[JohnDenver]

Another misconception which needs to be cleared up is that coal, natural gas and nuclear are not suitable transport fuels.

Coal is an excellent transport fuel. In fact, it was the ONLY transport fuel for many decades. Locomotives and ships can run on coal, no problem.

Natural gas is also a good transport fuel. Taxi fleets and buses run on natural gas throughout the world.

Nuclear too is transport fuel. Nuclear submarines, aircraft carriers and the French train system show how nuclear can be used to move people/things around.

Clearly, there is going to be some serious retooling involved, particularly in backwaters like the U.S. which are behind the times. But the main point stands: we're not running out of transport fuel any time soon.

But what about the private automobile and private motoring? Well... my thinking is that we should just take it out back like the sick horse it is, and put a bullet in its head.

[Raxozanne]

But what about the private automobile and private motoring? Well... my thinking is that we should just take it out back like the sick horse it is, and put a bullet in its head.

That is the main type of transportation taking place today. Everyone gets in a car to go to the supermarket/ take their kids to school/ go to work.

[JohnDenver]

But what about the private automobile and private motoring? Well... my thinking is that we should just take it out back like the sick horse it is, and put a bullet in its head.

That is the main type of transportation taking place today. Everyone gets in a car to go to the supermarket/ take their kids to school/ go to work.

Not everyone. Most of the 6+ billion people living in the world today do not own a car. I personally don't own one, and I enjoy a very high standard of living. There's really no reason why people need to have a car, except that they got hornswaggled by greedy corporate interests into communities designed to maximize car/gasoline consumption. Private cars are a lot like cigarettes -- a completely unnecessary addiction which is brainwashed into people with slick advertising appealing to vanity and the emotions.

[JohnDenver]

who pays you to be such a cheerleader for this crap nation we built? The Hudson Institute. The Cato Institute?

You got it backwards pete. The people disagreeing with me are the boneheads who buy into the oil/car/developer industry propaganda that cars are actually a necessity. Anybody who believes the U.S. actually needs 20 million barrels of oil a day is already a toady of corporate interests. Those people might as well be working for Exxon and GM.

[Googolplex]

But what about the private automobile and private motoring? Well... my thinking is that we should just take it out back like the sick horse it is, and put a bullet in its head.

Exactly. All those people saying that those fuels are not suitable for transport are OBVIOUSLY talking about personal cars! Even nuclear has been used for transport by the military for decades!

Don't escalate a misunderstanding into a flame war people. Hes only stating the obvious here.

Whats not clear is, who do you think you are disagreeing with JohnDenver?

[Doly]

John, you are essentially correct on this one. BUT there is a whole lot of cars in operation, many of them used to transport people from home to work. How are going to solve that one?

Also, how are you going to deal with the lorries/trucks used to transport all sorts of merchandise?

[Googolplex]

John, you are essentially correct on this one. BUT there is a whole lot of cars in operation, many of them used to transport people from home to work. How are going to solve that one?

Also, how are you going to deal with the lorries/trucks used to transport all sorts of merchandise?

Well now thats not fair. He never claimed to have all the answers.

[EDIT] And for that matter, are you claiming we HAVE to do somthing to keep all the trucks on the road? If so, how are YOU going to deal with the upkeep of all the millions of miles of roadway and the cost of building and mantaining those trucks?

[Raxozanne]

[EDIT] And for that matter, are you claiming we HAVE to do somthing to keep all the trucks on the road? If so, how are YOU going to deal with the upkeep of all the millions of miles of roadway and the cost of building and mantaining those trucks?

HEY IT was john denver who started this whole thread.
Im getting tired of this b******* that he sprouts about how transportation which is based entirely on oil at the moment will be fine and dandy when oil depletion kicks in. Are you living in some kind of dreamland Johndenver? Oh that's right we can all catch a TRAIN to the supermarkets and work in the future, no problem.

Yeah sure in the 3rd world countries alot of people live near where their food is produced but hey they are moving into cities now (just passed global 50% mark) and in our countries (england, america etc) out-of-town supermarkets is all people know.

[Googolplex]

HEY IT was john denver who started this whole thread. Im getting tired of this b******* that he sprouts about how transportation which is based entirely on oil at the moment will be fine and dandy when oil depletion kicks in. Are you living in some kind of dreamland Johndenver? Oh that's right we can all catch a TRAIN to the supermarkets and work in the future, no problem.

I suspect most would walk or bike actually. I don't know what he may have said in past threads, but in this one, he never said that transportation would be fine and dandy that I can tell, and in fact specifically states that personal vehical transportation has to go. Oh, and what makes you think that people will even be ABLE to have jobs and shop at supermarkets that are as far away as they are now?

Yeah sure in the 3rd world countries alot of people live near where their food is produced but hey they are moving into cities now (just passed global 50% mark) and in our countries (england, america etc) out-of-town supermarkets is all people know.

Yep, and alot of people are going to feel alot of pain because of it. Sucks to be us.

And now to you Raxozanne: whom do you think you are disagreeing with?

[Raxozanne]

I am disagreeing with the concept that 'no one really needs a car' by John Denver and that private car use can just be taken out and 'shot in the head like the sick horse that it is'. Because actually I believe that quite a few people in this modern society need cars to get to work/supermarket.

Look I'll even quote it from what was written above.

There's really no reason why people need to have a car, except that they got hornswaggled by greedy corporate interests into communities designed to maximize car/gasoline consumption.

Therefore I conclude that I am disagreeing with John Denver.

[Wildwell]

John, you are essentially correct on this one. BUT there is a whole lot of cars in operation, many of them used to transport people from home to work. How are going to solve that one?

Also, how are you going to deal with the lorries/trucks used to transport all sorts of merchandise?

Move closer to work, transport goods to ralheads and move less of them about IE Globalisation in reverse.

Good post John. For me, Peak oil is mostly about the car culture (yes I know a lot disagree). I reckon cars will be looked back upon in the future as one of the worst inventions ever created and Jeremy Clarkson and Henry Ford will be seen as villains and not Heroes for promoting and basing our society of one of the most unsustainable inventions of all.

How could these people be so stupid to base their entire economies on the need to get around so much and create so much shit and pollution? The stories will go.. Rather like we look back on certain things now as being rather silly.

[Wildwell]

I am disagreeing with the concept that 'no one really needs a car' by John Denver and that private car use can just be taken out and 'shot in the head like the sick horse that it is'. Because actually I believe that quite a few people in this modern society need cars to get to work/supermarket.

Look I'll even quote it from what was written above.

There's really no reason why people need to have a car, except that they got hornswaggled by greedy corporate interests into communities designed to maximize car/gasoline consumption.

Therefore I conclude that I am disagreeing with John Denver.

You don't need a car in anywhere but the most remote parts of the country (UK). I live in rural England a walk, bus, train everywhere. Therefore I conclude he is right.

What used to happen before cars is the shops were all in the high steet and people used to bike, walk or take a tram or trolley bus there. Most women stopped at home and looked after the children – stopping them from becoming spoilt little brats – and didn’t have half the labour saving devices they have now, so there’s wasn’t much choice in that. Cars and labour saving devices essentially allowed many women to work, although frankly most of that second income is used for the purchase, running and maintenance of cars.

[Googolplex]

I am disagreeing with the concept that 'no one really needs a car' by John Denver and that private car use can just be taken out and 'shot in the head like the sick horse that it is'. Because actually I believe that quite a few people in this modern society need cars to get to work/supermarket.

Look I'll even quote it from what was written above.

There's really no reason why people need to have a car, except that they got hornswaggled by greedy corporate interests into communities designed to maximize car/gasoline consumption.

Therefore I conclude that I am disagreeing with John Denver.

Ok, I see.

Id have to disagree with you on this subject though. If cars are truly a 'need' for these people, then peak oil would result in them no longer being capable of working or getting food. What about jobs closer to home? What about gardens and small local markets? It seems to me that cars, and jobs far from home, and large regional supermarkets are all luxuries, not needs. Luxuries we can no longer afford.

[Raxozanne]

This is the whole point over and over again.

yes we can work and eat without oil

but the big question I suppose that is hashed and rehased by all this is that:

Will the prices rise so suddenly that the present infrastructure will just collapse causing chaos?

Or will there be enough time to change the infrastructure in a progressive way?

Well, the oil depletion experts are calling on governments to recognise the problem of peak oil and therefore plan a strategy of decline, sustainability and relocalisation in line with oil depletion.

But here is the problem: Governments do not seem what to recognise peak oil or are going by USGS figures of a peak in oil in 2030.

Therefore what we really need is a large detailed audit on how much oil we have left which is why we need to get someone in to audit OPEC. Hopefully OPEC will let someone in soon.

In this way a definite date can be given to peak oil, government will be forced to face facts and societies will have a better chance of pulling through without trouble.

[Wildwell]

Well yes and thankfully Matt Simmons is doing good work out that.

Do we trust those in the Middle east? Probably not.

PO is a nettle that needs to be grasped and the sooner the better. No more pretending.

[Googolplex]

This is the whole point over and over again.

yes we can work and eat without oil

but the big question I suppose that is hashed and rehased by all this is that:

Will the prices rise so suddenly that the present infrastructure will just collapse causing chaos?

Or will there be enough time to change the infrastructure in a progressive way?

Possibly.

Probably not.

Well, the oil depletion experts are calling on governments to recognise the problem of peak oil and therefore plan a strategy of decline, sustainability and relocalisation in line with oil depletion.

But here is the problem: Governments do not seem what to recognise peak oil or are going by USGS figures of a peak in oil in 2030.

Therefore what we really need is a large detailed audit on how much oil we have left which is why we need to get someone in to audit OPEC. Hopefully OPEC will let someone in soon.

In this way a definite date can be given to peak oil, government will be forced to face facts and societies will have a better chance of pulling through without trouble.

I agree.

What does all this have to do with what we were discussing in this thread? Lets try to keep things on topic. This thread represents a specific topic of discussion (coal, gas, and nuclear as transport fuels) in a specific section (Energy Technology) in the Peak Oil forums. Your post doesn't even fit in this section, much less pertain to this thread. Probably belongs in the Basics or Peak Oil Discussion sections.

[Raxozanne]

No this thread belongs to us now Googolplex, mwhahahaha

[Googolplex]

:-D

No this thread belongs to us now Googolplex, mwhahahaha

What a handy way to dodge the fact that you also happened to agree with me and JohnDenver about people not actually needing cars...

yes we can work and eat without oil

...despite earlier claiming that they did.

[Raxozanne]

No we don't need oil for food and work because believe it or not many people got by for many thousands of years without it. THAT IS FRIGGING OBVIOUS.

What I am saying is that many people IN THIS SOCIETY CURRENTLY need cars and private transportation to get them to work and to get them to the supermarket.

In fact my friend who works in the Job centre said that most people were claiming because they didn't have a car to get to where the work was.

If this infrastruction were to collapse suddenly then people would be overwhelmed leading to problems.

NOW STOP TWISTING WHAT I SAY AND PISS OFF