Squanderland vs Thriftville

MonteQuest · Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2005 11:42 pm Post subject: Squanderland vs Thriftville

This is from a blog of mine that I didn't post here yet. Thought it might stimulate some discussion. Edited for current events.

Squanderland vs Thriftville

In the post-peak world, I see too distinct camps of thought: Those who want to consume as before, and those who wish to find stability. The first group will be the capitalist/economist type, forever-looking for new ways to exploit the environment based upon the economic mindset of supply/demand. They are always quick to adopt solutions that are brilliantly successful and perhaps understandable in the short run, but that fail or else create fatal problems in the long run, i.e., the current plethora of ills.

The second group will consist of those who realized that it was the mindset of the first group who got them to post-peak, although they had little choice as to whether or not to participate, and most did not know it was a path that led down a dark one-way alley.

You can solve most problems with enough money, energy, raw materials, and time, but you cannot solve an energy crisis by using more energy, more materials, and less time. This is what the cornucopians believe.

Energy is a unique commodity. It takes energy to do anything. And since you can’t create it, or destroy it, you had better make good use of it when you transform it from one form to another, as you are going to lose some of it in the process.

If we can have $60 a barrel of oil on the speculation of a shortage, imagine then what the price of a barrel might be when we do have real shortages. Shocked

Since we have done little to nil to prepare for the coming oil shocks, we are completely reliant on increasing our supply of oil to power all of our transport needs, our food production, our manufacturing of goods and 40% of our total energy needs.

I keep coming back to a question that appears to be tugging at more minds, and with more urgency, every day: What if the die has already been cast? Suppose for a moment that we have passed the point of no return, and that some form of collapse is now already in the cards. Nothing new, you say. But I look at this in a way few have considered: As the reality of oil depletion goes mainstream, the direct use of available oil resources for energy consumption may well take precedence over their indirect use to produce another form of energy, whether it be wind or nano-technology, especially if the ROI is a distant reality. And, of course, a fascist government could ration what we can have, so they have enough to wage war to get more.

Or this: The Islamic fundamentalists are becoming savvy to the notion that if you want to hit America or the West, you go after the oil, which, of course, is right in their backyard. The market today cannot sustain any loss of production or supply. Some have likened this new terrorism to a “shadow OPEC.” The control of oil doesn't rest in the hands of the OPEC or the free market, but in the hands of the guerrillas who can stop the flow—and knock the needle out of the junkie’s hands.

Anybody ever seen a junkie in need of a fix?

Authors note: My title was inspired by an article by Warren Buffet, entitled, The Mercantilist’s Tale. Well worth googling.
_________________
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
Live in Arizona? Check out: http://sustainablearizona.org and read my blog.

I_Like_Plants · Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2005 11:47 pm Post subject:

Hitting 'em in the oil can is how the Nazis and the Japanese were beat in WWII, and depriving the enemy of resources is as old as warefare itself.

I like that idea, the terrorists at a shadow OPEC, since they may have at least as much say in oil prices as the more respectable terrorists manning the pumps over there.

I got rid of my car, something about 1% of Americans are willing to do, it will take knocking the needle out of the junkie's hands indeed.

dissimulo · Heavy Crude Joined: Jun 01, 2005 Posts: 371

Indeed, I am shocked every time terrorists hit something other than an oil production facility. It has convinced me that they are not the evil geniuses that some would have us believe. Just a few well placed, well timed attacks might be able to completely unravel the weak US economy. We can weather a very large number of attacks on civilians, in comparison.

I have little doubt that energy resources will be used to maintain the status quo, rather than truly prepare for a low energy age. We are expecting people (largely ignorant people) to give up an entire way of life. This many generations into the industrial age, most people cannot comprehend a path backward.

I_Like_Plants · Posted: Wed Jul 13, 2005 1:31 am Post subject:

Good point!!

Pardon my French but what the [expletive] is blowing up trains and subways supposed to do? All that will do is harden the resolve against the terrorists.

Hitting pipeline and oil facilities will actually hurt more people and it will bring about understanding: That it is not our oil under their sand, it's their oil under their sand, and they can sell it or not how they choose, and we're a bunch of sniveling junkies if we allow ourselves to be dependent on it.

(edited for profanity- KiddieKorral)

pilferage · Posted: Wed Jul 13, 2005 1:39 am Post subject:

Well, given how much energy we can get from fission, I don't think energy itself will be a problem. However, I do think that we'll see quite a bit of crap hit the fan simply because this is an opportunity for quite a few entities to consolidate power.

Sure, almost everyone can buy a bicycle (the average automobile speed in the US is 32mph, about twice that of your average bicyclist, and maybe 5mph more than a velomobilist), learn how to garden (I'd wager that the grey water we pump back into the sewer/septic is enough to grow half of our own food... provided we got off our asses), and stop buying useless crap(self explanitory). But why would the government/industrial complexes want that? If anything they'll try to extend their influence in some areas and maintain the status quo in others during a transition like this.

In terms of percentage wealth I'd wager that we're poorer compared to the 'wealthy elite' than peasants were compared to their kings and emperors...
It's all about power and it always has been.
_________________
"Humankind cannot gain anything without first giving something in return. To obtain, something of equal value must be lost. "

Jack · Dark Lord Joined: Aug 11, 2004 Posts: 4957

I'm in the die already cast camp. In fact, the die had already been cast in 1980, and perhaps before - as the green revolution increased the numbers of humans, it created the certainty that the problem would occur.

Conservation might have delayed it; but as the numbers went above sustainability, the entire world become hostage to its energy addiction. As Catton points out in "Overshoot", we are detrivores; and the available debris we consume (oil) is in limited supply.

As for direct consumption receiving emphasis - absolutely. Only a very few countries can keep their people starving and freezing in the dark without a rebellion - North Korea seems to be one case in point. The rest subscribe to the Roman dictum, "Vox populi, vox Dei."

We are in for some interesting times.
_________________
Dieoff. Fun to watch. Better with hot buttered popcorn! new_popcornsmiley

Roy · Posted: Wed Jul 13, 2005 7:27 am Post subject:

Die already cast? Check.

Want proof? Notice the reaction of the party in power, and their supporters (supposedly a majorithy of Americans if you believe the last election was legitimate. The whole exit poll thing really raises questions in my mind but that's another thread) when any mention or suggestion is made to reduce the use of fossil fuels.

They view it as a liberal conspiracy to destroy the American way of life. Well no crap. Just where is that way of life leading the American people and the human race? Its clear to us here that its nowhere good.

They'll tell you that global warming is junk science and use Michael Crichton's latest novel as the undeniable proof. Uhhh. I like Crichton's past work, including Sphere, Eaters of the Dead, and the Jurassic Park series.

However, when a college educated, moderately wealthy, "successful" individual touts a FICTION book as a valid debunking of global warming I get really discouraged. Crichton is a good writer and no doubt an intelligent man, but when did he become an expert in climatology?

Answer: he didn't. I'm thinking he's more like an Armstrong Williams than anything else.

Yep, die already cast. Hold on to your hats folks, this is gonna be a rough ride! Denial and blame gaming will go on until the bitter end.

CARVER · Posted: Wed Jul 13, 2005 8:33 am Post subject:

TheTurtle · Posted: Wed Jul 13, 2005 8:51 am Post subject:

You continue to be a breath of fresh air, MonteQuest. Lately the forum seems overun with cornucopians ... almost to the point of being unreadable. Your post reminds me why I first started coming here.

Thanks. Smile

_________________
“Humankind has not woven the web of life. We are but one thread within it. Whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves.” (Ted Perry)

Cyrus · Intermediate Crude Joined: Jan 25, 2005 Posts: 607

TheTurtle · Posted: Wed Jul 13, 2005 9:46 am Post subject:

AirlinePilot · Posted: Wed Jul 13, 2005 11:00 am Post subject:

I believe it was last night on coast to coast, Goerge had a terrorist expert on and I only caught the tail end of the program. They were discussing the use of nukes. Basically he agreed that it was not a question of If but when. Personally I believe they could be holding this one in the wings for the reason mentioned above. One even carelessly placed nuke in Saudi Arabia would probably bring the world to it's knees. Even if it isn't nuclear, the right weapons at the right times could bring a terrible cascade of events on the globe if oil producing infrastructure is targeted.

I'm still not sure why they haven't tried it, I don't think they are geniuses, but they are intelligent. They may not be quite aware of Peak Oil yet either. Once PO goes really mainstream (I mean REALLY) then it will be time to worry about terrorist acts against oil and refinery infrastructure.

Leanan · News Editor Joined: May 20, 2004 Posts: 4447

linlithgowoil · Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 4:44 am Post subject:

Maybe the reason the terrorists haven't attacked oil production is because they know that would bring the world to its knees and, in fact, they actually quite like the way they world is. They are hypocrites as far as I can tell. They rage against the west etc., and yet they all LIVE in the west, enjoying cheap goods and energy and mcdonalds etc. Its very funny really.

The terrorists probably don’t want to blow up the oil wells because when it comes down to it, they want things to continue as they are.

If things were all sorted out tomorrow – i.e. Palestine, middle east in general, America stopped the war on terror, etc. etc. etc., the terrorists would be totally pissed off. They ENJOY things the way they are because they like moaning about them. Some people are just born moaning bastards.

I refuse to believe it is difficult to bomb Saudi oil infrastructure. Bombing a few pipes in the middle of a desert… how can that be hard?

Ludi · Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 6:51 am Post subject: