How did this all happen anyway??

she · Coal Joined: May 24, 2008 Posts: 1

Hello,

I am new here--great site.

Can someone tell me when the USA became so dependent on foreign oil? Was it around the same time that exploration here was stopped?? Was it in the 90's ?????

Who was the pres. then??

Bas

Carter took the problem of depleting oil reserves seriously, but all good intentions were quickly forgotten under Reagan, especially when the price of oil started dropping again in the mid 80's
_________________
"The best thing about the future is that it comes only one day at a time."

- Abraham Lincoln

Pops

I'm not sure who to respond to:

Ibon [ 180 Posts ] Search
sicophiliac [ 38 Posts ] Search
erl [ 4 Posts ] Search
she [ 1 Post ]

Can you help me figure out to whom I should address my reply?
_________________
Make a plan and work it:

BigTex

Pretty slick Pops.

cachas

_________________
Smile

HEADER_RACK · Heavy Crude Joined: Feb 15, 2007 Posts: 427

Kinda blows that "I'm new here" right out the water
_________________
There will come a day when we would have wished to do a little evil for a greater good.

kokoda · Heavy Crude Joined: Aug 24, 2006 Posts: 417

The_Toecutter · Light Sweet Crude Joined: Jun 18, 2005 Posts: 1727

How did we get here?

First, keep the following in mind:
-Our economy relies upon more growth and spending to prosper and has been such for the last 100 years.
-Any solutions to our problems that involve reducing spending by consumers or reducing tax burdens are frowned upon by business and government who are eagre to maximize revenues towards them.
-Our legislation has ben manipulated to accomodate the above two phenomena in our society.
-Most of this growth has not benefited the average person, but instead the super rich. Since the 1970s, productivity per capita in the U.S. has doubled, but real wages adjusted for inflation have decreased. It now takes families with two parents working to have the same living standard as a family in the 1960s with a single parent working. Worldwide, the top 1% richest now own 40% of the world's wealth and account for over 30% of the world's resource consumption. The bottom 90% accounts for less than 30% of the world's resource consumption and still includes half the world's middle class and many Americans.

-Know the following facts:
-Automobiles account for over 40% of US oil consumption just for their fuel. Their manufacture is considerably less, and roads about 1% of US oil consumption. It takes about 12 barrels of oil to make a car.
-Air travel in jumbo jets accounts for about 12% of U.S. oil consumption.
-The U.S. military alone consumes more oil than does the entire nation of Greece.

Now understand the following pieces of history in the U.S.:
-Car ownership in the U.S. had plateaued at about 1 car for every 3 persons of driving age in the 1920s because most people didn't need cars. The U.S. had the greatest mass transit system in the world; you could hop on a trolley in the suburbs and go anywhere within your metropolitan area cheaply and conveniently without the costly burdenb of car ownership. Then the depression came, and the oil and auto industry wanted to make money and the U.S. government was wanting Americans to spend more to help re-grow the economy. Solution? The govenrment allowed big oil and big auto to buy up all the mass transit and tear it down to force Americans into auto reliance during the 1940s. This combined with penalizing city dwellers and subsidizing the suburbs post world war two and issuing a propaganda campaign to coerce Americans into buying the 'American Dream' encouraged mass sprawl. Now today, there is more than 1 car for each driving age person in the U.S. and transportation is difficult in most areas without a car and impossible in many areas without it.

-During the 1930s, industrial hemp became viable for replacing crude oil for many applications such as petrochemicals, medicines, textiles, and paper. Many industries lobbied to get the war on drugs started to preserve their interests, and since then you can be arrested for growing it in the U.S. It is one of the few biofuels that can be cultivated in the U.S. without destroying soil, with a positive EROEI, no fossil fuel inputs or pesticides needed, and can even be cultivated feral. Henry Foird even built a Model A sedan that was hemp and wheatstraw bodied, 1/3 the weight of steel, and 10 times as dent resistant. Biodiesel can be made from hemp for the equivalent of $0.60/gallon and today hemp can sustainably replace perhaps 10-20% of US oil consumption, which would be far more than any other biofuel.

-Wanting to grow the economy, the U.S. has perpetually been at was since WWII and has been pumping as much money into the military as possible. This consumes large amounts of oil, but helps grow the economy more. Defense industry lobbyists do not want this to end and have had far more say on this issue than the American people have ever had.

-When the 1970s fuel crisis came, the auto industry had demonstrated prototype cars that could achieve 60+ mpg with no compromises to the consumer and no or little cost penalty. They never built them and refused to build them(See Volvo LCP 2000, Renault EVE+, Peugeot VERA+, Renault VESTA II, ect.).

-Jimmy Carter wanted to do something about this(such as eliminating America's foreign oil dependence, ending the war on drugs, ect.), but during the 1980 elections, Reagan and his associates arranged a deal with the Iran terrorists to hold the hostages longer than they would have otherwise been held. This exacerbated the hostage crisis, but ensured a Reagan victory in 1980 once Americans associated the crisis with the Carter administration. He took Carter's solar panels off of the white house, got on good terms with middle east dictators, even helped finance oil industry campaigns to rob land from African villagers so oil could be drilled on it by Shell and Chevron, and the oil crisis of the 70s/early 80s ended and the U.S. came to import 65% of its oil today. This grew the economy a huge amount. The super rich got the majority of growth while living standards for the average person continued to deteriorate.

-In the late 1970s, small automakers were starting to become competitive because they were offering products consumers wanted. The big three were rapidly losing market share, and lobbied the government to enact all of the necessary regulations to make it impossible to compete. This and subsequent Reagan-era 'voluntary' import tariffs not only doubled the cost of cars in the US(foreign cars went way up in price and the US automakers then raised theirs), but created market barriers so huge that today over $400 million is needed to mass produce a car in the US; mass production is needed for cost to be competitive. This has since kept small businesses from selling affordable, no-compromise, super-efficient cars and electric cars.

-During the late 1980s, electric vehicles became viable for 100 miles range, 0-60 mph < 13 seconds, 80+ mph top speed, in volume same cost as gas cars, and could have achieved consumer acceptance in the U.S. in volume for a few hundred thousand cars per year. The auto industry refused to touch the technology, and even used hired muscle to intimidate people who were demonstrating prototypes. The U.S. government even confiscated a prototype called the EXAR-1 from one company just before it was to be shipped to China for replacation and production.

-Sugarcane ethanol from Brazil has been confirmed to work with an EROEI > 4 and capability to produce ethanol for under $2.00/gallon. While not without its drawbacks, it is relatively gentle on soil(compared to corn). Fearing competition, the corn industry and oil industry lobied the government to tariff foreign sugar products, and thus this product is not economically viable in the US because of this tariff. This could perhaps replace 1-2% of US oil consumption, small, but significant.

-During the mid 1990s, electric vehicles became viable for 150+ miles range, 0-60 mph < 9 seconds, 100+ mph top speed, if produced in volume lower cost than gas cars, sub 30 minute charge times with Aerovironment quick chargers, and could have achieved widespread consumer acceptance. The U.S. government, auto industry, and oil industry began to actively and vigilantly fight the adoption of this technology.

-During the 1990s, the U.S. government under Clinton gave the big 3 automakers hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to develop prototypes of 80 mpg midsize cars with no compromises in performance or utility or cost to the consumer. The big 3 developed the prototypes, and never had to sell a single one(See GM Precept, Ford Prodigy, Dodge ESX cars). UC Davis and other universities were demonstrating 35+ mpg full size SUVs. The major auto makers refuse to produce a car like this when they are fully capable of doing so.

-Every time a high speed electric rail proposal has been made, the airline industry has used their clout to prevent any such systems from ever being built in the U.S. We can't have consumers taking airplanes less and saving money now, can we? Meanwhile, the airline industry is now sucking taxpayer dollars to stay afloat.

-It is now the 2000s. We have the battery technology for EVs to exceed gasoline cars in every category imaginable except charge time and range, and even charging can be done in 10 minutes with fast chargers and ranges can exceed 300 miles per charge. The auto industry still refuses to build electric cars because they will save the consumer too much money, money which normally flows to the auto companies. We also have the technology for 80+ mpg midsize cars, 35+ mpg SUVs, 150+ mpg subcompacts, 90+ mpg sports cars without the consumer sacrificing a thing, but the auto industry still refuses(See Opel Eco speedster, Loremo AG, UC Davis Futuretruck, ect.).

-The auto industry has repeatedly requested government bailouts while it continues to produce guzzling vehicles that Americans don't want.

-Every time there has been even a minor oil crisis, instead of supporting alternatives to a meaningful degree, our government has consistently resorted to more war, as we have seen in both Gulf War I and II. War costs money and forces the American people to spend money through the tax system, while once alternatives are adopted in mass quantities, Americans will; save money.

When Americans complain, our government offers them solutions that don't work:
-Hydrogen fuel cells in mass production today would make a fuel cell car cost over $100,000. Well to wheels, H2 is about as efficient as gasoline, is currently derived mostly from crude oil, and even engineers from Toyota claim that in 20 years, it is optimistic that a fuel cell car could be mass produced for under $50,000. Fuel cell cars have traditionally been hard-pressed to achieve over 100 miles range(although can now do 250+ miles with 45 minute filling times to compress the H2), and their performance is very sluggish. Fuel cell membranes fail after 2,000 hours of their first operation. Meanwhile, electric vehicles have worked for decades, and in volume, would cost slightly less than gasoline cars. Hydrogen fueling infrastructure around the U.S. would exceed $1 trillion in cost and would keep Americans chained to the fuel pump. Auto lobbyists love this 'solution' because they can look like they are doing something without actually doing anything. The government loves this 'solution' because it is good PR and if it ever becomes viable 30 years from now they can keep extracting 'fuel taxes' from Americans.

-Corn ethanol has an EROEI < 1 according to a study by Gregory Pimentel of Cornell University, rapidly depletes soil, requires use of our food to manufacture, and costs more than gasoline to produce. But, ADM, Monsanto, and their ilk like this because it will allow massive adoption and subsidies of their products, payed for by Joe Taxpayer.

-Our government has in mind more war if the oil scarcity causes serious problems. More war will make more money, and if Americans are opposed, they have the PATRIOT Act, Homeland Security Department, and the like to round up dissenters if it comes to it; they'll make cheap labor. Meanwhile, our oil war in Iraq has failed because the Iraqis are very stubborn and willing to defend their country from an occupying force. The money wasted on this endeavour could have greatly helped America reduce its oil dependence, but was instead squandered lining the pockets of the defense industry. This resulted in more growth, going almost exclusively to the top 1% while today Americans are struggling.

How did this all happen? Follow the money. This was all preventable. Now we have a huge crisis on our hands, and there are a very few people who will make very large profits because of it, espedcially those within the oil industry. They do not want this to change.

We've been robbed of a future.
_________________
The unnecessary felling of a tree, perhaps the old growth of centuries, seems to me a crime little short of murder. ~Thomas Jefferson

pstarr

BigTex

eastbay

pstarr

BigTex

Toecutter, that was a great post. Thanks.

One line jumped out at me:

Bas

Aaron

Blacksmith

I remember reading Hubbert's theory in the seventies and when the oil crisis of the early seventies hit people started to pay attention. Of coarse then the North Slope came on stream, prices fell and we all looked like fools.
The only difference now is, there is no fall back, no magic pill, and people are now paying attention to the fools, but its too late.
Then again I guess when you really think about it, it was already too late, when Drake was discovered.
_________________
Appuis ait fabrum esse suae quemque fortunae.
Alias Redneck