak-oil and beyond – give short answers
a) In which year will Peak-oil pop-up on UNs radar – and why? (as an multilateral issue- being discussed hard)
b) In which year will gasoline be banned by UN as a fuel used for private automobiles? (for all countries involved, and I know.. the US will not comply..)
c) What would the single most reason be when these issues will surface? only one issue allowed (to keep it easy)
Mostly for fun - although the issues in question are serious enough …
a)2009 as I think it will start to become blatantly obvious unless of course it is obfuscated by above gorud factors.
b)2022, except inner party use.
c)I'd say because oil is finite.
a) When the delegates decide to stop haggling over the 'oil for food' fiasco.
b) As soon as all the delegates, staffers, aides, secretaries, maintenence men, porters and janitors at the UN and the Sabrett cart owner in front of the building aquire diesel autos.
c) When all the delegates get really, really, really bored...or, when the US decides that they should take up the issue.
Avg. weekly pump price for regular 25 weeks 2007 $2.66/Gal 2006 2.58/Gal (EIA)
I was looking for some old monthly energy outlook reports from earlier months and started reading this!
From what orifice do these guys extract this stuff? Come on, these guys are paid big bucks to provide this analysis.
Reminds me of the reliability of the E-mails I used to get, saying some guy in Nigeria had $5 Million to share with me.
All I would like is for someone somewhere to show us where "reliable" NEW oil is coming from post 2012.
Not a lot of projects of significant size post that date, and that is only 5 years away.
This kind of "analysis" is just fluff - wishful thinking - "we could possibly..." stuff.
I could also possibly win the lotto tomorrow, but for some reason my banker will not take it as collateral for a big fat loan...why is that?
only because you aren't ADM
Dip: That reads like something out of THE ONION. Using a reasonable estimate of US dollar inflation of 4.2% per annum, they have a "reference" price for gasoline in 2030 of 84 cents a gallon!! Their high price is 1.25 a gallon. To call the EIA a joke is too kind.
Second sentence: All prices are given in 2005 dollars.
In other words, in 2030 dollars, gas will be about $150/gallon, assuming no peak oil.
I think it's more like "in 2030 dollars, gas will be about $150/gallon, assuming it's about $150/gallon. Trying to predict the 2030 price of gas strikes me as a waste of time.
I'm saying that if gas prices don't rise at all in real terms, they could still easily be $150/gallon by 2030, just because of wonderful way the feds are handling the value of the dollar.
Piano: My mistake-skimmed it too fast. Now it is just silly not ridiculous.
Yet even so, the numbers are insanely optimistic, imo.
From the GAO:
Nuclear Waste: Plans for Addressing Most Buried Transuranic Wastes Are Not Final, and Preliminary Cost Estimates Will Likely Increase
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d07761.pdf
And under 'a witches brew' of stuff to add to your soils I present:
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pxqBXdOJdD5a3dhB5Qm34fA&gid=0
The "witches brew" didn't interest me as much as some other things. First, it is the most simplistic soil test I've ever seen. It may be OK for India but it wouldn't hack it in the US. I was especially surprised to see that the only trace element mentioned was zinc. Second, I wonder how they came up with their recommended charcoal and sand additions. Third, it is well proven that synthetic fertilizers damage bugs in the rhizosphere. Yet, they recommend adding a variety of bugs and then dump synthetic fertilizer on the field. It just goes on and on.
For the Ag folks here, a book I really love is Ideas in Soil and Plant Nutrition by Joe Traynor, ISBN 0-9604704-0-9. It was self published so it may be hard to find. It's just full of basic and usable information.
Yet, they recommend adding a variety of bugs
I liked the bug list
and then dump synthetic fertilizer on the field
Yea, well doing that should have the plants immune system to reject symbiotic relationships so it might be self defeating - unless you believe in theories that Charcoal can absorb the Nitrogen then slowly release it.
Thanks for the book pointer BTW.
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Ideas+in+Soil+and+Plant+Nutrition%22&b...
And to find a library near you:
http://www.worldcatlibraries.org/oclc/7533456
http://www.worldcatlibraries.org/wcpa/top3mset/7533456
Now to run and fetch it.
Are governments/industry leaders supressing the MSM from acknowledging mentioning peak oil? Until now I think many suspect this to be the case.
I have just yesterday late recieved first hand information to that effect. I now have no doubt it is being supressed.
Of course my immediate question was why? Simple: It would cause mass panic that would reverberate through the worldwide ecomomy.
It may be no revelation but many here seem to be so dismayed (myself included) about the blanketing of the subject.
Anyway lets all be good sheeple and reduce our carbon footprint because that CO2 is a killer;-). (Only joking folks I do my bit too!)
Marco.
Are governments/industry leaders supressing the MSM from acknowledging mentioning peak oil?
That sounds like a conspiracy. And you are asking us to theorize on it!
A simple attempt to explain would be 'its hard to get someone to do something that hurts their pocketbooks.' If Peak Oil impacts cars and consumption - how much of the income from advertising to the MSM comes from consumption and cars?
In 2005 and into 2006, Danielle DiMartino wrote a series of columns for the Dallas Morning News that explicitly warned of a coming mortgage meltdown, and I believe she made some references to problems with future oil supplies.
One can only imagine the angry e-mails and letters that the Morning News received from real estate and auto related advertisers.
Result? She was fired, or forced out, in September, 2006.
I'm sure that lessons like this are not lost on other reporters and columnists, but it does however raise an interesting question. If one knows the debt driven suburban/auto system is unsustainable, but one has his own mortgage to pay, and you keep quiet, how does that make one any different from the guys at Enron who knew the company was an illusion, but who didn't want to rock the boat, and thus endanger their own salary?
http://housingdoom.com/2006/09/15/dimartino-goodbye/
Dallas’ Danielle DiMartino leaving bubble journalism
From her next to last column in September, 2006:
My opening question was rhetorical in that I was supplying the answer in light of information I had been given. You may call it a conspiracy theory if you wish.
The MSM have bigger worries than advertising revenues. More and more people are turning to the new media so they can cut filter out all the bullshit for themselves - that is fact.
Marco.
Lots of people only watch 'Democracy Now' on the tube and get the rest of their news fix from foreign media on the net. Count me among them but I occasionally watch an hour of CNN to find out if we have started another war or what the latest propaganda line is.
I check the BBC website for the same reason you watch CNN.(Can't tolerate CNN and their mindless bubbly Hooywood oriented focus.) Ted Turner said he realized soon after that he had made a mistake when he sold CNN to Time-Warner. I realized BBC was worthless for much else when they did not cover Gonu. I do enjoy Keith Olbermann on MSNBC.
They did cover Gonu. It was hardly a big deal anyway.
NO! Peak oil is starting to be mentioned more and more on MSM. They had a full segment on it yesterday on CNBC. CNBC and Bloomberg naturally are reluctant to dwell on anything that might make the market crash. This goes for peak oil or anything else. But they must mention it when it becomes news. And they are doing exactly that.
You are deeper into this conspiracy thing than I thought if you think the government tells MSM what they can report on. None of the financial networks or the mainstream networks consults the government before they report the news.
Of course industry leaders have no control over the media either except in the case of a given industry owns the station. For instance General Electric owns NBC, MSNBC and CNBC. And CNBC always reports this fact when they report anything about GE like an earnings report or whether or not this or that analysis recommends GE for a buy or sell. However I think it extremely unlikely that the CEO of GE would instruct CNBC to report nothing about peak oil. And if he did, CNBC seems to be ignoring that order.
Peak oil will be all over the mainstream media this winter. The subject is gaining momentum right now and if world production continues to decline, and I think it will, peak oil will be more in the news than global warming. Just imagine the headlines when production is down almost two million barrels per day and the world calls upon OPEC to increase production. Then OPEC says something to the effect…. "Well, we would like to but…"
However I really expect OPEC to lift all quotas then announce that Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Libya, Iran and perhaps Kuwait will not be able to increase production until a later date because of this or that excuse. UAE may be able to increase production by 100,000 barrels per day or so but even that is in doubt.
At any rate when that happens the words “peak oil” will be on the tip of everyone’s tongue. Even the presidential candidates will be arguing about it.
Ron Patterson
I dont see much effect on US gas stocks if OPEC takes all quotas off and our refineries remain enemic.
Thats not fair!! CNCB report was cut short at some ridiculous point because Paris Hilton got thrush; and you tell me they are taking it seriously;-).
""if you think the government tells MSM what they can report on""
It is more subtle that 'tells'. I would call it 'implied pressure'.
""Of course industry leaders have no control over the media ""
Utter BS. They have proxy control via our government who are lobbied VERY HEAVILY by them.
""Peak oil will be all over the mainstream media this winter""
I really hope you are right about this one as we all agree that market forces cannot deal with the problem. I tell you what I want. I want to see a 1hr panorama documentary. I want a BBC, times, Indy, Guardian, NYT, Washinton Post 4 page spread! In fact I want a pak oil supplement with graphics.
Marco.
Ron: How do you explain the EIA article quoted above? Just an honest mistake, or sloppy work? Why are the forecasts invariably erring on the optimistic side? Where are the articles in the MSM stating clearly that the EIA is a joke? Why is the Hirsch report never mentioned when CERA or some other mouthpiece is splashed all over the MSM? What I am saying is, you are labelling every attempt to make money a "conspiracy theory". Newspapers, TV news, etc. exist SOLELY to make money. Period. There is no obligation to accurately inform at all, and no desire. As advertising revenue is important to the business model, of course large companies will have some influence over the MSM content (if they didn't, why should they continue to pay for the service). GM is the largest advertiser in the USA. How do you think they would feel about Peak Oil splashed all over the media they are paying for? Don't they have a right to have some say over content?
Replying to Brian and Marco in one post:
Marco, get the facts straight. The CNBC report was cut short because of a report about the Blackstone IPO. They did it because they felt more of their viewers were interested in the Blackstone IPO than in peak oil. Disgusting as that is, they are competing with Bloomberg for audience and must yield to the wishes of their audience.
Really now? And what branch of government exerts that “implied pressure”, Congress? The President? Or perhaps the Supreme Court? Why don’t’ congress or the president exert that “implied pressure” when it comes to reporting on their approval ratings or the other disgusting things that the mainstream reports about them.
No Marco, there is no “implied pressure” by either the congress or the president to keep them from talking about peak oil. That suggestion is totally absurd.
Via our government no less? Again, which branch of our government is that? The fact that you truly believe that the government tells the mainstream media what they can talk about says something very profound about you Marco. That happens in Pakistan and other countries that have a dictatorship. But the president does not tell NBC or anyone else what they can talk about. You are just paranoid if you think they do.
Brian wrote:
Hell I don’t know Brian, it could be either. But that has absolutely nothing to do with MSM reporting on peak oil. Just how did you make that connection?
Good question! They have been doing that for years. I suppose they actually believe the crap they are reporting. One notable exception, the USGS’s Leslie Magoon has been telling us about peak oil for years. Why doesn’t “The Government” shut Magoon up if they wish to quiet the peak oil chatter? Why is Magoon allowed, while on the payroll or the USGS, to try to alert everyone about peak oil?
Stop trying to see a government conspiracy behind every tree Brian, it just is not there.
Because believe every damn word the EIA puts out Brian!
The Hirsh report has been widely reported by the MSM Brian. Nobody seemed very interested so they stopped reporting on it. That is how the media works, they report on things their audience wishes to hear about.
Bull! I only label it a conspiracy theory if you label it a conspiracy. I do not believe newspapers and TV are engaged in any conspiracy and we both know they are desperately trying to make money. It is you who are trying to imply that the government is controlling the news via some vast conspiracy.
Yes, they exist solely to make money for their stockholders. Their jobs depend on it.
And that line is total Bulls**t! Imagine if NBC were caught in a bald face lie? Their ratings would drop, there would be a stockholder revolt and the managers would be out on their ass. There is a constant effort to gather all the important news of the day and report it accurately. Their jobs depend on it.
This of course is true. And as long as peak oil is not news there will be no effort to make it news. But when it does become news, then the public will clamor for news about peak oil. THEN it will be splashed on every front page and it will replace Paris Hilton and everything else as the headline of the day.
Ron Patterson
""They did it because they felt more of their viewers were interested in the Blackstone IPO than in peak oil""
Really? They ran outside and did a quick poll on the streets of the USA than returned to the news rooms and said "Yep we just checked, more people are interested in the IPO, so run it?
""Why don’t’ congress or the president exert that “implied pressure” when it comes to reporting on their approval ratings""
They do. Do you honestly think Bush's ratings are trulty as high aas 30% I've not met 5% let alone 30%!!
""The fact that you truly believe that the government tells the mainstream media what they can talk about says something very profound about you Marco""
Ron we will have to agree to disagree. I started this thread on good inside info. For me it is simple; What I am sayinig is based on the case that my source is good. OR he is lying and it is not. Obviously I cannot name my source - the legal system has to deal with this kind of problem regularly!! What you have to ask is would I have reason to lie other than to win an argument? (which of couse would be stupid given I raised this thread). Why don't you address my main point - the motive per say: the assertion that I transcribed:
""Of course my immediate question was why? Simple: It would cause mass panic that would reverberate through the worldwide ecomomy.""
Do you not agree that this would be the case?
""The Hirsh report has been widely reported by the MSM Brian. Nobody seemed very interested so they stopped reporting on it""
Strange, I don't remember any polls being run on whether or not the Hirsch Report was popular. no one asked my wife or my third cousin. Come to think of it they didn't even know about the Hirsch report. I wonder why?.
I make one final apology. I havn't got a clue to quote in Grey.
Marco.
Marco, get real! The folks at CNBC know exactly what subjects their viewers are interested in. The Blackstone IPO was the biggest story they had posted in weeks. They had several reporters on the floor of the NYSE covering the story. Hardly anyone has heard of peak oil, it was just a background story.
Nonsense! There are still plenty of die-hard republicans that still support Bush. Do you actually believe that ABC, CBS, NBC, the New York Times, the Gallop Poll and all other polls are just lying? You believe that Bush is coming in at around 5% but they are reporting 26%? http://milwaukee.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2007/06/18/daily52.html
That is absurd! If you believe that you are totally out of touch with reality Brian.
Brian, there are several other possibilities. Perhaps your inside source is not as inside as he thinks he is. Perhaps he is simply mistaken. But if you’re inside source says the Bush, or anyone else in the government, is ordering Gallop and the other news or polling organizations to add 25 points to Bush’s poll ratings, then he is either mistaken or lying. There are a lot of things I would believe but believing that they have that kind of control over all news and polling organizations is simply beyond belief.
Yes, I do argue that this would not be the case. And I can prove it. It has been reported and it did not cause mass panic!
I listen to CNBC all day long on weekdays. Peak oil has been discussed many times and it did not cause mass panic. Most reporters on CNBC have expressed their opinions that peak oil is baloney. And that is the opinion of over 99% of the population. Why do you think they should have another opinion?
You seem to be pissed because people will not believe in peak oil. You are pissed because the MSM will not tell everyone that peak oil is a fact. Hell Brian, they don’t believe it themselves! Let that simple fact sink in and then perhaps you will see things a little clearer.
Brian, please stop being ridiculous and get real. MSM knows exactly what news is and they know exactly what kind of stories their readers and viewers wish to read or watch. They get feedback constantly.
It works like this, [blockquote] I make one final apology. I havn't got a clue to quote in Grey.[/blockquote] but replace the brackets with chevrons <…>
Ron Patterson
Ron: All the comments you attributed to me were actually made by Marco. No worries- I think we have exhausted this one anyway.
Sorry Brian, I actually knew that but just had a memory lapse while I was replying and typed Brian instead of Marco.
Thanks for clearing it up.
Ron
It's not the only thing you are having lapses about:-)..... Chill Ron, i'm just messin' with you.
Marco.
To to summarise Ron:
1) You do not belive the MSM are manipulated by industry/government.
2) Peak oil has been reported and it did not cause mass panic.
I want some of your pills. Only joking. I must respect your opinion and you have been a worthy advisory. For the record I am learning a lot here and enjoy these debates.
Marco.
>2) Peak oil has been reported and it did not cause mass panic.
Simmons, Pickens, and others spoke that we probably past peek, however, outside of hedge fund managers, investment bankers, there hasn't been any technicl discussion by oil insiders that have openly discussed PO on CNBC, Bloomberg.
For instance, lets examine how CNBC and other news channels discuss the housing bubble. Prices have been falling for about a year now, yet they're all still very upbeat about the future. They all believe that housing turnaround is around the corner or perhaps within the next 18-months. There are virtual no news reports that housing will be in a bear market for well more than a decade (aka Japanese Real estate). Simply because it negative as does zitch for ad revenue.
CNBC and others are in the business of selling optimistic financial news. Investors want to her up-beat news on how they can profit from the market. When the market goes bearish, investors lose interest in the market and are no longer interested in watching CNBC.
>You do not belive the MSM are manipulated by industry/government.
The MSM selects news that they believe will capture the most ad sales possible. The MSM decides what the believe will generate higher viewership and increase their profits. Most of the MSM is targeting big oil since Joe Six pack believe that its the oil companies that are manipulating prices. Joe Six packs understand zitch about geology or how oil is produced or refined. All the know is that the price of fuel is a lot higher today, than it was back four years ago. All the want is the price of fuel to go back down so they can fill up their monster SUV, pickup, minivan, etc. The rest is irrelavent to them.
testing testing:
2nd try, testing testing:
Testing my posting skills with a bit of Libel:-)
Ron: It is unclear at what magical point the switch is flipped and "Peak Oil" is splashed all over the MSM. The peak of light sweet crude has barely warranted a mention. Peak exports likewise. Peak "conventional" oil is unlikely to hit the headlines. The definition of "oil" is continually being rewritten so that maybe the subject can be delayed for a very long time. I would assume eventually CTL output will be included as "oil" output, next garbage to transportation fuel will be reclassified as "oil" under total liquids.Paris will be a grandmother by this time.
I suspect this is most likely correct. Unless there truly is the hugely dramatic drop in imports as positted by Westexas (26% in one year or something?), there never will be an obvious moment that everyone can pin "peak oil is here" on to. People will just see gasoline get more and more and more expensive, then every thing else get more expensive; there will inevitably follow some sort of significant economic downturn, and the MSM probably won't even make much of an effort to connect the dots. They will have plenty else to report about anyway, if things are even only half as bad as some here have not unreasonably suggested they could be.
You are probably quite right in what you say. In which case, PO will be considered a "conspiracy theory" and those that believe in it, insane. No different than today.
[note: partially sarcastic comment]
Actually there are many things that can be done it influence what is covered by the MSM. Prior to the purchase of CNN by Time-Warner, CNN was considered to be relatively unbiased in their news reporting worldwide. Many world leaders admitted to watching CNN for this reason. When Time-Warner took over, they cleared the decks. Serious Journalists were replaced with ditzy headed Hollywood watchers covering the tid-bits of American Living but no issues. They took a serious news organization and turned it into the Ladies Home Journal. In management they put in place individuals with a decidedly conservative outlook and a propensity for instantly latching onto the latest drival put out by the Whitehouse as God's given truth. The people currently in place that decide 'what is news' and what will be broadcast, couldn't recognize the truth if it hit them in the face. If you employ people who would never in a million years report on certain news or go against Whithouse wishes, you don't have to tell them not to. Biased management ensures biased coverage.
A good example. If you put syntec, Keithster and Roger Conner in charge of your news dept., do you think you would ever hear that anyone had a problem with ethanol or that there was any link between ethanol and higher food prices? That is how they control what is broadcast by the MSM.
The whole world is like a gigantic paranoid and multiple-personality bio-body-thing screaming in the woods – but its ears are somewhere else– and thus cannot act upon its own screaming-suggestions…
Joke aside –
We need a Peak-Oil-Churchill – as we already have a Climate-Churchill in Gore
No, we need a Peak Oil Uncle Sam. Churchill, while good for morale, made only a small difference to the timescales.
The Brits didn't want to go to war and were willing to ignore the rise of the Nazis, hoping for continued peace in the absence of rising evidence to the contrary. When it became perfectly plain that serious change was unavoidable, the British hung on grace of the RAF and the Atlantic convoys until Pearl Harbor, when Hitler declared war on the USA. Then it was all over bar the shouting.
The capacity for (similar) denial in the face of (similar) overwhelming evidence remains strong. Where the lovely cavalry is going to come from is as yet unclear.
The Brits didnt have anything to go to war with on land against the Nazis but they were more than a match in an all out duel at sea. Had Goering not been so incompetent he could have finished off the RAF and Hitler could have invaded England by sea. Goering made several crucial mistakes like not realizing the improtance of radar to the Brit RAF, and then he switched from bombing the RAF fields, aircraft factories, and aircraft on the ground to bombing Brit cities instead. At the time of the switch the RAF was almost done. Goering never gained air superiority over GB so an invasion by sea was out of the question. Of course all of Hitler's top staff were brow beaten into being yes men. I would venture to say that they only difference between Hitler and Rumsfeld was that one spoke English. If their top staff officers didnt say yes they were gone.
Chamberlain had to attempt to appease Hitler because the British Empire was in dire financial straights. India, the jewel in the crown, was in revolt and only WW2 kept India bound to the empire for a few more years. Britians interests in SE Asia, especially Singapore, could not be defended from the Japanese land attack that Britan had not anticipated. The Med and the Suez Canal, the British Empires main shipping route, was under threat from Italy, a member of the Axis alliance. Russia, the real destroyer of the Nazi army was sitting on the fence while Britain was under siege from the air but then joined Germany in the partitioning of Poland. Chamberlain was an appeaser but he was also holding a very weak hand. When Churchill came to power he knew Britans only chance was to get the US into the war by any means possible. As fate would have it Hitler felt compelled to declare war on the US as soon as Japan attacked Pearl Harbor since Japan had signed a mutual protection alliance with Germany and was also a member of the Axis. See: The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.
But ultimately it was the Red Army that defeated the Nazis. Not England or the US.
All combined did.
The Soviet Union alone would have surely been defeated by the Germans (and Italians, Romanians, etc.). Add a Japanese attack in the East (instead of attacking the USA) and it would have been over quickly.
The USSR & UK w/o the USA would likely not have prevailed against Germany and Italy.
The USA alone could never have invaded Europe. A stalemate would likely have resulted.
In 1942 and early 1943, the Soviet Union suffered the most causalities of any nation. But the US & UK took out about as many soldiers as the USSR did (higher % Italian, much higher % captured vs. killed) and did some damage & disruption to "home front" production.
Alan
Sorry Alan but you are dead wrong when you state that 'the Soviet Union alone woudl have surely been defeated by the Germans;et al.' If you read a bit of unbiased history you will certainly come to see that the invasion of Normandy occured to stop Stalins forces from over running all of Europe. See my post above.
Happy Sunday
Absolutely. For confirmation see 'Operation Barbarosa.' No other operation of WW2 compares with that of Hitlers onslaught and eventual defeat on the eastern front against the forces of Stalin. Hitler and his staff vastly underestimated the strength, size and capability of the Red Army which is a bit surprising since Molotov and Stalin had told the Brits and the Germans (at different times) that they could commit over 300 divisions to an operation immediately. Much is made today about the Brits breaking of the German diplomatic and military operational codes but Germany had also broken the Brits and Russians diplomatic codes and were reading them in real time. Actually, the '300 divisions' was a very lowball figure. Within ten days of the launch of Barbarosa German Army intelligence was reporting from the eastern front that they had already identified Russian troops from 360 different Red Army divisions and counting. Hitler and his staff felt confident that the 160 divisions that they had committed to Barbarosa would be more than enough, they were wrong. The allied operation at Normandy was conducted after the German Army had been ground up by the Red Army and the Russian winter. Hitler used the same tactic against the Allied invasion that he had used during the invasion of Poland; ie, a few divisions to hold the line in the west while the vast bulk of his armies were fighting in the east. Stalin raged at Churchill and FDR for years to open a front in France but they dithered while the Red Army took on the Germans. When it became apparent that the Red Army was going to over run Germany and probably would not stop untill they reached the channel ports the Allies finally launched the Normandy invasion. (I am not taking anything away from the Allied troops that fought at Normandy, in Europe and elsewhere. It was a brutal war and much bravery and fortitude was displayed by all forces involved.) FDR and Churchill obviously did not want Stalin to occupy all of Europe...More real history that you will not see on the military channel...lol...For a good place to start reading about the history of WW2 see the 'Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.' The 'Rise' was written by an American with a definite Anglo slant but there are other histories out there that are more factual in detail - the devil is in the details. In addition, many more facts have come to light since the 'Rise' was written. Hitlers great efforts to aquire 'Leiberstraum', literally living space and raw materials, was aimed at the occupation of the 'wheat basket' that was the Ukraine, and aquisition of oil fields and minerals in Romania (or Rumania) and elsewhere.
90% of the Red Army trucks were American, planes, plans for the Christie tank became the T-34 (from memory), food, etc.
Khrushchev Remembers, his memoir, states that the Red Army desperately needed those supplies. The troops made many obscene jokes about Spam but he admitted it was actually pretty good tasting for field rations. His earlier memory of Ford trucks was key to Ford supplying a Soviet factory during the VietNam War (Ford trucks had a better rep than GM in the Red Army). Khrushchev recalled the problems in getting enough Soviet made trucks for May Day parades postwar.
Add 1 million Germans diverted to Home defense against the US & UK air war.
And a "Second Front" did open in North Africa in 1942 and Italy in 1943, Normandy in 1944.
I stand by my statement that the Soviet Union alone would have been defeated by the German and allied Axis Armies. (Especially fast if a second front opened in the East by Japan).
Alan
Re the Battle of Britain and operation sealion.
You forget the Royal Navy in Scapa Flo.
Had the RAF been defeated that summer and Sealion commenced, the Royal Navy would sailed into Sealion and simply destroyed it.
Sure , it would have been a death-ride for many RN capital ships. But Sealion would have been a blood-bath for the Germans.
If the Germans had gained air superiority Sea Lion would have commenced and many RN capital ships would have been sunk by German aircraft. Battleships, cruisers and destroyers were no match for air superiority in the Channel, at Toranto, at Pearl Harbor and many other locations during WW2. Churchill, writing in his memoirs, stated that 'they had prepared for Sea Lion with drastic measures, including fitting of RAF aircraft with mustard gas dispensers to use against German troops on the beaches of GB.' Churchill also states that if Sea Lion had commenced that 'The outcome would have been too close to call.'
I will stick with Churchill's view of history over yours.
>However I really expect OPEC to lift all quotas then announce that Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Libya, Iran and perhaps Kuwait will not be able to increase production until a later date because of this or that excuse. UAE may be able to increase production by 100,000 barrels per day or so but even that is in doubt.
Well, if we fall into a recession this fall or early winter it should ease prices. I have no doubts that OPEC will tout: "See we were right, there more than adquite oil supplies. Oil prices declined without increasing production...".
>At any rate when that happens the words “peak oil” will be on the tip of everyone’s tongue. Even the presidential candidates will be arguing about it.
I doubt that, At best, we'll hear talk about building new refineries or improving gas milage (for tackling global warming). If a candidate was candid about PO they will drop out of the polls like a rock. Americans simply don't want to hear about it, whether its right or wrong.
Are governments/industry leaders supressing the MSM from acknowledging mentioning peak oil?
Some have replied that this can't be done. That's false -- otherwise you'd see stories, at the very minimum,about the military people (Cols and Lt Cols, Ret) and former admin officials who have questioned (or more) 9-11.
But peak oil is not the same as 9-11 -- it's not a direct accusation of gov't criminality and therefore less threatening. In fact, it's an issue that can ultimately be used -- the people can be told "yes, there's only so much oil -- who gets it? Let's fight to get it." This message is already being delivered in some cases by the likes of Coulter and others.
Peak oil is seeping into the MSM and has been betting some play for at least a year or two.
Rumsfeld told a LOT of lies as Sec Defense but I did hear him utter the truth once in a press conference. He got pissed about some question a reporter asked him and blurted out in an angry voice 'The American People cannot handle the truth.' I believe that this entire administration has been working, from day one, under this premis...which is probably a accurate premis.
I suspect that it is just inertia - thinking uses up lots of calories.
For what it is worth, I have had published around 4 letters in the FT that relate to the coming shortages of oil. Here is the shortest:
I don't know whether anyone is getting published in the letter's section of the WSJ.
A little off topic (big picture):
Some review:
Ml-Implode is at 86
Fun site - Foreclosureradar.com
Will give you the 20 closest foreclosures to the address you enter for free. The densities in some areas are amazing.
Strap in for Monday, ANYTHING or NOTHING is possible after a weekend of brooding about the sub-prime collapse. One thing is for sure, it definitely is NOT over.
Brought to you by Cheap oil and a global basket of Fiat currencies.
Foreclosure site only good for Calif.- too bad
history shows again and again how nature points out the folly of men
Hello Leanan,
I believe you lived in Hawaii at one time and still have family there [Please correct if I am wrong]. Is the drought as bad as the news reports in my posting at the very bottom of yesterday's Drumbeat [state of emergency, emergency spigots, trucks hauling water 24/7]? It seems that it would be easy to forbid tourists until the water supply is replenished to safe levels. Thxs for any reply.
The following is the latest drought news I could find [Hawaii excerpt posted below, but link has latest US drought map & national discussion too]:
http://www.cattlenetwork.com/content.asp?contentid=139278
----------------------
Hawaii: A few locations recorded more than an inch of rain for the week, but rainfall was neither heavy nor widespread enough to alter the D0 to D2 conditions currently affecting the island chain.
----------------------
http://starbulletin.com/2007/06/23/news/story02.html
-----------------------------
Pacific phenomena herald warming trend
Challenges await that require preparation now, experts warn
"Droughts change the way we eat," he said. There are no carbohydrates "so people truly starve to death in the Pacific."
Flooding, famine and disease could affect Pacific island nations first because of global warming, federal officials told delegates at health conference meeting in Honolulu this week.
--------------------------------
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
Hadn't heard anything about it. I'll ask the parental units.
Thxs--I will stay tuned for a later update. I bet this is driving Jay Hanson on Kona nuts. Unless he has his own well and/or 1,000 gallon water cistern [knowing Jay: he probably does have this personal setup].
Hello TODers,
In keeping with my drought theme today, I found this link from Savinar's LATOC:
http://mdn.mainichi-msn.co.jp/national/news/20070620p2a00m0na016000c.html
-------------------------
Fears of water shortage spreading across Japan
---------------------------
As an interesting aside: lots of good reading on LATOC's news section today:
------------------------------
Shot More Than 40,000 Times, an Iraqi Artist Spreads a Message with a Paintball Gun
-------------------------------
Truly bizarre what is happening!
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
I thought they drank sake.
No your thinking middle age's Europe. it was safer then in large city's to drink the liquid bread that was called beer then plain water.
Well, on oahu the water is still coming out of the tap, courtesy of fossil fuels.
Seems like as the pacific fluctuates between El Nino and La Nina conditions across the years, that changes the previous rainfall amounts which were pretty steady. In El Nino years we get more humid air forced over us from hurricanes developing in the eastpac and then (hopefully) petering out to tropical storms by the time they get here. In La Nina conditions, there are fewer, hence less rain.
There will always be some forced-adiabatic rain in Hawaii as long as large mountains stick up into the winds. Even on Oahu in drought, I have an unofficial gauge: I drained and cleaned the swimming pool after my dad next door passed away a year ago, and since then it has been interesting to just let whatever rain fell in it stand. (I threw in some feeder comets to eat any mosquito larvae, which they have done, and they're near fryin' size by now, with no food input into the pool other than whatever leaves have blown in).
So starting last fall until now, there is an average of about 3.5 feet of water standing in it; the precipitation even during a drought is 3.5 feet in excess of evaporation in my neighborhood. Thus, the drought conditions are due to the highly efficient runoff you get from these islands.
On the big isle, I imagine places like Kona are geting a bit dry. (how is it in Pahoa, Ckaupp?). One of the good things about chosing a high-rain area like Puna could be that even when rain is 20% of normal, there's still plenty.
So there's a half-assed reality check from scenic Maunawili on oahu.
I suppose there have been problems with record flooding too. This site listed recent world floods:
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/NaturalHazards/natural_hazards_v2.php3?...
Including record April floods in Ethiopia.
L.A. had problems with water for a hundred years with the Owen's Valley water rights controversy being evidence of it in the 1920's. Now that the Colorado River has to be shared between several states and Mexico too, it could not fill all the wants of an expanding population in a semi-arid region.
There were once glaciers as far south as Central Park in Manhattan. Climate change has been a long term trend, not something begun with the introduction of strip mining coal, although there was some evidence CO2 might have added to the problem.
http://www.fettes.com/central park/glacial erratics.htm
Greenish...see my reply a few posts below.
It was bad for some people. I live on the "wet" side, and many people were lining up to have a tanker deliver water to their catchment tanks. Of course, as soon as they did this it started raining. Our tank was about 1/2 to 1/3 full, and a week of rain the second week of June had it overflowing. But before that, we were having to water fruit trees that we don't normally water--which seemed really strange for one of the wettest places in the US.
I don't know how well the Kona side is faring.
The mayor had declared the drought as a state of emergency.
Of course, once it started raining here it hasn't decided to stop....
OFF TOPIC, in referece to June 19th drumbeat.
Leanan, I hadn't seen Airdale for a bit so took a look at his postings and was a little shocked by the dialog between you two. I think you should take time to reconsider your position.
MY impression of Airdale is that he is a complex, intelligent and feeling human being who, I think, has the credentials, just in the area of computer technology alone, to be on this site.
Airdale's comments, while made in what might be considered a folksy manner, bring a lot of direct observation of our world, this from his vantage point. We as a 'civilization' have become, with the use of petroleum, disassociated from the real world; we no longer sense it's nature. Our world has become one of steel, concrete, electricity, oil, and fantasy. We no longer feel the grass under our bare feet (anyone here do that lately?); we don't understand the weather (we read or listen to news about it): I could go on but I'll just say we are no longer connected to the roots of our nature, our nature being that which has evolved on this planet. We have cut ourselves off and are in peril in that action. Airdale brings a breath of the real world of nature, as well as some idea of the world as it was before oil, to this site to those who measure but rarely have time to feel it.
Leanan would you tell me what the use of this site is that has, as you stated, no room for Airdale and what he has to offer?
The TOD mission statement says . . .
We are here to talk about ideas. We're all learning here about ourselves and from each other. No perspective will be punished as long as evidence and logic are present. We want to bring brain power to bear on all of these issues; we may not come up with a solution . . . but we can at least say we tried.. . .
Has it, instead of those fine words, really only regard for those who have learned a few 'very clever monkey' tricks and feel that technology is in itself wisdom?
Ummm...did you actually read our exchange? I didn't tell Airdale to leave. He posted yet another "Goodbye, Cruel TOD" message. He's done it many times before, and even asked that his user ID be banned. He always comes back.
IME, the drama of your goodbye message is inversely proportional to your chances of actually leaving.
Well, I was going to post a picture of a puppy, with the message that if I was not banned from TOD, I was going to shoot the puppy. . .
Yes Leanan ,
I did read your message as you read my message. If you read my letter really well, as you expected me to read yours, you will see I did not say that you told him to leave. I don't see why Airdale wouldn't be back, I don't think he has said he has left. Let me know If I missed that in his messages .
To use a quote from Airdale in his response to you, 'Well you missed the whole point'.
I find that if one has no answer to an argument they will pick something that is external to that argument for the purpose of 'making points'. You are intelligent and know what I am saying but do a disservice to that intellect setting up ( I dislike using that hackneyed term) straw dogs.
Westexas, I thought better of you than that. You left out the little cute tear in the puppy dogs eye.
Eric blair, suggest you go write your magnum opus on sugar and distilling moonshine, you'll be your own best customer.
Obviously, I am not intelligent enough, because I don't understand what you are saying. You asked if TOD had room for Airdale. I replied that he left of his own volition, I didn't kick him out. Seems pretty straightforward to me.
Airdale did say he wouldn't be back, in a later DrumBeat. But he's said that before.
Hi Leanan thanks, too bad you have lost a valuable member, I can only hope he will return.
Anyway, how about doing a meld here with these two statements.
The TOD mission statement says . . .
We are here to talk about ideas. We're all learning here about ourselves and from each other. No perspective will be punished as long as evidence and logic are present. We want to bring brain power to bear on all of these issues; we may not come up with a solution . . . but we can at least say we tried.. .
with your statement...
To be blunt, I think many of TOD staff members are kind of embarrassed by the survivalist stuff, and see it as something that undermines what they are trying to do, by making us look like kooks.
There are extremes on this site, and I think that is a good. There is very little in US main stream news and not much elsewhere other than a very narrow view. Another extreme on this site was Freddie Hutter, I'm afraid I do not know enough about Freddie Hutter to comment on why he was banned, but the few interchanges I viewed that he had with other commenters were ones where he did not seem to be the aggressor.
I think you have to be careful when you either ban or suggest people leave the site, other than for malicious intent, that you don't find yourself either alone or with a very limited points of view. The feeling that one should guard their thoughts for fear of banning or punishment can be a very real one to many. Unless of course the cultivation of sycophants is an aim.
BTW I would like to hear how the TOD experiment with dropping the comment portion turned out...I would think it would be a pretty morgue like experience?
Sorry for taking so long with these responses I have just had some garden supplies delivered 14 yard of new garden soil and another 14 yards of cow manure, no shit!
I value Airdale as a unique contributor to this site. He has valuable insights to offer. He does go off sometimes, but who doesn't, especially given the present state of the world? I hope he comes back. His suggestions are not "embarrassing survivalist stuff" but a sharing of his experiential wisdom in areas many of us lack his experience.
I don't see any contradiction. Nobody told Airdale not to post.
Again, that is not the issue here. No one told Airdale to leave.
He wants TOD to change. He doesn't like the focus on news, science, and politics. I just told him that that wasn't going to change, and he didn't take it well.
We cannot be all things to all people. We have to focus on our strengths. There's plenty of other sites out there that focus on other aspects of peak oil. And of course, he is free to start his own, and he said he would.
Leanan: You are a great moderator for this site- you are so patient and laid-back (possibly from the Hawaiian upbringing?). A site like this attracts a lot of short fuses (this is definitely not a Dick Cheney comment so no need for Mudlogger to respond)so your style is perfect.
Ha, Ha.
Its a wet sunday afternoon and i am chilling.
"He wants TOD to change. He doesn't like the focus on news, science, and politics. I just told him that that wasn't going to change, and he didn't take it well."
I believe I have seen him say that in the past, true.
"To be blunt, I think many of TOD staff members are kind of embarrassed by the survivalist stuff, and see it as something that undermines what they are trying to do, by making us look like kooks."
I believe Airdale felt this was directed at him. I do not believe you were referring to him with this statement. Not even sure you were referring to your own feelings, but just stating some TOD staffers feel that way. Thing is, why would they feel embarrassed about something posted in an open forum? Not like it was something they said. All open forums have extreme views stated on them. TOD has no more than any of the others.
Airdale has a point when he says we are past peak and will be in need of the knowledge necessary to survive. Whether you believe in a long slow decline or abrupt collapse, you will need this info eventually. Also, If you believe in a slow decline, you might be wrong, and find yourself thankful for what knowledge, with regards to surviving, that you did absorb.
A word of caution. Right now, in it's present form, TOD works. A successful Blog or Website usually exists because of a fortunate balance of factors. Trying to make it 'better' can upset this balance and destroy the site. It's usually best to follow the old adage, "If it works, don't fix it."
Another point. It is not useful to label those with different viewpoints with derogatory terms. To someone who believes in a long slow decline, those who see an imminent abrupt collapse on the horizon may appear to be 'kooks'. Someone who believes a collapse is imminent, see those who don't believe it, as blind, and in denial. Either of these viewpoints could be valid. Either side could be wrong. However, both sides agree on one thing, we are probably past peak. It is the continued analysis (and disagreement) about what that means that makes this site alive and vital. Take away that debate and make this a club of people who only see it one way and you destroy the purpose for its existence.
TOD has changed a lot since its start as a blog on Blogspot, and it will continue to change. It has to, because everything else is changing. We're growing like gangbusters, and what worked when the blog rarely got a comment will not work when there are hundreds or thousands of comments a day.
And the peak oil issue itself is changing. There's a lot more awareness now. I expect our focus will be shifting from raising awareness of peak oil and global warming to trying to do something about them.
Change is life.
"Change is life."
"God is change"
Ever read Parable of the Sower?
problem with survivalists.... i don't want to just survive - i want to exist in a world i can actually have some quality of life in...
--
When no-one around you understands
start your own revolution
and cut out the middle man
It has been so busy at work lately, that I missed the whole June 19th drumbeat drama.
So just to put my two cents in...............
I think airdale has a point (if I understood it correctly) that there really isn't a top quality website that deals with post peak issues. A site like that would be focused on agriculture without fossil fuel, urban agriculture, drinking water, sanitation and heating.
I understand why the oildrum may not be the place to host such a site. It is more focused on predicting/monitoring the peak, new technology and influencing public opinion. But all the other post peak sites seem to combine technical illiteracy and/or a cult like atmosphere of “we are all going die, isn't that exciting”.
However, there has been a quite significant “back to the land” and “off the grid” subculture that has existed for decades. Including several magazines dedicated to that subject. The are not necessarily doomers, they just prefer a different lifestyle. One that pretty much mirrors airdales, without the peakoil viewpoint.
A good place to start is the Foxfire book series: http://www.foxfire.org
Get equipment and books from http://www.lehmans.com/
Then start reading back issues of :
http://www.backhomemagazine.com/
http://www.backwoodshome.com/
http://www.backwoodsmanmag.com/
http://www.homepower.com/
Here is a nice link page from backwoods home:
http://www.backwoodshome.com/linkspage.html
Would it really degrade the focus of the website, to included links to sites that teach self sufficiency and life without oil?
I thing that would be a hard call to make. Most of America is in denial about what peak oil means.
Luckily I am not the person who has to make that decision.
PS: There are these things called books, that exist independent of the WWW. Besides the Foxfire book series. I have read the following titles and have many more to wade through. :-}
Five Acres and Independence: I think the title says it all.
The Contrary Farmer: Sound (and entertaining) small scale farming advice from someone who actually went back to the land.
Solar Gardening, Growing Vegetables Year round the American intensive way: By Leandre and Gretchen Poisson.
Edible Wild Plants: Peterson Field Guides
Field Guide to Edible Wild Plants: By Bradford Angier
Where There Is No Doctor: Useful even today, to help talk to your doctor.
The Merck Manual of Medical Information (home edition)
I have a longer reading list if anyone is interested.
It could just as well be focused on the art of dying. For all the uncertainties there are around peak oil, the consequences of peak oil - at least in highly energy dependent ecocnomies and societies - are orders of magnitude more difficult to grasp. Personally, in addition to the gardening and infrastructure work, I'm spending effort trying to understand the psychology. I've no time to figure out how to make a bicycle powered compost sorter or any of ten thousand other things.
cfm in Gray, ME, Second Foundation
Dryki,
While you're at it on the psychology end, old chum , why not look to that old geezer, Abraham? Group dynamics, the sacrifice that brings the beset and confused group together all warm and cuddly. There is going to be lots more room for that sort of thing , one would think, in the age that approaches.
Since you seem to think for yourself, you'll know enough to keep out of places that have altars. Also I wouldn't turn that bicycle into a compost sorter anyway, better as a get-away-from-that-milling-herd escape bike.
I think you're looking for this.
"...or a cult like atmosphere of “we are all going to die, isn't that exciting”."
ROFLMAO
Crystal Radio,
I will reply to this post and to the rest that are strung after it. It seems that a clarification is clearly needed since already what I posted is being misconstrued and primarily by Leanan.
I made these salient points:Note that the wording may not be exact but the points are clear none the less.
Leanan made it clear, crystal clear that the 'staff' believes that the 'survivalists' are embarrassing.(somewhat?)
Leanan made it clear that the 'staff' prefers the message of TOD be to the 'politicians' and the 'scientific' community.
They felt , according to her, that this should be the thrust of TOD.
Further that the Drumbeats are not that important and has been under consideration to discard them. Further that the previous embedded firstliner stating'And now a word from our members' was now gone and that this is not the purpose but more of just and open thread.
Further that they feel that technology will 'save the day'.
Or that the correct political actions and technology will.
Or whatever..but thats how it read to me. I did read anothers irate post on this subject as well though I myself did not belabour that point or issue ,fatal though it will likely be.
I noted that none of the above was refuted by the 'staff' and therefore must stand as true.
Therefore I stated that I would NOT be an EMBARRASSMENT(caps for emphasis) but would always be a survivor.
I also said that I didn't feel that I could continue to be a full participating member and therefore 'crunched my TOD cookie'.
It would be ok with me if they did delete my account. I have requested that in the past. I have taken leave on occassions when I found the postings to be less than vital.
But he is my main point with TOD.
I believe that in the past two months many of the contributors have made it ,again , crystal clear IMO that we are past PO. Some straddle the fence but except for a few most of the very good techical posts on this issue have convinced me, and others as I read back then, that we are now on the plateau and can look forward to the decline.
Therefore as far as I am concerned this is the point:
*What are we/you/I now going to do about this simple fact?*
What?
As for me that means I am concerned less with the timing and more with surviving. I am placing all my options and actions is that area only. No more fence straddling.
One last point. Leanan states that I wanted to change TOD. I merely suggested that they could do both by having another forum/board/discussion group linked to on the home page such as they do for Europe and NYC. I did NOT ask for TOD to change , but merely to addto.
Survival to me is just that important and I think so to many members of TOD.
In reality what I also had in mind was 'calling them out' by
creating the post so to further determine exactly where TOD is going. They responded but not by even asking for discussion, not thinking about it, not asking for views or any other means other than to let the Drumbeat Editor throw cold water on it and speak for the 'staff'.
I therefore do not intend to be a posting member any further.
I will also state that the word 'Elitism' has been revolving thru my mind while thinking what Leanan said as regards the 'masses', and that they are all 'engineers and geeks'. It was a superb putdown IMO,,one of the best I have read in many years on internet usage. I am sure this will infuriate her...well TS then but you must stand by what you state and it was stated in that vein. Elite will do the job. Snobbery is close behind.
For those who put their knees and hands down in the dirt, mud and dust to bring food out of the ground? The word elite does not ring the dinner bell. You have to be sort of humble to go there. Who wants to do that then? All that oletimey shit? Agghh its soooo plebian and so much peasantry involved. Again this is what brought us to this point in history. The Olduvai Gorge it is. We forgot what real work is. Now its all 'services'. Now its all trading paper chits while someone else does the real digging and ass hauling. Its those *masses* isn't it? The ones who don't need any stinking mesage.
I am looking into, time permitting, acutally using my old website for a survival forum or cooperating with Durdanal on a different one. We have not discussed it too much and at this point I have little free time to do so. In a month or so I will have far more available time. This is not a promise but just a impossibly. Perhaps it will bear fruit and perhaps not. I have setup , configured and ran websites in the past of various types, mostly using my own website. Sometimes with over 500 members. It is a time sink and so the payback has to have merit.
But even if its only a dozen then it might be worth that. I would later like to have it branch into the area of amateur radio as well.
As for as West Texas and his comments? I have never dissed WT but he seems to have it in for me even though I have applauded his views. I guess he has a grudge for some reason. I do have that effect on people. Class of '57 and all.
Thanks Crystal Radio for bringing it up. I see that my statements have already been starting to morph. I expected a bit clearer rendering.
Frankly of late I have not found that much to interest me on TOD. It seems to ebb and flow so if I do read it I scan really fast. Many of the same posters seem to be the main thrust of DBs. This I notice changes over time. Now its the Blair kid and was Hothgor and DMatthews1 et al.
Again a lot of the commentary is the same hashed over stuff. Sorry but thats the way I read it. How many times can the same material be rolled over again and again?
You may notice that I return a few shots over the bow. I think its only fair play to do so and I do grow tired of courtesy when the moderator eschews such and so sometimes it best to just say what 'you' think...as say opposed to saying what 'you' think 'others think'!!(meaning the 'staff')..an elitist term(staff) if I ever met one and in this day and age one meets quite a few.
Airdale-not a rant even though it reads like one. Its my heartfelt beliefs and thoughts. Trash them as you see fit. Try to think of what to do when all this wunnerful shit disappears and your down there on your hands and knees then.
PS. You knew I alway do a PS..so all the above being stated the decks are cleared and its obvious exactly how I feel. Lets not misconstrue any more shall we? I am not trying for a popularity contest here and I think those times are over. Soon the winnowing will begin. The fallout has already struck me a few weeks ago in the housing bubble bursting to the tune of a couple hundred thousand in USD that just disappeared on my residence equity and I am still standing. Still standing and I rode on. I will ride but you can crawl, slither or climb..I will be passing by on my motorized mountain bicycle at 150 mpg.
Cheery bye.
Umm...not thinking about it? Do you think TOD just sprouted like a mushroom? People have put a lot of time, energy, money, and, yes, thought and planning into this site. Behind the scenes, we are constantly discussing the future of the site. And we have had at least one thread asking for input from members.
From these discussions, I have an idea of where the site is going. Let's just say you wouldn't approve.
But feel free to post the link to your site, when it's ready.
Please do.
While I do like the scientific slant of TOD I also appreciate the input of "survival nuts" like Airdale.
If you are putting together another blog to focus on those kinds of issues I'd love'd to include it in my list of must read sites.
RR is a great example of this. He doesn't post his every thought and observation to TOD but posts to his own blog.
Blogger is a good option, at least as a start. It's free, and most people understand how to use it. Plus, it's part of Google, so you get in the search engines right away.
TOD started out on Blogger.
Well Leanan, how about letting the commenters in on that one. Maybe there will be others who don't want to go that way, whatever it is. I thought when I came here that this was to be an open, to all views, place, something that has been lost in the west a place to freely express ideas on a subject. If it is only to be selected PO ideas then get that out on the mission statement
Yes and Airdale has spent a lot of time energy and feeling into this site too, as well as have all commenters according to their time and abilities. Money? That is just a marker of time and energy and I think I have seen at least one post where these little markers have been offered up to the TOD Altar by a lowly commenter. (I also remember a medical Dr. in a flourishing practise telling me that his lot was a sorry one, I suggested that he quit and go work on the green chain out in the fresh air. (green chain if you don't know is where the wood comes off the mill and it's hot dusty and nasty and all you do all day long is grab lumber and sort into piles.)Sorry we all get paid for our efforts, put a little effort in get a little out, paid in dollars paid in kind, etc. I am sure you Leanan are happier doing this good work (despite these little hiccups ) than you would be doing something idle and useless as is the lot of most.
I am a rather new, albeit mouthy commenter, so that request for input was likely before my time. I wouldn't mind seeing what the response was.
Cid Yama states quite correctly if it ain't broke don't fix it. I would add if you do fix it make sure everyone knows what's changed so they know if they need to duck and cover or I would hope applaud.
BTW If I leave this site, it will be like PO, you will only know long after it happens. (unless of course the F.H. measure be taken.)
From the Editor's Desk: Peak Oil, Heretical Thought, Complexity, and the Future of The Oil Drum
Those of us that have been around TOD for several years understand all this and appreciate it immensely. I see it as a priviledge to participate for free.
airdale,
Just in case you decide to come back and read the posts surrounding your leaving the site, I just want to say that it's too bad that you've left. Your contributions to the site have apparently been valuable in the past and, as new member, I'm going to probably miss out on the benefit of knowing your views and exchanging ideas with you.
Crystal Radio asked if anyone has recently been out in the grass in their barefeet. Well yes, I was last night. I was in the Adirondack Mountains camping with my family and got up to take a leak in the moonlight. Part of the reason for that camping trip was to get better in touch with the basics of life and it helped. It was also a lot of fun. But in reality, if the decline of oil is on, as you say it is, there isn't going to be any fun for anyone. I guess you're all ready and just waiting for, 'looking forward to', the hell that you foresee. So, though I dread the future you proclaim, I sincerely hope you're wrong. My reason for hope is that people are always wrong about the future, wrong about who or what has conspired against them, wrong about how they are perceived by others. We simply don't know these things. Reality always trumps our best guesses.
Asking to have your account deleted just has "drama" written all over it.
IME, the drama of your goodbye message is inversely proportional to your chances of actually leaving.
Very true... I've watched that phenomenon for over 15 years on Usenet.
ciao,
Bruce
You realize that if you think Airdale is right, there is nothing stopping you and him from going and getting hosting and putting up a site that matches his vision.
Go ahead. Show us all here how to do things and start your own TOD "fork"
And I'm sure the people who run this would be happy to have some far better site doing a better job so they could return to their lives and not have to devote hours and money to run this place.
I think Airdale is big enough and ugly enough to look after himself, as my mother would say.
I think many readers have a love-hate relationship with his comment posts.
I never saw him being told to bugger off. Hopefully he'll be back. But to your point, surely it is also true that Leanan shouldn't have to walk on eggshells... it isn't like Airdale doesn't dish it out when he wants to.
--
When no-one around you understands
start your own revolution
and cut out the middle man
it isn't like Airdale doesn't dish it out when he wants to.
There was a post something like 'you'd better not piss me off or I'll get ya' Airdale once made.
In today's WSJ:
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission proposed a new rule that will give it greater oversight over market manipulation. Basically, all types of trades would be reportable, from those by ma and pa to hedge funds. According to the WSJ:
How likely are such rules to be implemented? Any thoughts on how this would impact oil and natural gas futures prices?
Kind of funny how Congress didn't demand action when the markets drove oil prices down to the $10 range in 1998 to 1999.
But in any case, I think that Congress should mandate maximum energy prices worldwide--with the stipulation that the first 25 mbpd of all oil production goes to the US--and I think that they should join in the effort to repeal several Laws of Nature, especially the ones relating to thermodynamics.
Congress should immediately demand that oil companies be forced to recycle used gasoline: http://www.glossynews.com/artman/publish/laws-of-nature-repealed-1291.shtml
Hello Gail,
My speculation is that this is in preparation to prevent the 'ma & pa' small investor from future commodity market participation-- only the topdogs will call the shots.
Prelude to ever more effective and government protected looting mechanisms. Or maybe something akin to the Fugitive Slave Act. Come on, government is a 100% owned subsidiary of the wealthy and corporate classes. This mechanism will *protect* the hedge funds, ala LTCM.
cfm in Gray, ME
1GW conservative estimate from pentland firth estuary.
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=982522007
A couple of recent TOD mentions:
Oil reserves: A cause for panic?
Pressure Mounts On 'Jumping Jack'
"The Senate bill requires automakers to increase fuel economy to 35 miles per gallon, about a 40 percent increase over what cars, SUVs and small trucks are required to achieve now. It would lump all the vehicles under a single regulation, but also give manufacturers flexibility so large SUVs wouldn't have to meet the same requirements as smaller cars."
OMG, are these people brainless? And the full effect isn't even required for another 13 years? Ain't gonna be a GM and Ford by then if they don't do something right in a Big Way before then.
"What has changed from a few years ago, she said (Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash.), is there no longer is "a fear factor that you're going to be in itty bitty cars" if the government requires automakers to make more fuel efficient vehicles."
I'm sure most have us have heard people comment about how safe they feel in large SUVs. Personally I love small cars and have taught my daughter to wow, actually pay attention to the act of driving, I know, revolutionary. In something light and agile, armed with a bit of skill, you can avoid most anything.
I admit to be a recovering muscle car addict. Got hooked early, turned 16 in 1968, near the peak of the craze. I always did lean towards the small and light side of the equation, Camaros, Mustangs, etc., so was actually on the front side of the mileage curve early, lol.
When Mazda introduced the RX-7 in 1978 I had to have one. That thing weighed in at under 2100 lbs. had a decent suspension and engine and near perfect 50/50 f/r weight distribution. Wow, maybe the most fun car I have owned.
Outhandled corvettes, some armed with every upgrade GM had ever offered for them, at auto-crosses for 6 years with it, hehe. No accidents...
However, for all of its' low weight and low coefficient of drag and frontal area it got abysmal mileage. I never managed over about 22 mpg. The rotary was extremely poor at efficiently extracting energy out of fuel/air mixture due to its' rectangular combustion chamber shape.
If something like it were offered today, say 2100 lbs or lower, with, oh, a 1.8 liter turbocharged engine, diesel even, capable of maybe 200 hp on boost and efficient cruising, I would snap one up in a heartbeat.
Should be capable of 40+ easy with gasoline power and 60+ easy on diesel.
Keep it balanced with a decent suspension and tires and it would also keep my muscle car addiction satisfied, lol. Not to mention safer... I have always driven cars that had higher performance potential than average. With a little practice, the driver can then avoid that sudden threatening situation much more easily.
Working for oil companies all my life handling mass quantities of petroleum products gradually led me to question the whole thing. I mean the quantities are just huge. Amoco alone had 83 light oil terminals BEFORE the BP takeover. And they only marketed in about 28 states if I recall correctly.
So yea I'm schizo, muscle car versus oil depletion fringe lunatic/conspiracy theorist. The current one is a last generation Z-28 with the LS-1 engine. It doesn't do too bad, 25 mpg highway easy, 27 if I work at it. 20 in town, 23-24 on my daily commute cycle which is about 70% freeway. Of course this engine can plummet mileage in a hurry if you decide to have fun... so I rarely do, lol.
Waiting anxiously for the new models rumored from Mercedes and Volkswagon for the 2008 model year. A host of small diesels is in the pipeline it appears. Can any of them be any fun?
Down with SUVS, lol.
It seems to me that the new CAFE regulations just trade in one set of loopholes for a different set of loopholes. Right now manufacturers jack up their station wagons to achieve light-truck status and get the lower requirements. With the new regulations we'll see widened tracks and lengthened wheelbases to reach the government-preferred status.
Are you havin' a laugh?
I already own a 1760lb vehicle with decent aerodynamics and its powered by a 1 litre 3 cyl engine with about 64hp.
My milage? My long term fuel economy over the last 10,000miles is 39mpg(US).
Granted I drive it like I stole it, but its 50/50 city/highway mileage.
I seriously doubt that anyone could make a 200hp vehicle that would average 60mpg(US) even on diesel. And certainly not with a 1.8 litre engine.
Andy
i also have a metro. not much good on the highway but 39/39 sounds about right. i believe that the mileage one gets depends more on where one fills up.
in addition, i have a 2002 mercury cougar, 225 hp v-6 that gets a solid 30 mpg on the hwy. i believe that most of the "technology" developed in the last 30yrs or so has been directed at more horsepower.
Mine ain't a metro.
Its a Toyota Aygo.
For Americans who have no idea what I'm talking about:
http://www.toyota.co.uk/cgi-bin/toyota/bv/generic_editorial.jsp?BV_Sessi...
My only real requirement when buying a car is that I can get my mountain bike in the back seat. Because of the speeds I drive at I don't like bike racks. Plus I don't trust them not to fall off during cornering.
Andy
I drive an 88 Honda CRX with a 1.6 liter four making 105h.p. If I drive the pizz out of it I get around 37mpg, if I feather it and drive like I want fuel economy I tend to get 46mpg. With straight up highway driving (at 65mph steady) it tends to get 43mpg (and top gear is stupid revvy too). It'll outhandle about anything out there even though the suspension is pretty much shot. Not bad for a 19 year old car nearing 270,000 miles. At the current rate of "progress" I'd probably have to wait another 19 years for something new to replace it.
You forget that an 88 CRX would have no hope in hell of passing modern EURO IV emmission requirements even when new.
My car is EURO IV compliant and as such can't run slightly lean. It must run near stoichiometric air fuel to at all times. This does have a fuel economy penalty. If Honda remade the CRX exactly as was built in '88, except meeting modern CARB emission requirements the fuel economy wouldn't be nearly as good.
So, fair play for having an efficient car. But I've always said, that I couldn't go around producing as much VOC, NOx and unburned hydrocarbon emissions as some folk with older cars do simply because of conscience.
I hate it when I get stuck in traffic behind some old banger that was built pre EURO days. Effectively they get a get-out-of-jail-free card when it comes to annual emission inspections as a car in the UK is tested against the standards that were in force when it was built.
Give me cleanliness before efficiency. This is why I hate diesels and believe you Americans have been wise not to let them onto your roads until they can meet TierII-Bin5 levels.
Andy
"i also have a metro"
I thought he was talking about a Metro for a moment too, until he said "with decent aerodynamics". That, unfortunately, ruled out the Metro ;)
VW GTI Diesel, can make it to 60 mpg when equipped with the. 1.8 liter turbo-charged diesel. It ways far more than 2100 lbs. however and has the aerodynamics of a brick relatively speaking. It does have a low frontal area though.
Granted, it would not make it any where near that 60 mpg if you had it floored all the time, even though it is rated well short of 200 hp.
Let's take my dinosaur Camaro, sneaking up on 350 hp, it dips well under 15 mpg if my foot so desires, but then again if I manage to control that foot intelligently, 25 is easy, with 27 even possible.
Mpg rating is not directly dependent to hp rating, that having much more to do with how you drive the thing. Max hp rating will be well up in the revs under full throttle where you would rarely be under normal driving, never when going for mpg.
Try learning how to drive for economy instead of like you stole it and see what you can get with that thing.
Get a grip, open your eyes, what I ask is quite possible.
2 Liter 200 HP BMW diesel
Nope, tried that. Doesn't make a difference. I tend to accelerate hard until I get to cruising speed then ease off. There doesn't appear to be any difference in taking 2 minutes to reach cruising speed or 10 seconds.
The reason? Well, I may use up much more fuel accelerating hard, but I'm only accelerating for a short time. Slower acceleration may use less fuel but happens for longer. So the total fuel used for X distance is the same.
Plus I tend to drive everywhere at 50, the most economical speed, except motorways (cruise at 80-85) and in town where its bumper to bumper like everyone else.
Andy
(Note: this is NOT my site)
(Note Note: This guy's idea of "jackrabbit start" may be a little skewed)
http://www.crxmpg.com/accelmpg.html
You just have to learn to drive like these guys
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18923454/
Ha ha...that's small potatoes. You should know by now the MSM is almost always behind the curve.
Check these guys out:
http://www.metrompg.com/
http://www.gassavers.org/
http://www.crxmpg.com/basjoosgallery.html
I'm sorry, but the total amount of energy required to accelerate a large object rapidly is going to be more than that required to accelerate it slowly. Once you're at a speady speed, then I agree it makes relatively little difference how fast you're going (supposedly 90km/h ~= 55mph is about the most efficient, but at least according to our car's economy meter, it's barely any different at 10 or 20 km/h faster - the fastest you can legally go here).
Having said that I do wonder if you can accelerate TOO gently, not allowing to the engine to work as efficiently as it might. I read somewhere that 25% throttle is about optimal, but nothing to back it up.
The best way to drive economically is to avoid needing to accelerate at all. At the extreme that means don't use your car at all...but if there really is no alternative, then once you've reached cruising speed, make sure you never need to slow down too much. Ideally, this would be simple, by maintaining a good distance from the traffic in front of you, and avoiding as many intersections/turns as possible. In reality, at least in this country, most drivers are idiots and will just rush in to fill up the gap - even when you're cruising towards a red light. Oh, and trying to make it through turns without braking doesn't tend to go down well with the S.O. sitting beside you.
Both of those statements are wrong. The energy required depends on mass and final velocity (mv2/2) - greater power is required to accelerate faster, but the total energy expended will be roughly the same.
At steady speed, most of the energy is expended overcoming air resistance, which roughly squares with speed, and exceeds rolling resistance above about 15 mph. Therefore the speed makes a big difference.
The key parameters in energy use are mass and drag coefficient/velocity.
Well...whether it's greater power or greater energy (and surely mv2/2 only applies in a vacuum with no air/road resistance?), I can't believe it doesn't take more fuel to accelerate at full throttle. Every page with tips on economical driving suggests that would be the case: "hard acceleration is the enemy of fuel economy".
I didn't mean to imply that it didn't require more energy to maintain a higher speed, just that it made little difference to fuel usage. But apparently it depends a lot on the car...most cars do have optimal economy at around 90km/h (with significant drop off at 20 km/h faster), but higher powered cars (ours is a V8) are often more or similarly efficient at speeds somewhat higher than that.
I think there might be "miles per gallon" and "miles per gallon".
An example:
In a real world analytical test, done in mixed conditions (road + city) during winter and spring, the following miles / gallon figures were achieved in the Finnish "eco-car of the year" competition:
Car maker / model liter/100km Miles/gallon(US)
(Year 2005 models - EU mid-size hatch/sedan, most sold in FIN)
*Toyota Corolla 1.4 D4D 4.9 48
Mazda 3 1.3 HB Classic 5.1
Opel Astra 1.4i Essentia 5.2
VW Golf 1.9 TDI Trendline 5.3
Toyota Prius 1.5 HSD 5.3 44.4
(Year 2006 models - smallest cars, EU type)
Opel Corsa 1.3 CDTi 4.7 50
Peugeot 1007 HDi 1.4 4.8
Volkswagen Polo 1.4 TDI 4.9
Skoda Fabia 1.4 TDI 5.0
*Toyota Aygo 1.0 5.1
Hyundai Getz 1.5 CRDi 5.2 45.2
Ford Focus FlexiFuel 10.2 23.1
(Year 2007 models - mid-size EU-type multi purpose vehicles)
*Citroën Xsara Picasso 1.6 HDi 5.4 43.6
Ford Focus C-Max 1.8 TDCi 5.6
Honda Civic 1.4i 4D Hybrid CVT A 5.6
Toyota Corolla Verso 1.6 5.7
Opel Zafira 1.9 CDTI 5.8 40.6
* = Winner of the year's eco-car competition (including all criteria like GHG emissions, pollution particles, fuel economy, noise, etc
From the above it appears that 60mpg is next to impossible in Northern EU type driving with lots of city driving, economic driving style and driving throughout all four seasons. This is regardless what kind of modern mass-manufactured car one chooses to drive.
BTW, all of the above figures are with a normally loaded car (i.e. 2,5 adults and some baggage), not with a single driver almost empty car.
Then again 40 mpg is easily doable, even on a mid-size multi-purpose vehicle.
However, I'm guessing that people have a lot of variation in their MPG measures due to obvious factors like:
- amount of open road vs. city driving
- driving type (aggressive vs. economy)
- driving climate/season (temperate vs arctic, summer vs. winter)
- loading of the car (driver only vs. family, no baggagge vs. lots of stuff)
- age/condition of the vehicle (new/well take care of vs. old/not serviced)
As such , I think the figures that are above 60MPG are mostly in situations where most of the following apply: very warm weather, mostly steady open road driving, economic driving style, driver only load in the car, new vehicle.
Averaged around the world and in real situations, the figures are obviously lower.
EDIT: Sorry about the formatting. For some reason this publishing system does not honor normal *space* characters inside *code* tags.
Well,
I got a 180 Hp Diesel car with 400NM torque and I can drive 65MPG when I cruise 60 miles/h in 6th gear without any problems what so ever.
It is a Seat Leon (tuned) 2 liter engine (German engine).
Roger From the Netherlands
Yea, gotta love those Civics. Sadly over the years they have suffered, as do most long lasting models, from bloat. They are now up to the 2500 lb. area, sigh. Imagine what a well taken care of CRX would do if it had decent aero.
From a current Civic lop off the rear seat, ditch a bunch of creature comfort BS and make them back into basic transpo models and voila, back under 2000 lbs. or better. Throw in a turbo for those rare times when you need the power, or heck, just settle for the variable valve timing version.
Jack rabbit starts hurt you to a varying degree, not a lot when your max output is 64 h, a lot when it is 350 hp. Not as much when you are pulling 2000 lbs. up to speed, more when you are lugging 80,000 lbs. around with you. How you maintain your speed makes a huge contribution, a steady throttle foot is generally better, cruise is better than that (if your cruise control is a 'soft' cruise) and 'rolling' the hills is even better if you are committed to the best possible mpg without drafting.
In addition, always look well down the road, set yourself up to avoid braking as much as possible, just giving back hard earned momentum when you brake. A good suspension, decent tires and a bit of skill allow you to carry more speed through turns, again keeping momentum instead of braking and re-accelerating, burning precious fuel.
Yea drafting can give awesome returns, but not exactly the safest, lol.
But since the auto-makers have taught us that bigger is safer, lol, how many fun, efficient little new tech cars will we see? They are lobbying their butts off as we speak to keep their current revenue streams intact, bleh.
ALL legislation that has a time frame similar to that is not actually intended to do Anything about the problem.
It is done for two reasons. It doesn't matter if it's about climate change or peak oil.
1. If anything good does happen these people can go back and say they were the ones that did it.
2. It makes those who can't or don't dig deeper on the subject feel better about the problem by filing it away as 'see big mommy/daddy government saved us' in their minds and continuing to consume.
p.s. interesting thing about climate change and al gore. he did a interview on British tv about a year before his documentary came out. he keeps saying ten years when if he was actually warning people. he would update his retorec to say there is only nine years left to act, instead he continues to say we still have a decade to act, at the same time he when forced on it acknowledges the situation is worse. So in other words despite the fact that yes he used very good data and showed the truth. he is still a politician at heart and is only using it as a spring board back into the political wrestling ring that bush threw him out of. I know i am going to get attacked, go ahead. It doesn't change the fact that gore is using climate change to build up a political support base again and it's working.
I worked in DC for many years and lived in Anne Arundel County and later Calvert County, Maryland. When I owned a home in Calvert County my round trip commute to the NW section of DC was 72 miles round trip. When gas increased I purchaesed a VW Jetta with a 4cyl Diesel and had an extra 10 gallon tank installed at the dealership. That little car achieved a consistent 44-46mpg and I would refill the tank about ever 900 miles. It was no drag racer but for many years gave great service with no repair costs. I sold it when I retired to Florida and the vehicle had nearly 200,000 miles on it and it was still running strong with nothing but tire changes, oil changes, and once I replaced all the rubber hoses in the engine compartment. If VW could build a vehicle like that in the 70s they could certainly do it today.
If VW could build a vehicle like that in the 70s they could certainly do it today.
Indeed they could, but it would be illegal in safety standards and (non CO2) emissions.
Unless world wide standards for emissions and CO2 are imposed (or agreed to) upon/by all coutries then restrictive laws in any single country are worthless. In other words unless China, India, and all other countries pass the same laws what is the purpose of passing stringent laws and penalizing the people of one or a few countries? A good example of the point I am trying to make is the VW Bug. The last bug was sold in America about 1974 but the bug continued to be sold in Mexico and elsewhere untill a couple of years ago. Do emissions stop at the US/Mexico border? No more than the illegal immigrants do. The result of the situation that currently exists, with various countries having divergent emission laws, is to send the population of the world a mixed and confusing message. When people receive a confusing message they are inclined to ignore the message and proceed on their own initative. That is human nature at work and untill our 'leaders' get on the same page few people are going to take them seriously. I dont.
"The last bug was sold in America about 1974 but the bug continued to be sold in Mexico and elsewhere untill a couple of years ago."
If only I'd found out sooner. I would have bought a junked out bug here in the states and "taken it to mexico to restore it." (that would be, taking the VIN plates to mexico) and driving a nicely "restored" bug back into the states.
;)
I've got a question for those in the know...
Why doesn't ASPO-USA put the entire conference (every video) onto respective bit torrent hashes, and then we the TOD community can all partake?
Selling those 12 pack dvds or whatever seems like such a crude swindle when we've got all this coal powered semiconductor capacity at our finger tips. Also, the other good p2p point to be made here is that more people will see it--which can only be a good thing, right?
It is easy and doesn't require anyone to host the data, so it won't cost anyone money. It is purely democratic. So what's up with this?
[edit: maybe make the torrent video lower quality (obviously)... Then you can still sell high quality video on dvds to the hardcore ASPO-USA fanatics, and still have community participation for those unfortunate enough not to be able to go to Houston--or to buy the 12 pack of plastic.]
Thought I'd copy an interesting biofuel development from Thursday's Drumbeat. Not that it's going to save TWAWKI, but if ethanol can replace say 10% of motor fuel, this would allow it to replace maybe 13% instead.
It was posted in Science Daily on June 21, 2007. It looks like they are reducing the sugar to its underlying hydrocarbon backbone, DMF. A better solution than letting yeast chomp on it...
Oh and BTW here's the WikiPedia article on the HMF process, apparently it is fairly straightforward:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroxymethylfurfural
| The problem will solve itself.
| But not in a nice way.
It has been posted on Drumbeat several times since PNNL first did the press release. I had posted it first as a possible interesting topic as one of the claims was the "inexpensive"-ness. However, at that time I wondered, and still wonder, if anyone will claim that they can produce significantly more biomass (per acre or per nation) also, as the chemistry part is not a solution to the energy issue per se, but rather the required mechanism for usefulness.
In other words, would we still be better off using Solar thermal or PV, on an efficiency basis, rather than using photosynthesis.
In other words, would we still be better off using Solar thermal or PV, on an efficiency basis, rather than using photosynthesis.
YES! Esp. Thermal solar for heat.
If you look at my bio page I've quoted someone else on photon to biomass VS PV,
Yeah, though it seems to me that "chemistry" is probably better than "zymurgy" in the transformation of biomass, it's still only running at the efficiency of photosynthesis at best.
I see that WikiPedia says it's 90% efficient, but that has to be for those photons which actually encounter a chlorophyll molecule. Green light bounces off, among other obvious factors.
As for the chemistry, they got to HMF through a simple dehydration of the carbohydrate, but to convert HMF to DMF requires the removal of a couple oxygens. That has to cost them something in efficiency. Like I was saying, not as bad as zymurgy, but still a biofuel. A silver BB at best.
I see that WikiPedia says it's 90% efficient, but that has to be for those photons which actually encounter a chlorophyll molecule.
Or one could choose to believe:
The efficiency of photosynthesis in plants on land is ~1-3%In other words, would we still be better off using Solar thermal or PV, on an efficiency basis, rather than using photosynthesis.
The essential and enormous difference is that plants reproduce and grow on their own, with just a little help.
The essential and enormous difference is that plants reproduce and grow on their own, with just a little help.
In the US of A you are taxed on that land to grow the plants AND have to go through some effort to process the plants for energy harvest.
VS once a building is built with passive solar, its built and unless the way the earth spins about the sun changes, that passive system will continue to work.
*check* and *mate*
From the UK government (via Energy Bulletin):
Britain’s Environment Agency: Go Vegetarian to Stop Climate Change
i find it funny.
vegetarianism relies on cheap oil, and big pharma(vitamin and mineral supplements). NO one region can grow all the plants needed to allow a varied enough diet to give a human being all the needed vitamins, mineral's, and protein needed to live. this is of course leaving aside the whole scientific proof that even though we are technically omnivores, our body's have been tuned by evolution to rely on eating meat as the primary and most efficient means of getting the large amounts of protein needed to run our 'cleaver monkey brains' and trace minerals for general health.
Though to be clear this is not a post defending current practices of penning up livestock such as bovines, pigs, chickens, etc and force feeding them a diet evolution did not tune them for such as large heaps of cornmeal while being pumped with anti-biotics.
It could be said that vegetarianism is a way to worsen the overshoot and postpone the collapse...
BTW, can you point me to the scientific proof you mentioned? I've heard about it but haven't seen it myself. Would love to show it to my vegan friend.
Just point him to human evolutionary record, books discussing the fact that we needed to start eating meat to support our brains. they would not of gotten the needed protein otherwise and we would not be sitting here at plastic and silicon toys. Just a interesting fyi on the subject, there was a hominid relative species at the same time our brains really started to grow after becoming meat scavengers, it died out.
then point him to biological papers on the human digestive tract, it will show him that our systems are very inefficient at extracting nutrients from plants compared to pure herbivores. That when we eat leafy veggies most of the matter and allot of the nutrients just pass right through our system because we don't have the digestive tract to unlock them, though this doesn't mean we can't eat them. That just means that it's not what your digestive tract is best at.
I know what your going to say next though. 'i want links'
well if i knew where you lived i would give you the address to the closest library.
Thanks, I know and use several good libraries in my area. :)
My point kind of was that, if I talk to vegans about nutrition, they are far more likely to have spent hundreds of hours studying "vegan propaganda" (for want of a better term) than I have spent studying the nutritional aspects of human evolution, and frankly I don't currently have time or energy to concentrate on that subject. What I do know about evolution leads me to think that you are probably right, but I doubt that I could convince a committed vegan to believe any of it.
IME most vegans are 100% certain that their diet is the healthiest imaginable, and they can come up with tons of research, of one kind or another, to back it up. If I can't point them to a fairly short paper or book that explains your view in a concise manner, they won't be interested. If I could, they would probably read it in order to attempt to refute it by using their dogmas.
How's this for an idea Jussi. Stop having conversations with vegans about food - life is quite short.
http://media.anthropik.com/pdf/cordain2000.pdf
Of course, you can expect the usual vegan-religious kicking and screaming about that document and the other documents that it references. Just ignore the religious extremists.
Ghawar Is Dying
The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function. - Dr. Albert Bartlett
Hmm. Deeply into overshoot, having performed the magnificient task of converting millions of years worth of energy into a geological eyeblink spree of species-destroying carelessness, we still insist of bigging up our monkey brains...
I think the Hindus had vegetarianism before oil.
Hindus drink that "Gift of Love", milk.
Milk is one of the major differences between vegetarians and vegans.
BTW, I have argued with ethical vegetarians and vegans that oysters are perfectly acceptable. No brains :-)
5% animal protein seems to be about the minimum for historical populations and societies.
Best Hopes for oysters post-Peak,
Alan
actually if you look it up the vegetarianism hindu link comes from some miss-informed vegetarian sites. all the stuff i am pulling up on ancient hindu's says that while there may of been small sects who preach such stuff in terms of respect of animals based solely on their religion, in general hindus still ate meat and other animal products. I think I will stick by the more scientifically correct paleo diet of mostly meat, some fruits and easily digestible veggies.while trying to avoid processed foods as much as possible(except for a treat or two).
Please supply links to above. I doubt you will be able to. Better yet, if you want to debate evolutionary biology in an off-the-cuff manner, try another site.
Otherwise, I was hoping people might address the substance of article -- that a fraction of the world eats a meat-intensive diet that does more damage to the environment than automobiles.
Oh right,
this will be the same DEFRA that went on record in 2003 stating that food self sufficiency in Britain is no longer important...
They believe globalisation is here to stay, that other nations can grow our food for us and we can sell them essentials in return like...Insurance, Advertising, brit-pop, fashion models and television programmes.
The people at DEFRA represent the intellectual sump sludge of government. Ever smug, ever clever. Never heard of the Kriegsmarine, 1917, 1940 -1943.
Sure, all 60 million will all be on vegan diets post peak.
Grass.
But only for a short while.
The survivors will need specialist tailors. For Rickets.
The survivors will need specialist tailors. For Rickets.
Nope. Things like sauerkraut can prive enough Vit. C.
And, realistically, unless there is a total collapse, things like Vit C pills, asorbic acid, will still be made in the industrial processes.
Rickets is insufficient vitamin D, not insufficient vitamin C. That is scurvy.
We are going to have a big problem as a nation under the stress of any interruptions to food imports. We operate a just in time system through the large supermarket chains. This came close to a grinding halt in the farmers fuel depot pickets.
There are 60 million of us. Even in the 40's and 50's with victory gardens and a hellofa lot more gardens, allotments and experienced gardeners. And of course a lower population. We could not feed ourselves without US, Canadian and the help of others.
I was really hoping people would address the article and the findings underlying it and not turn this into a discussion of how dumb or hypocritical or deluded or whatever vegetarians are.
I am amazed and disappointed that people on this site will debate for hundreds of comments over dozens of threads about the pros and cons of driving with windows open vs. using an air conditioner but a statement from a credible government agency (supported by reports from the UN, research done by the University of Chicago, and other studies) that we can decrease our environmental footprint by a huge percentage by adopting a different diet - one that is, as the American Diatetic Association says, perfectly healthy - elicits either silence or screed.
Where is the vaunted high level of discourse and openness the denizens of TOD constantly pat themselves on the back about? Has this site so devolved that some topics can only be met with brays and hoots?
It would seem, if TOD were such an excellent collection of level-headed rationalists and visionaries, information from articles like this:
...would be seriously considered and debated. I hope we can abate the slide (which seems to me to be occurring site-wide) into ignorant polemic or fuzzy-headed theorizing and return our focus to the facts.
Is a vegetarian diet less energy and CO2 intensive? Yes. It appears this is the case.
Excerpt:
Is a vegetarian diet a healthy alternative to meat-intensive diets? According to the ADA, yes.
Excerpt:
So, bringing it back yet again to the article I posted originally -- the British government says eating vegetarian can reduce our ecological footprint significantly. Discuss.
It's something of a sore subject here. I think people are ignoring it because we've gone 18 rounds before (paleo vs. vegan), and people are kind of tired of it, knowing no consensus will ever be reached.
I read this site almost every day and have for more than two years. I disagree this has been exhausted. In fact, I don't think the topic has ever been addressed in a rational manner.
When 21% of anthropogenic CO2 and 16% of methane emissions come from a single source and that source has never been the topic of any articles or scientifically-grounded discussions, I have to conclude there are some issues a majority of TOD just won't address.
We can berate SUV drivers on this site but we can't discuss diets more damaging that SUVs.
I would say meat-eaters are bashed at least as often as SUV drivers here.
But what is there to discuss? Yeah, it might help global warming if everyone gave up SUVs and meat, but it's not going to happen.
And it doesn't address what many here see as the fundamental problem: overshoot. If everyone ate vegan, maybe we could cram more people on the planet, but eventually, the crash would come, and it would be even worse for being delayed.
Is meat-eating bashed as much as SUV driving? Really? I'd believe vegans are bashed as much but not meat eating.
Heartwarming stuff. So let's limit our discussions to the likely. If people won't change, don't talk about it. Criticising SUVs is off limits, peak oil mitigation off limits, avoidance of personal debt off limits.
Who said we should cram more people on the planet> I agree overshoot is a problem.
We need many fewer billion people. Period. That is why we voluntarily decided to forego having children. Many environmentally-minded people I know did the same. We also reduced our footprint in other ways - no car, no meat, small home.
Let's be clear - I advocate and science supports the need for less meat-consumption, less consumption in general, and less people. Never said otherwise.
What I find interesting about your implied argument (an argument I never made nor that I agree with): "everyone goes vegan, therefore planet accommodates greater population, therefore more disastrous overshoot" is silly.
The implication is that we should be satisfied to destroy the planet at the current levels of population and that any efforts at mitigation will just make matters worse.
It's not off limits. It's just not of much interest. What gets discussed here are generally things that are debatable. I don't think it's really debatable that eating less meat is better for the environment.
"I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals. I'm a vegetarian because I hate plants"
S. Wright
Mose in Midland
"If people won't change, don't talk about it."
Exactly. People like SUV's, so that's off the table.
Look folks, if people won't change, there is NOTHING to talk about.
Wrong
I believe people won't change... I find this site one of the most rewarding daily must-reads
Why? Well... I think TEOTWAWKI is coming... I want to figure out when it is most likely to come, what form it will take (really bad crash - as i believe - or severe but manageable structural changes - as others believe)... i read people's suggestions for mitigation strategies, for exit strategies...
Lots to talk about. But meat eating is worse for the CO2 and energy use... check, no debate here, move on... SUVs are a problem... check, no debate here, move on... small insulated houses better than big oil heated barns for living in... check... you see the pattern... things are debated, accepted then we move on to things that are still speculative, new or interesting...
I would love to go veggie... for a whole host of unrelated issues... and i have an intellectual commitment to do so... have had for years... haven't made it happen... meat or no meat is just one of several issues that we aren't going to do much about here - we all know it is better in some circumstances to do X than Y... i also fly a lot for work and personal reasons, i have two cars and my home is currently in Houston bloody Texas... I GET the problems with that... now back to more interesting topics
--
When no-one around you understands
start your own revolution
and cut out the middle man
Well, religious fanatics who believe in more more more children do have more more more children, and they vote. When there's enough, many other things go wrong.
Pakistan and Gaza may be unfortunate early examples.
yes, i have often wondered if the religous right is opposed to abortion and gay marriage for the same reason....they dont increase consumption.
Looks like Pakistan is unraveling even faster than I thought. I little bit of rain and their biggest city falls apart. They still have 3.5 months of monsoon ahead of them.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/06/24/pakistan.floods/index.html
Tont, exactly what do you propose to do with the 'food' animals alive now? Kill them all? Let them go back to nature? If the latter, where? Also if the latter, they'll breed like crazy and produce even more gases.
-
James Gervais
Hope was the last ill to escape Pandora's box.
Generally, if you really go back to nature, they won't have feed-lots supplying them with nearly free calories, and they'll have predators.
Humans protect them from predators and provides them with food.
Most of the highly domesticated farm animals would probably be too dumb to survive on their own. The buffalo/bison are apparently closer to 'wild-type' and are more resourceful.
Strawman. Surely you have a better argument than this? Did you even read what Leanan wrote or are you so far up on your religious soapbox that you feel you must make proselytizing points rather than contribute to actual debate?
Ghawar Is Dying
The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function. - Dr. Albert Bartlett
TonyF:
I don't think this is what you are looking for but........
I think a distinction needs to be made between 100% vegetarian diet and a mostly vegetarian diet supplemented with occasional animal protein.
The native Americans lived on the three sisters, corn, beans and squash. With the occasional wild game.
Besides I think you would be surprised how much can be grown locally. Try reading these books.
Solar Gardening: Growing Vegetables Year-Round the American Intensive Way
by Leandre Poisson, Gretchen Vogel Poisson
Four-Season Harvest: Organic Vegetables from Your Home Garden All Year Long
by Eliot Coleman , Barbara Damrosch , Kathy Bray
I have recently been trying to draw out knowledge from my dad, about how his family grew and stored food back in the 1930's.
Step one: have a root cellar. http://waltonfeed.com/old/cellar4.html
Step two: Onions were hung in bunches, Potatoes and other root crops were piled in the corner and covered in dirt.
Mom use to talk about how they had one of the best root cellars in town, because it was built beside a local stream.
Almost everything else was canned or salted. Of course back then coal was king and the canning was done with a coal stove.
They would have a winter and summer kitchen. In the summer the stove was picked up (not an easy task) and carried out to the back covered porch. That way the house didn't heat up.
This is a great posting - and that link was really helpful.
Thanks very much.
--
When no-one around you understands
start your own revolution
and cut out the middle man
You're welcome.
For those who may not have heard of Jared Diamond's “Guns Germs and Steal”, you may want to read it. He has a very eye opening explanation about animal domestication. Why it occurred, and why they are so useful.
My sound bite version is: They eat things we can't (grass), make fertilizer, haul heavy loads and provide protein.
Part of his thesis is that domestication of animals was a major factor in allowed the Europeans to invade the Americas, rather than the other way around.
It's a lot more complex than what I've written, but that is the problem with sound bites.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guns%2C_Germs%2C_and_Steel
...'credible government agency'...
Scarce as hens teeth.
...'University of Chicago'...
Home of weird economics.
...'livestock/greenhouse gas connection...
Consider all the gas the dinos emmited. It didnt kill them but might have stunted the growth of mammals.
...'ADA'...
What is their take on those horrible pickles on fast food?
Eat fish, oysters, shrimp and crayfish :-)
Alan
Would love too but where i live it's not a option for the meat.
Oysters are the carbon negative food (mollusks in general are, but oysters by far the most).
The shells are mostly calcium carbonate. By hauling them out of the water, they will not dissolve nearly as quickly (even a few centuries ia good), thus increasing the carbon dioxide carrying capacity of the oceans.
Best Hopes for more oysters on the half shell and a cold beer,
Alan
Alan
Don't forget an oyster loaf made with remoulade !
Ahhhh, to be at the Acme Oyster House in December...
One question I have about livestock GHG emissions - surely the only thing that really matters is what percentage of that is due to fossil-fuel inputs into sustaining the livestock? The world was surely full of bovine-type creatures well before man came on the scene in a big way, but their GHG emissions were just part of the natural cycle. The main reason we're upsetting the cycle now is because of our ability to pull fossil fuels out of the ground, and release the previously locked-up carbon into the atmosphere.
I also read something interesting a while back about capturing methane emissions from livestock and using it as a source of energy. But presumably the methane is burned, producing CO2, so the CO2 would still need to be captured.
FWIW, the sooner we see a decent differential between the price of meat and the price of fruit & veg, the better. I would happy to voluntarily eat half the meat I do now, but the only thing that would convince the other half (who does most of the shopping & the cooking) would be if meat (well, beef especially) was genuinely too expensive to have as anything other than an occasional treat. I've never had a vegetarian dish that I didn't enjoy as much as any meat dish, but I admit they often seem to be a lot more work.
You mean Bartertown?
Er...no...this one was for real. There are definitely methane capture programs already in existence, but they just flare it off as CO2, which apparently reduces the GHG potency, but no-one's yet worked out a way to commerically capture it the energy released yet, as far as I can tell.
Landfill gas power plants (0.5 to 8 MW) are extremely common now. Not a massive source of power, but the best use of methane releases.
Best Hopes,
Alan
That would seem to indicate that main reason methane from livestock hasn't be used as such is due to an issue of scale and location - presumably the landfill sites used for power plants release larger quantities of methane than even the largest livestock capture programs, and/or the latter are not so well located for building such a plant is viable
TonyF
Thanks for posting this.
I too find it interesting that a government agency would say such a thing.
I guess I wouldn't go quite as far as vegan - but it would be good if somehow the idea of eating less meat started sinking into people's heads. It would certainly be better for health.
From the "Canary" article at the top:
If you read further down, the author explicitly thanks TOD.
Indeed I do, and I'll do it again! "Thanks TOD!" (And ASPO!)
I welcome any comments/corrections on the data I assembled.
My ambition was to redux the best available info and package it up in such a way that non-technical readers and those not already deep into peak oil reading might be able to understand it.
ChrisN
www.getreallist.com
There are several aspects of PO that are seldom taken into account and are not technical. The first and most important is fourth generation open source conflicts that lead to failed states and fluctuating oil extraction and export. Nigeria is a good example of a country that is striving to keep up exports and has at the same time increased the cost of fuel to citizens. The resulting conflict in Nigeria seems obvious to all except the central government. Mexico could be the next example. Insurgencies in oil producing/exporting countries can cause a lot of peaks and valleys in the plateau that we are currently skating on...imo.
Interesting Editorial from Pravda. They claim that talk of Peak Oil is a US conspiracy, but then they talk about what I can only describe as a desperate effort to reduce domestic Russian consumption of oil and gas. I wonder why they would be desperate to reduce their oil and gas consumption?
http://english.pravda.ru/russia/economics/93835-0/
Russia to reform national economy to get rid of oil dependence
From Pravda: ". . . U.S. aggressive policies toward oil-exporting countries. . . "
I thought this headline from PIW was interesting:
Iraqi Crude Exports Rise to US, Drop Sharply to Asia in June
Petroleum Intelligence Weekly (subscription) - New York,NY,USA
And the people who have been saying all along that iraq was about importing oil to the u.s. at the expense of the rest of the world are vindicated..
Too bad you have to pay to see that vindication.
CERA probably wants to include tar sands/heavy oil and oil shale reserves to the 1.2 trillion barrels of oil reserves estimate. Others do not include heavy oils or oil shale in their estimates. Where oil shale rock was crushed and burned without refining, power generation was possible (Estonia). Petrobras has been extracting oil from shale for years.
If you check where most of the world's oil discovery has been occuring, it seems to be offshore and on mature shelf areas - deep offshore. Although there were some onshore finds such as a Tengiz satellite field of 2 billion barrels, some large fields in China's Tarim Basin and numerous fields onshore in the Persian Gulf Country oilfields. In spite of peak oil, Saudi Arabia claimed they discovered new reserves this past year; the problem is they have not discovered some of the reserves they claimed they found in previous years. SA estimated they will reach peak oil production capacity in 2009.
Do you have a link with respect to "SA estimated they will reach peak oil production in 2009"?
Hello TODers,
Referring to Leanan's toplink on the Nigerian fuel-transport strike:
This will probably lead to a Nigerian repeat of the earlier 2000 UK crisis unless most Nigerians grow most of their foodstuffs locally.
http://energybulletin.net/19919.html
------------------------------------
Remember, remember the 5th of September, 2000
by Kathy McMahon
-----------------------------------
It will be interesting to see how this is resolved. My WAG is that world crude inventories are sufficiently high enough short-term for the importers to wait this out, combined with severely restricting the importation of refined products and foodstuffs into Nigeria to really put the screws to these poor people to end this strike quickly.
Is this fair & just? Nope, but just reality.
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
I have a 401k that I want to invest in Oil/Gold/Silver. Does anyone know of a fund that is doing this?
KORG,
For gold and silver I would recommend the physical over the ETF's.
Try www.goldmoney.com
Hope this helps.
Canada Central Fund, CEF. There are also gold/silver "tracking" funds, GLD and SLV -- Financial Sense published an editorial a while back from someone who had read the fine print in StreetTracks' prospectus. Seems they're outsourcing the tedious business of storing gold in a vault, so it's essentially just a paper-(computer-)based asset which will vanish when TSHTF.
That said, I can understand your situation. Your 401K, as mine, probably does not permit the portfolio to contain any hard assets.
Brazil is probably going to do fairly well post-Peak Oil. They will still produce most of their own oil needs, export some ethanol, #2 food exporter, most electricity comes from hydro (and one white elephant nuke) etc.
CPL and CIG are two Brazilian Hydroelectric utilities listed on the NYSE.
Add some Canadian hydro, perhaps NZ and Swiss/Austrian hydro as well. Buying them for a 401K can be difficult !
Best Hopes for Investments that retain value !
Alan
Brazil has 2 white elephant nukes (and 1 that nobody agrees on continuing or ceasing the building)...
But our stock market is currently as skewed as any other out there, so it may not be a sane option.
Embraer and others in Brazil will be vulnerable.
However, utilities with good profits today, steady costs (mostly hydroelectric so financing and depreciation are the big costs) can survive. Major inflation of the US dollar would be good for them.
There profits are good today, they may be less post-Peak Oil. But they should not go bankrupt (they are half owned by the Brazilian states that they are in) and they own assets of enduring value; hydroelectric dams and transmission lines.
Brazil also should suffer less than most. Good exports and enough oil and sugar cane ethanol.
Best Hopes for Brazil,
Alan
What I discovered when I was interested in the same thing several years ago, is that there are two companies that do this both based in Texas. One is the American Church Trust and the other is Sterling Trust Company. You can roll all or a portion of your 401K over to a precious metals IRA. However the IRS is very specific about what you can hold in the account; basically it is American gold or silver eagles or bullion bars. They also outsource the storing of the gold, but it is susposedly specific stored with your name on it which is an important distinction from the gold ETFs. Also you can take distribution in kind when you retire.
It seems to me that some sort of solar trough equivalent of a propane fridge would substitute for the electric AC units that now, thanks to Chinese low cost production, seem to be proliferating, especially in places like Pakistan where they contribute to 'load shedding' crises.
Is there some technical reason why this isn't being done? if it can be, it certainly should be, especially considering that ther is a direct relationship between solar input and AC demand.
If Congress wanted to really do something worthwhile, mandating that all AC units be solar powered would get that over with instead of mandating fuel economy standards for cars. Same for hot water. Cars are only visiting but houses, in theory, last a long time or used to. I know, it's too obvious and simple, and the profits could end up outside corporate hands. Silly me.
Is there some technical reason why this isn't being done?
Fear of Ammonia leaks?
http://www.thesustainablevillage.com/servlet/display/microenterprise/dis...
A unit like this was being used on a military base for cooling their hardware.
We had a air conditioner which worked this way, but our heat source was natural gas. We replaced it two years ago when it developed a leak, because we couldn't find anyone to service it.
Because us Murkans want to just push a button and have the AC come on and make us cool.
With solar, you have a mirror or other collector that has to be kept clean, perhaps has to follow the sun. It only works during the daylight hours.
Doesn't require taxable tribute payments to the local electric utility.
Stuff like that. You hippies just go ahead and get one going though, wouldja? We'll all pile in -after- TEOTWAKI and demand ice from yours.
Indian SPR
5 million metric tonnes equals about 33 million barrels (if I have my conversions right).
If they fill these up over 2 years, slightly less than 50,000 b/day. A drop in the bucket in world demand.
But added to additions of US and Chinese SPRs (plus whoever else), it is additional demand that will affect markets.
Fortunately, SPR is "green demand". Move oil from one hole in the ground to another instead of burning it all :-)
Take oil from "Hubbert's Peak" and use it (hopefully) far down the downslope.
Best Hopes,
Alan
Conspiracy what conspiracy?
CIA to reveal decades of misdeeds
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6229750.stm
The US Central Intelligence Agency is to declassify hundreds of documents detailing some of the agency's worst illegal abuses from the 1950s to 1970s.
Sorry if this has already been hashed but it just pisses me off to no end.
At least I have a MSM link to show my peeps who say I'm nuts.
I saw that on google news this morning. Kind of strange to be releasing their list of misdeeds now.
There had to have been some extraordinary back room politics for this to occur. I'd love to know the motivation behind it.
Sort of remindes me of when Rumsfeld announced that the pentagon lost 2.3 trillion dollars...
on Sept. 10 2001
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/01/29/eveningnews/main325985.shtml
Timing is everything.
i think the ministry of truth deleted the article. i only get an error message.
Sadly it's a attempt to hide the bigger skeletons in their closet by taking out some of the smaller ones.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,462976,00.html
A good example of what they did NOT include.
My time in the federal bureaucracy has taught me that when something like this comes out, it is for one of the following reasons:
1)Everyone already knows and it looks silly to continue denying. Especially if you were not involved with the original cover up.
2)This is an attempt by bureaucrat 1, to embarrass bureaucrat 2, during a power struggle.
3)Distract the public with a pretty pony, while doing something even worse.
4)The last official act of a “short timer”. Someone who is about to resign or retire decides to toss a monkey wrench into the works before walking out the front door.
Of course it could be “all of the above”.
Not sure whether posted yet but Lehmans have raised their oil price target (citing factors often discussed here):
Lehman Raises Oil Price Forecast on Lower Supplies, High Demand
By Eduard Gismatullin
June 22 (Bloomberg) -- Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. raised its forecast for average Brent crude oil prices this year 3.7 percent because of limits in supply growth.
The fourth-biggest U.S. securities firm increased its estimate for 2007 Brent oil prices to $70 a barrel from $67.50. Oil will average $75 a barrel in 2008, up from the previous forecast of $72, Edward Morse, Lehman's New York-based chief energy economist, said today in an e-mailed report.
``Disappointing non-OPEC supplies, OPEC's refusal to increase output, and rising product demand are tightening markets,'' Morse and colleagues Adam Robinson and Michael Waldron said in the report.
The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, which pumps about 40 percent of the world's oil, last year agreed to cut crude supplies by 1.7 million barrels a day to maintain oil prices around $60 a barrel.
May oil production in Norway, the world's fifth-largest exporter, slid 7.4 percent from a month earlier to an average 2.2 million barrels a day.
This is not the full piece, its from Bloomberg, sent on to me.
Well, this could suck:
Rising sea levels could divide and conquer Antarctic ice
Hello Leanan,
Recall my long ago speculative posting on what a volcano could do to the WAIS if it erupted in the subsea rift of the Bentley Trench.
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
So, Leanan, does this mean that location, location, location no longer includes waterfront property? It will be interesting to see how big insurance deals with this one...he said, as he stirred the contents of the garage looking for his water wings.
Another excellent piece from the UK independent on the inter-relationship between food, fuel and inflation (and thus asset prices):
http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/article2697804.ece
The Law of Receeding Horizons applies not only to new projects, but to current activities. Where each of us in the top-dog world has something like 20 or 30 full-time energy slaves keeping us happy, as they get more expensive, the price of everything will increase. TSHTF not so much when they get more expensive, but when the 20 or 30 becomes something like 10 or 20. Then we have a discontinuity and it's not at all clear that the system will degrade "gracefully", eg people might not have the gas to drive around to find food not everywhere in supply so they will have to walk over to the neighbors to take it.
Pets will go missing.
cfm in Gray, ME
glad my two cats are indoor only.
Though i do not have a dog for a 'emergency food supply'
I wonder who will get that.
Worth remembering though that we pay far less as a fraction of our incomes for basic essentials like food and electricity than we did 30 or 40 years ago, and everyone survived just fine back then. On the other hand, it's pretty clear that a significant percentage of us these days are living beyond our means, with record household debt levels etc. (and I put my own hand up as a guilty party - we're only just starting to dig our way out of at least a few years of rash overspending). Still, increasing interest rates will hurt families financially more than rising food or energy prices - there's no way to cut back on mortgage payments.
Worth remembering though that we pay far less as a fraction of our incomes for basic essentials like food and electricity than we did 30 or 40 years ago, and everyone survived just fine back then.
True, but most of us are also paying far, far more for basic almost-essentials like medicine, education and required insurances (auto & home).
Perhaps in the US, but you still get perfectly good medicine and education essentially for free here (Australia). Insurance is...well...arguably optional.
Mortgages are what have eaten up most people's budgets.
...and taxes for those that live in Florida...
Occidental Subcontractor Killed, Seven Hurt in Yemen
Your oil news segments are getting a little more serious sounding here lately. Agree?
Not really. It's always been bad, as Billy Joel noted.
We didn't start the fire
It was always burning
Since the world's been turning
We didn't start the fire
But when we are gone
Will it still burn on, and on, and on, and on...
Leanan, did you post this one already?
Lehman Raises Oil Price Forecast on Lower Supplies, High Demand
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601072&sid=aDYLArXEPRfI&refer=e...
[my emphasis added]
[subliminal whisper] "c'mon...just say it...peak oil..."
Someone else posted that this morning, but didn't have a link. I went looking for one, but there wasn't one yet.
It is an interesting story.
http://www.upstreamonline.com/market_data/?id=markets_crude
Interesting that louisiana sweet continues to rise faster than wti, even as asian prices are falling. Maybe most us refiners, excepting those around cushing, continue to want more crude even as storage remains high and refiner output low... some seem to be thinking crude might be hard to get by and by. Wonder what this lot thinks about po...
Did anyone listen to the radio program " Coast to Coast " saturday night? Art Bell had a guest on who went by the name of Matt, and the topic was peak oil. Everything we consider here at TOD was clearly put forth. Do we know who this "Matt" is? Who ever it is, well done!
His name is Matt Savinar. He runs the site lifeaftertheoilcrash.net. The link is available to the right under Peak Oil Primers.
He used to post here under the Alphamaleprophetofdoom, but now posts under the name of TheChimpWhoCanDrive, or something like that.
Which of the 5 hours ?
http://www.coasttocoastam.com/shows/
See a replay of last nights show.
Alan
Just found out that it is $6.95 :-(
Are you kidding?
Look at the last story I posted up top (the one at the bottom of the list).
That was Matt Savinar, the guy who runs LATOC. He posts here sometimes under the names Alpha Male Prophet of Doom and The Chimp Who Can Drive, among others.
Hello TODers,
http://www.centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/stories/001/?ID=5504
--------------------------
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Saturday declared a state of emergency in Kings County due to drought conditions.
The governor says the situation in Kings County shows “how precarious California's water infrastructure is.”
And tougher times may be ahead, he says.
“The decreasing Sierra Nevada snow pack and declining conditions in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, combined with our rising population, will make it increasingly more difficult to maintain adequate water supplies in California,” the governor says.
--------------------------------
For those who don't know the Southwest's history, and for those that need to understand the degree of the SW's Overshoot: this county used to be almost totally covered by the largest freshwater lake west of the Great Lakes called Tulare Lake [570 sq. miles in 1849 or roughly 24 miles x 24 miles], and much more marshland.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kings_County,_California
------------------------------
Kings County is a county located in the Central Valley of the U.S. state of California, southeast of Fresno County. It is located in a rich agricultural region.
-------------------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulare_Lake
----------------------------------------
Tulare Lake is an extinct fresh-water lake that was formerly the largest in the Western United States. During wet years it was the terminus of the western hemisphere's southernmost (Chinook) salmon run, and was written about by Mark Twain. The lake was named for tule, a giant species of bulrush that, once plentiful, lined the marshes and sloughs of its shores.
The lake was "reclaimed" (emptied and dried up) over the course of a few decades as the Kaweah, Kern, Kings and Tule rivers, were diverted upstream and canals were built to drain the lake. In fact, aggressive groundwater pumping since the draining of the lake has resulted in a significant lowering of the water table, causing subsidence of the land.
------------------------------
http://rubicon.water.ca.gov/v2/TLR.html
------------------------------
The valley floor overlies mostly one large ground water basin that consists of alluvial sediments. In the western half to three quarters, the Corcoran clay layer, which generally lies at depths of 300 to 900 feet, divides the ground water basin into two aquifers. South of the Kern River, the Corcoran horizon drops below well depths but other clay layers provide some confinement. On the eastern side of the valley, both north and south of the Kern County line, older formations are tapped by wells that usually exceed 2,000 feet in depth.
-------------------------------
Amazing! From a huge lake to now over 2,000 ft down to get aquifer water when the rainfall and long distance canals are inadequate.
Aquifers are almost like an oil reservoir: basically finite in human lifescale timespans.
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
I thought they drank carrot juice.