But then, how would someone get from coast to coast? Right now the options in this future economy are not pretty. You could pay a premium for the traditional 6 hour flight. You could drive a car at a similar premium.
Let's say premiums get so high those options are out of consideration. How about rail? Right now, a coast-to-coast (NYC to SF) rail ticket is $137 with Amtrak. This is comparable to what it would cost to fly, assuming you book well in advance.
But of course, there's the issue of opportunity cost. The $137 Amtrak ticket gets you from NYC to SF in about three days. While certain people might not mind this if there's somewhere to plug in a laptop, the time factor is probably enough to put most people back on the plane, even with a high premium, especially if they have Monday meetings to make.
Two ways to increase the appeal of rail (and thus ease the transition) might be be to:
- make it faster; or
- reduce the opportunity cost involved. A plug at every seat would be a start; internet access would be a huge pull. Cheaper sleeper cars would also help, since part of the cost of a coach ticket is the possibility of bad sleep for three nights -- right now that NYC to SF ticket jumps to $739 for a sleeper car, but that does include meals for three days.
Comments
View as Flat
profgoose Posted 6:17 am
27 Jun 2005
However, don't we have to put those improvements in place PRIOR to petroleum getting expensive?
Oh, sorry...that would require a little foresight on the part of the PTB...my bad. :)
profgoose, The Oil Drum
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 11:13 pm
27 Jun 2005
Not to mention biofueled jet engines. and of course the oil in the tar sands, harvested and refined cleanly with wind powered electricity.
And then we have oil derived from coal, refined cleanly as well using wind and solar power.
By vastly reducing fossil fuel combustion in all other areas, air travel will have minimal impact on global climate problems.
Please try to view energy solutions as a comprehensive aproach across the board. As Nathan Therm said, "Maybe that would be more effective for you?"
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 5:20 pm
28 Jun 2005
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Help acquire and protect ecological hotspots, give to a conservation organization: http://www.saveourbiodiversity.com
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 11:02 pm
28 Jun 2005
Hehehey. Reading comprehension or mere delusion D?
It's a variation on that good old talking points horse and buggy or nukes false dilemna.
And of course a jet engine will never run on methanol converted from methane (derived from waste digestion) with wind electric power.
Permalink
jdhlax Posted 9:47 am
29 Jun 2005
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 2:42 am
01 Jul 2005
It is not either give up air travel ...or big oil ruling the energy supply of planet earth.
Planes can run on biofuel, and on the oil saved by going to plugin hybrids and electric cars powered by renewable electric power.
Seriously, does anyone think air travel will dissapear?
Permalink
jdhlax Posted 1:40 pm
02 Jul 2005
As I've said before on this site, humans must evolve mentally and spiritually to greatly reduce their desire for material things and to be willing to live in a simpler, more natural way. There are no magical solutions -- including biofuels, or wind or solar power -- to the problems caused by, for example, paving over the Earth for roads and runways. Those things would certainly be far less ecologically harmful, but they're still not natural. Industrial society is very far from being in harmony with life on this planet and it has to go!
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 3:51 am
03 Jul 2005
Half of our energy use, at least, is unecessary.
And living within the energy means of our planet would not only save us and all life as we know it, but also leave us al;l better off spiritually for the effort.
If you go too far, in prescribing a horse and buggy lifestyle for everyone, the poltical progress on environmental issues will cease, and the neoconmen will win every time.
You are falling right into their false dilemna trap jd. Either nukes, "clean" coal, and oil unlimited or...horse and buggy. it's a lie, just like that old WMD lie.
Remember Condi and her mushroom clouds? It was either invade iraq or mushroom clouds over the US.
Permalink
jdhlax Posted 11:30 am
05 Jul 2005
How can there be air travel, which is totally unnatural for humans, without hideously harmful things like extremely loud planes and earth-destroying runways and airports, even if some magically harmless fuel were found? I understand your point that we have to be careful what we say in public in order to not scare people away or turn them off, but this is supposed to be an enviro blog and I assume I'm interacting with fellow environmentalists, not the general public. Tactics and strategies aside, our goal should be a much lower human population that lives in harmony with the rest of the planet, whatever that requires.
If humans evolved enough mentally and spiritually, they wouldn't desire any of these environmentally harmful technologies. They'd be very happy to live relatively naturally and enjoy this fantastic planet. For a parable of what I mean, watch an episode from the first season of the original Star Trek series called "Errand of Mercy."
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 2:09 pm
05 Jul 2005
Get used to it, and work within these parameters.
Of course you personally can give all that up. It really is a path to enlightenement, enjoy!
But don't imagine the bulk of industrialized humanity will follow.
Given that reality, shamans are needed. To intercede with nature on behalf of humankind. To show the way to acomplishing symbiosis.
And certainly examples like you intend are very helpful in this effort.
I'm all for a discussion free of how it sounds to those who don't care, but I also want to show how the opposition is using the weaknesses we exhibit against us.
I saw another liberal, adamantly opposed to everything bushco inc. stands for, tout the hydrogen/nuclear economy on another forum today.
People are falling for these talking points. Saying air travel is just right out? Horse and buggy stuff.
I know that a design using wind and solar power of a lighter than aircraft that rises in the sun, and shrinks to a wing that glides at night sounds far fetched. It would have to be zepplenesque in size to work.
But give up flight? Impossible.
Permalink
jdhlax Posted 7:35 am
06 Jul 2005
Keep in mind that predictions are just that. There are virtually an infinite number of variables in life, so that no one can accurately predict the future. So, there is a chance that people will realize that they don't need or want to buzz around the Earth at unnaturally high speeds, leaving massive ecological destruction in their wake, and there's a chance that day could be tomorrow! If you don't work for something, there's no chance of achieving it.
Permalink