Comments odograph has made

no "additional" bailout?

Don't forget they got $25B in October.On Republicans refuse bailout; Obama wants auto czar posted 1 year ago 13 Responses

BTW

I can't believe you say "hydrogen."On Why taxes can't get us where we need to go on transportation posted 1 year ago 17 Responses

coal is essential?

what for?  the solar folks claim they can supply 90% of US electricity and the wind and geothermal folks make claim for much more than the remaining 10%On A real path to energy independence posted 1 year ago 31 Responses

ok

Maybe this page shows 300-400 MPGe for AVE 300 km/h trainset on Madrid-Seville lineOn A real path to energy independence posted 1 year ago 31 Responses

yikes!

Sudden thought ... building an electric train while we still import electricity from coal!On A real path to energy independence posted 1 year ago 31 Responses

Is it?

My memory of train efficiency and "seat-miles-per-gallon" is that the British rule, because they have slow trains running at high capacity.

If I'm going to drive you crazy, I'll ask you for those seat mpg for operating bullet trains ... I tried dredging wikipedia for real-world bullet trains results without success.

(Note that California is in budget crisis, and not in a position to do the merely "good."  There are lots of "good" things in this world.  We should on the other hand be spending  where we "must."  That is more arguable say, to eliminate our current imports of coal-generated electricity.)On A real path to energy independence posted 1 year ago 31 Responses

You scared me, man

Not because I think Gore (or Obama) is a bad guy, but because I think a moderate, centrist, beginning is vital.On Al Gore 'cannot yet reveal' his role in Obama's administration posted 1 year ago 3 Responses

lol

Good one, Dr.XOn Colbert on offshore drilling posted 1 year, 3 months ago 17 Responses

hippies

I have my bikes, and my Prius, wolvie.

I'm a realist though about how well basically hippie solutions are accepted.

But if you want some good news you can run with, bicycle fatalities are both low and falling further:

http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811017.PDF

I think one of the reasons those non-hippies don't ride is fear.

(BioD, you seemed to restate my efficiency goal ... no word on "alternatives to fossil fuels [] here, ready, and reliable"? On Colbert on offshore drilling posted 1 year, 3 months ago 17 Responses

BTW

This could also could be an endorsement of "just enough suburbia" ... enough for an intensive garden.On Can locavores embrace a truly place-based agriculture? posted 1 year, 4 months ago 14 Responses

inside baseball

I think the interesting thing about McCain's rightward tilts is what they say about his options.  It is late to be shoring up the base.  It is late to be defining yourself as more conservative than the middle.

Normally, the first thing a candidate does after winning an nomination is to immediately pretend to be the moderate's moderate.  He normally begins wooing voters from the other side.

So, either he feels he is in danger of losing the right, or he's afraid they'll sit this election out ... and maybe he thinks the moderates are in Obama's boat already.

Though, some nationwide polls have been a bit disturbing, from the standpoint of what I think should be moderate in 2008.On McCain adviser Forbes suggests candidate will dump cap-and-trade plan posted 1 year, 4 months ago 4 Responses

photo

Benxi: Pollution from steel mills blows over residential buildingsOn No easy explanation for continued price increases in the oil markets posted 1 year, 4 months ago 48 Responses

ye gods!

"China has been a continuous civilization for more than 4000 years, for example. The Chinese culture must have learned something about sustainability (too bad they're forgetting it now in the attempt to imitate the US)."

I'd take recent Chinese (and Soviet) history as proof that industrial communism destroys nature even better than industrial capitalism.

To hammer China's plight in a backhanded attack on OUR culture is absurd.

(I take the general "Blank Slate" position, the book not the literal meaning, that cultures vary but along lines generally bounded by "human nature."  A reasonable and moderate recognition of what really is human nature ... that's the tricky bit.)On No easy explanation for continued price increases in the oil markets posted 1 year, 4 months ago 48 Responses

cool(2)

"I'm going to be publishing this week some looks at the question you are asking"

Bad ol' me, I'm flying to Alaska tomorrow.  To arrive at the Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport galls me no end, but I have been to carbonfund.org

I'll look it up when I get back.On More than half of today's electricity, more than 16 percent of today's energy posted 1 year, 4 months ago 74 Responses

added expense

So has anyone run the numbers?

With current technology what would it cost to replace SoCal's coal use (SCE consistently "predicts" < 10% of total, but then "uses" > 30%, see bottom right, page 2 of PDF) with rooftop solar, and then with desert solar?

I mean, you say "it might be worth the added expense just because of the "tactile", personal aspect" ... but what are we talking about as a premium? 10% 100%?On More than half of today's electricity, more than 16 percent of today's energy posted 1 year, 4 months ago 74 Responses

BTW

Very nice that you were there earlier with the numbers.On More than half of today's electricity, more than 16 percent of today's energy posted 1 year, 4 months ago 74 Responses

skeptical

I'm still skeptical about homeowner solar as a broad solution.  Yes, it is great when a dedicated greenie buys in, places the panels carefully, monitors their output, cleans them as soon as needed, etc.

But the average homeowner?  My gut says a managed corporate solar farm will beat them every time.

Just to give you the chance to convince me though, tell me what fraction of US home rooftops are actually suitable for solar: either flat, or south facing.  Does anyone have a study?On More than half of today's electricity, more than 16 percent of today's energy posted 1 year, 4 months ago 74 Responses

most

If "most of the economy" is truly externalities then we are screwed no matter what.

All that is left in that case is an escape to fantasy.On A few thoughts for environmentalists posted 1 year, 8 months ago 95 Responses

some

but not all.  Remember that "environmental externalities" were invented by neoclassicals in 1920 or so.On A few thoughts for environmentalists posted 1 year, 8 months ago 95 Responses

well

I ask you again about "study" and "expertise" ...

Should we make sure no one studies economies, and should we just blunder on with whatever we get?

Again that sounds like the old AGW denier's argument that no one should respect climatologists and that we should just blunder on and take what we get.On A few thoughts for environmentalists posted 1 year, 8 months ago 95 Responses

and the ship thereof

"And this is what kept the economy afloat, according to Robert Brenner."

Foolish growth comes home to roost.

(Tom, as I understand it part of the problem is repricing some securities for their newly perceived risk.  How big that part is depends on how many debt obligations of all stripes face an unpriced "recession risk."  Halting "mark to market" might slow the feedback on that, but it can't make newly discovered risk again salable.  Nor can it make new debt offerings attractive.)On A few thoughts for environmentalists posted 1 year, 8 months ago 95 Responses

balance

I fault many of the same people you all do above.  We lost are balance in a democratic market capitalism.  We became immoderate.

Part of that lack of moderation came from free marketeers who pressed for less and less regulation as the problems built.  That is true.

But I still see most of you unwilling to tell the other half of the story.  This credit-driven crisis simply could not have happened if people had not borrowed to such unsafe levels.

As I've said before this is about exploding debt at the personal, local government, state, and federal level.

In the polarized world of American politics it becomes "bail out the homeowners" or "bail out the bankers."

Too bad such bail-outs leave so much of the real problem unstated.On A few thoughts for environmentalists posted 1 year, 8 months ago 95 Responses

do the math

we need to include the costs of damaging the mesquite ecosystem

Go ahead, do that math.  Compare it to the energy costs of creating solar panels that are then badly placed and badly maintained.

and also the benefits of having a decentralized energy system, which is inherently more resilient

Only if they are properly positioned, in a proper micro-climate, and properly maintained.

I am skeptical that this would ever come to pass.  More likely rich duffers will brag about their tax credits, and after checking their bill for a few months, forget about it ... leaving the cells to rot.

(In the towns around me solar-thermal pool heaters rot by the thousands.)On A few thoughts for environmentalists posted 1 year, 8 months ago 95 Responses

catch-alls

I was going to make this edit:

Given that over the course on my life I will have seen most of the planet turned into a wasteland come toilet, and that our economies and therefore [humans] are largely responsible

But it kind of ruins this one, doesn't it?

I concur with their opinions of themselves, but little else.

Humans (or American debt fiends) tend not to think of themselves (they keep their high opinion of themselves), but instead to look for the convenient effigy.On A few thoughts for environmentalists posted 1 year, 8 months ago 95 Responses

first, second

First, we can peal a bit off my Feb 21 post (which I called "A Necessary Scandal?"):

I don't like the rich gaming the system (they keep their profits but the government covers their losses), but unfortunately a failed banking system might be even worse.

The critical error was in not regulating more safety and less risk into the banking system (including the shadow banking system) years ago. Now we have to bolt the barn door, and keep the farm from burning down ...

But beyond that you may not like who I really blame.  I wrote here at gristmill on Jan 23:

BTW, I am unpopular for putting blame on a "debt friendly society."

That is society from top to bottom.

I'll happily fault those fast-talkers who repacked junk and sold it to the unsuspecting ... but let's not forget all those among us who leveraged further and further ... because everybody was doing it.

(I'm actually surprised for the number of google hits for "odograph" and "debt" at grist.org.  It must have been my hobby horse, eh?)

On the original post, and the safety of our safety net ... I'm not so sure.  I recommend The Big Picture for ongoing coverage (and the already-linked Krugman).On A few thoughts for environmentalists posted 1 year, 8 months ago 95 Responses

what, me study?

The economists got us into this mess.

We concern ourselves with a lot of questions, like fishery health, or global climate, that require serious study (PhDs even).  It's borderline amusing that the AGW deniers will often fall back to a position of simply rejecting "high priests" and "academic consensus."

It's an unfortunate parallel.

I wonder what you'd seriously do without the economists David.  Are you one of those extreme free marketers who would abolish the Federal Reserve?

And if you keep the Reserve, who would you have run it, if not those who have done the studies?

(I think the Greenspan Fed made serious errors, and that Bernanke has been bailing as fast as he can.  I also think this meets a craven kind of free marketer out there ... one who wants less regulation until he needs the Fed to patch things up again.  Some economists did of course call for tighter lending standards & etc. early on.  I blogged this for a while, and still have some good links there ..)On A few thoughts for environmentalists posted 1 year, 8 months ago 95 Responses

bits

The WallMart PC was interesting, but I expect that walk-in customers didn't get that any pc wouldn't be Windows.  Or perhaps they didn't picture what part of their old PC was Windows.

Notebooks in general though are going to have a lower total system power requirement (beware CPU-only quotations, that's the biggest chip, but not the only chip, and doesn't include the disks or display).

I'm happy with my Eee PC, but I think these are early adopter times.  There are some rough edges with Asus' Linux update process.  You might want to watch how that works over time.

BioD, on the upgrade thing MS is aggressive in adding in new features.  This gives them a common marketing cause with PC makers, video card makers, etc.  Unfortunately those same additions expand Windows beyond the ability of relatively recent hardware.

On the other hand, the hacker-developer community for Linux has a different value network.  Many of them run older PCs ;-)On Wal-Mart discontinues selling green PC in stores posted 1 year, 8 months ago 9 Responses

"alarm"

FWIW, I don't think you need to be "alarmed" in the sense that AGW is going to spring from under the bed and eat you!

But there might be some prudent and moderate steps to take to mitigate future harm.On What drives climate change denial? posted 1 year, 8 months ago 34 Responses

well

I have called AGW deniers an anti-intellectual movement.  I think they broadly were, especially in the full-on days of the Repubican war on science.

That said, the culture war description might be a fair.  Even if deniers are anti-intellectual, they aren't the only ones.  Environmental opposition to natural gas terminals (while we still burn coal) was not too intellectual.

So I kinda agree, but I think that there is more than a left-right war in the AGW thing.  I think it is, very sadly, a culture war against science and knowledge.On What drives climate change denial? posted 1 year, 8 months ago 34 Responses

again?

My goodness, how many times have I heard this story?  A new diesel, that is announced, and not even scheduled for delivery where I live (California), might beat a Prius.

A car I bought 3 years ago ...

Man, all you need is a time machine and you're in!

(I've long understood the theorOn Volkswagen's new entry to the clean diesel fleet posted 1 year, 8 months ago 11 Responses

too soon

the cost of a prius commute, even with double today's gasoline prices, is workable for a median family.  (roughly the first 15 minutes of an 8 hour day pays for a median commute at median income)

but beyond that sure, rural counties face the meth explosion even todayOn Deep thought of the day posted 1 year, 9 months ago 15 Responses

"and trade"

It is arguably true that a cap and trade system is different from a "cap" system.  Yes, in both cases the cap is mandatory, but in the "and trade" version some operators have the option of buying additional credits from more efficient players.On John McCain avoids using the word 'mandatory' when discussing cap-and-trade posted 1 year, 9 months ago 8 Responses

lol

"Odo, as is buried in this post, services are generally activities that take place by using manufactured goods."

You really won't let go of that hammer, will you? ;-)On We've borrowed more than we can afford to borrow, sprawled more than we can afford to sprawl posted 1 year, 9 months ago 32 Responses

Footprint

There was a time, years ago, when I would zone out and try to do environmental accounting for some product (or service) back to its roots.

It is sometimes useful but more often leads to (I'll use the comp sci slang here) many twisty passages all the same.

A would-be Footprint Czar could drive himself nuts doing that, and trying to decide if an iTune was better or worse than a Comedy Club.

But why bother?  There is an easier, freer, and more democratic alternative.  That is to simply attack the upstream evils (the pollution, the biodiversity loss, the resource depletion).  Tax them or outlaw them, it doesn't matter.  Then you can let the market (and the consumers) sort it out.  If electricity and gasoline are priced appropriately people can decide if they drive or download.

So, thank you for your Google gazing, but to be brutally honest, I'm not really looking for an expert opinion here.  I'm looking for an open and democratic framework.On We've borrowed more than we can afford to borrow, sprawled more than we can afford to sprawl posted 1 year, 9 months ago 32 Responses

metabawhat?

Green, my response above was to your 3:22 but it works well enough with your 3:30

"Information technology complicates this whole manufacturing/productivity argument, but you can still sort it out if you look at the economy as a metabolism with an energy balance."

I think that "metabolism" thing is spoken by a would-be designer, rather than an denizen.

A member of a regulated market economy such as ours, might think first of "ecosystem."On We've borrowed more than we can afford to borrow, sprawled more than we can afford to sprawl posted 1 year, 9 months ago 32 Responses

"things"

So, yes, everybody is in debt up to their neck, but when you don't make things, in order to exchange for things, you have to take on debt.  smash!

I write software.On We've borrowed more than we can afford to borrow, sprawled more than we can afford to sprawl posted 1 year, 9 months ago 32 Responses

more

I really should have quoted this paragraph from the "college loan" story above:

Demand for bonds in the $360 billion auction-rate securities market is waning on investor concern that dealers who collect fees for managing the bidding on the bonds won't commit their own capital to prevent failures. Reduced appetite for auction-rate debt in the municipal market also reflects expectations that the credit strength of insurers backing the securities may deteriorate.

When college loans don't move because investors are scared generally of bond issuers ... something is sketchy.

I don't have a prediction of how bad it will (or will not) get, partly because I still don't do predictions, and partly because things change.

One thing seems like a safe bet though ... American consumers will be forced to service debt, to reduce their debt, as part of this.  Lenders are already closing down credit lines, capping HELOCs and credit cards alike.On We've borrowed more than we can afford to borrow, sprawled more than we can afford to sprawl posted 1 year, 9 months ago 32 Responses

BTW

You might enjoy The Curious Capitalist on Capital One offers five horrendous ideas for spending borrowed moneyOn We've borrowed more than we can afford to borrow, sprawled more than we can afford to sprawl posted 1 year, 9 months ago 32 Responses

bunsen

You'd think a high-grade bunsen burner would provide similar drama, at lower risk and env impact.

(I used to roast occasionally, but had trouble making the vacuum pots go ... maybe my bodum burr grinder wasn't up to the task.  Now I like a simple cone filter.  Now there a lack of conspicuous consumption for you ...)On Blue Bottle generates more than just a caffeine buzz, but what does it mean? posted 1 year, 10 months ago 4 Responses

mutiple factors

singpretty, we obviously bring different genes to this, but that isn't the only factor.  If it were, median weight (or height or strength) would constant over time, and would not change as our society changes.

I am certainly not trying to fault anyone who lives a healthy lifestyle, no matter what their personal outcome.

On the other hand I worry that we, broadly in industrial countries, are taking a poor approach to health, diet and exercise.

I mean to look at one environmental hobby-horse, why do so many people drive to the gym and then get on stationary bicycles?  If it was a little more acceptable (and safe) for adults to get on bikes maybe we'd save in more ways than one.On The parallels between accepting obesity and ignoring global warming posted 1 year, 10 months ago 71 Responses

cool

"30 percent of the earth's ice-free land is directly or indirectly involved in livestock production"

So the planet can support maybe 20 billion vegans?On In case you'd forgotten, industrial meat is a friggin' nightmare posted 1 year, 10 months ago 46 Responses

getting serious

Yes, if you have debt the serious answer is to use your rebate to reduce it.  Don't think twice, don't think that you have a duty to shop.On Put your economic stimulus stipend to green use posted 1 year, 10 months ago 8 Responses

feebates

I don't think feebates are perfect, but they are probably more effective than (more easily gamed) CAFE-style regimes.

A world-wide carbon tax would be better, but I don't see that on the '08 or near-term radar.On California mulls nation's first feebate bill posted 1 year, 10 months ago 2 Responses

GMC Denali?

Those GMC bikes from your "store" almost had me, but if I had to pick a good basic bike I'd go with this.On Put your economic stimulus stipend to green use posted 1 year, 10 months ago 8 Responses

Population

... and it's affects present real problems.  I support voluntary programs for birthrate reduction.  At the same time, I think it is kind of up in the air how well those will work out, and the degree to which population specifically shapes our future.

I loved the Gapminder visualizations already linked on Grist.  I should really go back and catch up on the vids they've made since.

I think Gapminder illustrates the many things going on at once, and yes, how large populations can trap themselves in bad outcomes.On 'Green empire' like 'military intelligence' posted 1 year, 10 months ago 66 Responses

luxurious carbon

Fine with me bookerly, though think the old "revenue neutral" carbon tax (with offsets to social security or some such) is more systematic, without being regressive.On Deep thought of the day posted 1 year, 10 months ago 14 Responses

Blame

BTW, I am unpopular for putting blame on a "debt friendly society."

That is society from top to bottom.On Deep thought of the day posted 1 year, 10 months ago 14 Responses

2005 data

This 2005 article on household cash, investment, and debt, has much food for thought.On Deep thought of the day posted 1 year, 10 months ago 14 Responses

No Subsidies

"It would be awesome if all government tax breaks and subsidies were removed from the energy sector [and farm sector..]"

Yes, excellent.

"However, that's never going to happen."

Nobody's going to cut in this time of panic and stimulus, but I think there might be an opportunity on the other side.  The numskulls who said "I don't care, as long as you cut my taxes" have left the government with unsustainable debt (long term).

One way to reduce that debt is to reduce subsidies.On Deep thought of the day posted 1 year, 10 months ago 14 Responses

follow this link

IF, and only if, you have a sense of humor and an open mind.  Peak Oil Debunked on Jim K.fOn 'Green empire' like 'military intelligence' posted 1 year, 10 months ago 66 Responses

6-9 months

That's how long it should take to complete and close a stimulus plan.

(Assuming of course that this is merely a recession.)On A way for Congress to provide economic stimulus that is green and just posted 1 year, 10 months ago 11 Responses

National Squares

Parades with Tanks.

Big clues.On 'Green empire' like 'military intelligence' posted 1 year, 10 months ago 66 Responses

Stimulus

I grant that a stimulus might be necessary, a lesser evil, but this article explains the spot we are in:

t's important to note, though, that the Bush administration has had a fiscal stimulus package of sorts in place ever since the middle of 2001. That's when the federal government started spending more than it takes in. Just to review the deficits of the past six years:

FY 2002 [..]: $157.8 billion (1.5% of GDP)
FY 2003: $377.6 billion (3.5% of GDP)
FY 2004: $412.7 billion (3.6% of GDP)
FY 2005: $318.3 billion (2.6% of GDP)
FY 2006: $248.2 billion (1.9% of GDP)
FY 2007: $161 billion (est.) (1.2% of GDP)

It would be nicer if we were "starting" this stimulus from a less debt-ridden state.On A way for Congress to provide economic stimulus that is green and just posted 1 year, 10 months ago 11 Responses

bundling

It's fun, in moderation, when eco themes get bundled with disparate social, political, and economic concerns.

But the environment doesn't really care who stops beating up on it, as long as someone does.

Ask a bluefin tuna .. would you rather be not caught by a capitalist or not caught by a communist?On 'Green empire' like 'military intelligence' posted 1 year, 10 months ago 66 Responses

truth telling

The really odd thing JMG, is that the truth is a stronger lesson than your distortion.

We were never an Imperial people.  We made plans from the beginning to leave the Philippines.  We embodied that in law.

... And it still took us decades.

THAT should have been the lesson before Iraq II.

Even if you don't desire Empire it can still take you decades to shake yourself loose.On 'Green empire' like 'military intelligence' posted 1 year, 10 months ago 66 Responses

Capitalist

I'm a semanticist on this one, again, because I think "capitalism" requires power to reside with "capitalists."  That is, owners.

Our problems are in some ways more insidious because ownership and responsibility are spread so widely.  Who lobbied congress for these laws?  Your pension funds did.  Fund managers (and other "managers") reign in a post-capitalist society.On 'Green empire' like 'military intelligence' posted 1 year, 10 months ago 66 Responses

Harrumph!

That was a positive harrumph, to this:

"If you mean the current regime [well-connected corporate greedheads+venal politicians-(humility+caution+prudence)] to which many of our fellow citizens have at least acquiesced, count me in."On 'Green empire' like 'military intelligence' posted 1 year, 10 months ago 66 Responses

"bad things"

I actually oppose a lot of "bad things" in the world Canis, but that doesn't mean calling them by the wrong name is enlightening.

We certainly have had a mercantile foreign policy, and that has not always been a good thing.  It would be a mistake though, and IMO it lessens our understanding, to think of that as Imperial.

I'll grant you all that "Imperialist is a good epithet, and sometimes effective in staving off "bad things."

But we should hold some distinction between the word as weapon and the word as rational description.On 'Green empire' like 'military intelligence' posted 1 year, 10 months ago 66 Responses

bases?

Pfft.  I laugh at bases.

It would be different if we had a few hundred thousand civil administrators spread outside our native domain.  As the British did at the height of their Empire.  As the Soviets did at the height of their Empire.On 'Green empire' like 'military intelligence' posted 1 year, 10 months ago 66 Responses

emprie

It is interesting that the Bush government merely leaned toward empire slightly, and that was enough to raise all our national anti-empire antibodies.

If we were anything like an imperial society they would have been able to sell the war on that basis.  They could have pitched it as a permanent role for us in the middle east.  They could have sold it as our destiny.

No, the war was sold as "self defense" because we are not naturally an imperialistic people.  We are strongly isolationist and it took the biggest hammer they had, self preservation and "a smoking cloud in the form of a mushroom cloud" to move us.

(I say generically "us" because in fact I opposed the war, before there was a war.)On 'Green empire' like 'military intelligence' posted 1 year, 10 months ago 66 Responses

fetish

It's all about the back-rubs.On Second 'major economies meeting' this month in Hawaii posted 1 year, 10 months ago 3 Responses

Hey, I don't care

Just kill the subsidies and let the innovators sort it out.On Thus spake Chairman Peterson of the House Ag Committee posted 1 year, 10 months ago 10 Responses

Small vs Compact

BTW, I think the EPA says "small" and "compact" interchangeably.  The corolla is in their search-by-class under "small" but listed in the pdf as "compact."

It is NEVER of course midsize, like the prius.On Hybrids and biofuels: The road ahead posted 1 year, 10 months ago 44 Responses

average

"Khosla is comparing a mass produced smaller budget car, to a low production heavier luxury car.  (Probably a stickshift/economy model if he really knows how to play the numbers)"

On the other hand, when I talk about the average new car, I am talking about the average case.

I think corolla buyers are a small slice of the total market, and it is kind of an appeal to a hypothetical "rational" market to imply that we are all really corolla drivers.

If that was true, the freeway out there would be wall to wall with them, and there would certainly be no corollas with the "S" option!On Hybrid emissions: Facts and numbers posted 1 year, 10 months ago 34 Responses

BTW

I guess the shortest way to frame my question is, given the average $28K price on new cars, how are you going to move people down to Corollas?On Hybrid emissions: Facts and numbers posted 1 year, 10 months ago 34 Responses

Royal

"A report from a working group of experts convened by the UK's Royal Society has concluded that although biofuels have a potentially useful role in tackling the issues of climate change and energy supply for transportation, important opportunities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from biofuels, and to ensure wider environmental and social benefits, may be missed with existing policy frameworks and targets."On Prius: Green or greenwash? posted 1 year, 10 months ago 36 Responses

FWIW

I came back a day later, and this essay looks even worse to me.

I'm going to consider you a lobbyist, Mr. Khosla, for your own investments.On Prius: Green or greenwash? posted 1 year, 10 months ago 36 Responses

wrong foot forward

The Prius is the corn ethanol of hybrid cars, and we should recognize that. It has increased investment in battery development, but beyond that it is no different than Gucci bags, a branding luxury for a few who want the "cool eco" branding (70%+ of Prius buyers make more than $100k per year).

I appreciate that this might be a "tough crowd," Mr. Khosla, but I was going to try to cut you some slack, and to see what logic you could offer.

This isn't it.

First, upper income buyers are more mobile and quicker to respond it is true, but nonetheless the Prius at $23-30K brackets the average new car price in America ($28K).  In fact it is on the low side.

Second, it is the most efficient mid-size car on the US market.  This is true with gasoline fuel, but it has been tested and done well with ethanol blends as well.

That leads into the third point as well.  Why, when the Prius (and other small hybrids) can run on ethanol blends would you set up their efficiency as enemy of ethanol blends?

The Prius works, and if you can make ethanol work, they could actually work together.

Skimming further ... I'm put off again.  Gucci bags?  Maybe my extra effort was wasted.On Prius: Green or greenwash? posted 1 year, 10 months ago 36 Responses

I refuse to be drawn in!

Without a breakthrough in battery technology we are left with a choice: high cost or low "electric miles."

(Darn!  I was drawn in.)On Watch CBS this Saturday for breaking electric-car news posted 1 year, 10 months ago 14 Responses

memories

of the VW camper.  Course that '68 vw probably beat it on mpg.On The Chrysler Town & Country freaks me out posted 1 year, 10 months ago 15 Responses

where's the leap?

For instance, here in beautiful downtown Evanston, Illinois, our family of four is surviving nicely without a car, even though there are cars all over.

I'm with you Jon, on incremental improvement, but these "are bits and pieces all over the place" which "need to spread" don't support the idea of a huge leap which eliminates the need for transition.On When do green ads translate to green action? posted 1 year, 10 months ago 114 Responses

BTW

Are those natural gas prices inflation adjusted?

Actually, as I've said before I don't like the idea of inflation adjusted energy prices.  Energy price is too much of an inflation component.  It almost becomes a number adjusted by itself.

The best measure would be natural gas prices vs median income.On True costs of fossil fuels make renewables seem cheap in comparison posted 1 year, 10 months ago 8 Responses

unbridled economic globalization

Isn't globalization actually bridled by environmental laws?  And haven't those laws spread?  We worry that China's laws are woefully inadequate but they have laws and are expanding them.

I suspect some folks of disliking market economies (including Chinese communist market economies) and attacking them through environmentalism, rather than having environmental concerns first and foremost.

If you believe the environment, and sustainability, are key you should act directly to protect the environment and disallow non-sustainable practices.

Then, if some clever boy figures out how to be a green Bill Gates, more power to him.

(interestingly searching google for "china's richest man" yields "China's Richest Man: A Solar Magnate")On Can economic democracy make the global economy more sustainable? posted 1 year, 10 months ago 32 Responses

consume differently

I actually like pangolin's vision of small electronics, home gardens, and local pubs (or cafes).

I sometimes am frustrated with the WorldChanging crowd because they (while good on many tings) think the suburbs must die (and cannot evolve).

All that said, I think the conflict between those who are ready to "consume differently" and those who are convinced (for whatever reason) that "differently" won't be enough.  (Or that "different suburbs" won't enough.)On We can consume less without sacrificing well-being posted 1 year, 10 months ago 12 Responses

Japan

A little bit here:

How Does Japan Lead the World in Carbon Reductions?

It doesn't address oil and car use ... but we know where the Prius comes from, after all.On When do green ads translate to green action? posted 1 year, 10 months ago 114 Responses

Japan and Germany

Buying more cars to fix the problems caused by cars may indeed improve average fleet efficiency but this brings no overall beneficial environmental impact unless it also has the effect of reducing total fleet emissions.

Since the early 90's Japan and Germany have reduced their total oil consumption, and by direct stoichiometry their CO2 emissions.  They did that while growing economically.

You seem to have a theory that we might not do the same, and so we should not try.On When do green ads translate to green action? posted 1 year, 10 months ago 114 Responses

growth

Globalization questions are boring, but growth questions less so.

We are back to a narrow definition of growth in the Saunders piece and then the argument that it must stop.  That's fine, when people remember that it is the defined form of growth that must stop.

The problem is that people tend to generalize the argument to their broader and personal ideas of growth.  Some people believe, or fear, that any dollar for your child's college fund or your retirement fund must equally come from a despoiled earth.  More tuition, more destruction.

The connection is actually non-linear, and proven to be so in the real world.  Economies vary greatly on things like sustainability and energy intensity.

The "proofs" that we cannot grow, as we eliminate the unsustainable and encourage the sustainable are strange, theoretical, and floated on a raft of questionable assumptions.

... or they work by narrowly defining growth so that it can only be unsustainable.On Can economic democracy make the global economy more sustainable? posted 1 year, 10 months ago 32 Responses

VMT and/or MPG

I certainly got that "mood tipping" was icing on the cake.

The basic physics says that we can reduce CO2 emissions and energy consumption by improving (as I said above) VMT and/or MPG.

The argument that we should only take one path (VMT but never MPG) is ultimately an emotional one.

I'm disappointed that the emotional argument soldiers on, shrugging off each wave of facts, but you know ... there has always been a emotional/scientific split in environmentalism.On When do green ads translate to green action? posted 1 year, 10 months ago 114 Responses

illogical

Sorry shapeshifter, I think your central fallacy is that any of us control ... everybody else.

It is illogical to think that selling or keeping any particular car will affect fleet VMT or MPG in any particular way.  That is not driven by the choice of the seller.  That is driven by the choice of the buyer.

It is the cars ultimately unsold that are scrapped, and the person who determines that is the used car buyer of last resort.

We can lobby for them to reduce their VMT and/or MPG, driver interest and commitment will vary.

(On the other hand, we know that we CAN change our VMT and/or MPG with our choices.)On When do green ads translate to green action? posted 1 year, 10 months ago 114 Responses

nephews

You know, there have been economies that have been so tight on cars that by holding onto yours you essentially kept someone off the road.  We heard of 10 year waiting lists for new cars in some countries.

But that ain't here.

The US, especially with the recent credit bubble, has been pumping new cars into the system.  The "nephews" you talk about have choices.

And given that entry drivers are going to be price sensitive, as prices rise I'd expect many of them to choose efficient little used cars.  Some of those Hondas and Toyotas last a really long time.

As for new cars, they are inching upward in mpg, for the same economic and social reasons.On When do green ads translate to green action? posted 1 year, 10 months ago 114 Responses

And thus

... we return to the perfect being enemy of the good.On When do green ads translate to green action? posted 1 year, 10 months ago 114 Responses

energy

If you ask me, the waste here is all the energy spent ignoring  hard data.

The hard data shows that small sensible hybrids, like the Civic and Prius, win on lifecycle energy and greenhouse gas emissions.

The cranks don't have peer-reviewed disproofs, in fact, in echoes of GW deniers they repeat indirect and weakly supported charges ... that they heard somewhere.

But hey ... when ignoring data allows you to reinforce your world view what are you going to do?On When do green ads translate to green action? posted 1 year, 10 months ago 114 Responses

shorter

A valuable message for the US consumer is: We don't have all the oil anymore, and it's foolish to act as if we did.On When do green ads translate to green action? posted 1 year, 10 months ago 114 Responses

keep your eye on the ball

I used Japan and Germany as an example of what can be achieved.

How exactly do you argue that we can never do what they have done?On When do green ads translate to green action? posted 1 year, 10 months ago 114 Responses

theory over reality

I've been meaning to write a short piece on "why do people prefer theory over reality?"

Jeavons' Paradox is understood as a theory, but it is not, in reality, always the driving factor.

Germany and Japan have reduced their total, not just per-capita oil use.  The Prius is comes out of that Japanese environment and effort.

What kind of person raises Jeavons as a counter to that?  I don't know, but it has to be some kind of dysfunction.

Surely it is rational to take the real-world examples of what is possible as just that - what is possible.

(Sorry Jon, I read your comments as a continuation of JMG's vibe, in part because I confused the J's)On When do green ads translate to green action? posted 1 year, 11 months ago 114 Responses

ROFLMAO

I was confused about the who, but not the what.

Oh yeah, Ford and GM and even Toyota (as they fought CAFE increases) are right on board with incremental increases.

Never mind that in this case the "incremental" is a doubling from the status-quo (fleet average -> prius or honda civic hybrid mpg) ... and of course a halving of CO2 production.On When do green ads translate to green action? posted 1 year, 11 months ago 114 Responses

"wimpy" Prius

Doesn't it worry you Jon, when you find common-cause with the Hummer drivers who call the Prius wimpy, from the other direction?

Sure the guy who gave up his car and his job (not necessarily in that order) can pride himself on miles not driven and tons of co2 not emitted.

Prius folk can keep their jobs and only talk about tons of co2 not emitted.

Most Americans still have done neither.  They have neither gone car-less nor gone hybrid.

As far as I'm concerned, extreme environmentalists play tag-team with the Hummer drivers.  They reinforce the status quo as they both argue against incremental improvement.On When do green ads translate to green action? posted 1 year, 11 months ago 114 Responses

perfect vs good

The argument at the top of the thread was about how bad "Prii" were because they were still cars.

I ask again, what are you going to do in 2008?

Are you going to kill the car culture, and the Prius along with it?

Or will you be lucky to get efficient-car share as high as 10%?

How many active internal combustion vehicles will we have going into 2009 and what will be their fleet MPG?

(Jon, in what year do you rationally expect 3 trillion electric cars on the road?)On When do green ads translate to green action? posted 1 year, 11 months ago 114 Responses

yeah and

how many times do we play the "perfect as enemy of the good" here?

Get over yourselves.  If you can't make America go carless in 2008, maybe you better just set your sights on making them go to a (merely) better car.

I mean geez, half the US bought SUVs as their new cars last year ... and the best you can do is to fault Priuses?

I tell you what, if you want to be constructive (and sane) sell them an efficient little car (or midsize like the Prius) and then encourage them to walk or bike when they can.  If they are environmental, when they can, they will.On When do green ads translate to green action? posted 1 year, 11 months ago 114 Responses

Lazy

"I find that pretty cheeky. The one serious knock on the Prius is that it consumes enormous resources in production. On a life-cycle basis, as I understand it, a conventional used car with good gas mileage is a greener buy than a freshly minted Prius."

Rather than trolling for facts, with your "I understand," why don't you do your homework?On When do green ads translate to green action? posted 1 year, 11 months ago 114 Responses

$4

Oh, the LA Times is projecting $4 in 2008 for us Californios.On Venture-capital star ain't no clean-tech expert posted 1 year, 11 months ago 54 Responses

BTW

You seem to think I'm on some other wavelength than I am.  I might have my concept of a perfectly rational Tahoe driver (someone who needs to carry many people and tow things frequently), but to me that does not really distract from the much more general case.

Most people juggle a basket of want and needs, as well as costs and disadvantages, as they shop for a new car.

You have to be a hypothetical being, or an imbecile, to limit yourself to two "equivalents." On Venture-capital star ain't no clean-tech expert posted 1 year, 11 months ago 54 Responses

again, shorter

For any car it is "this is what it does" and "this is what it costs."

You can choose to spend $8K more for hybrid on your Tahoe, or you can choose to spend $20K less on a Prius.On Venture-capital star ain't no clean-tech expert posted 1 year, 11 months ago 54 Responses

Tahoe

Exactly.  Nothing makes the funny argument better than the idea that you've got to have that huge bundle of features that are a Tahoe, and then add "hybrid" to it.

FWIW, the Greenhybrid database shows that a Highlander Hybrid gets 26 MPG real-world, and the Escape Hybrid gets 29-32 MPG.

You can buy those, or a Prius, or you can "add" hybrid to a Tahoe and get 21?  Should I even believe 21 at this point?On Venture-capital star ain't no clean-tech expert posted 1 year, 11 months ago 54 Responses

costs

Remember that the average price for a new car in America is $28K.  A Prius (or Civic Hybrid) can be had for $22K.  The idea that a hybrid costs more is based on the idea that of the constellation of cars available (from the $10K Aveo to the $1.7M Bugatti) you will first choose some exact combination of features and preferences, and then add "hybrid" to the mix.

For most of the market that is, and has always been, silly.  Most people choose a car, hybrid or not, that suits them, and most already pay more than what a hybrid would cost.

If someone is talking to you about a hybrid premium then they are either a buyer of low-end cars (those costing less than $22K) or they are deluded.

Ask them what their last car cost.On Venture-capital star ain't no clean-tech expert posted 1 year, 11 months ago 54 Responses

metaphores again

History moves like a slime mold.

The future is here, it just isn't evenly distributed.

etc., etc.

There is no static now, nor a railroad track to a defined future.  We evolve, but we need to trick our human sense of time to see it.  The "year in review" lists spanning the web are lessons in how not to do it.  They often contain items that are not items for 2007 at all, just hints and promises for the future.  You see "2007 was the year we learned ..."   Yeah, maybe.  Or maybe we learned something else, something we don't understand right now.

But again, one thing we can do is make our best steps for today, and adopt new/better tech as it proves itself.On Venture-capital star ain't no clean-tech expert posted 1 year, 11 months ago 54 Responses

future tech

I'm not absolutely up to date on my reading, but I tend to treat cellulosic ethanol and plug-in hybrids equally.  That is, they aren't here yet.

The are both promises, to men like me on the street, that the inventions will be made and that the tech will be delivered at a reasonable price point.

I think I prefer to be agnostic, and let these guys do their inventions, and then compete with actual product details.On Venture-capital star ain't no clean-tech expert posted 1 year, 11 months ago 54 Responses

Q to me?

Jon, are you thinking of the old CNW Marketing Research reports?  Many of us contested and debunked those, but they kept coming back.

Wikipedia covers it as:

CNW's publication "From Dust to Dust" [1] claims that a Hummer is more efficient than a Prius, despite the fact that a Prius is one-third the weight of a hummer and gets between four and six times better mileage. CNW claims that their efficiencies are based on Priuses lasting only 109,000 miles whilst Hummers run for more then 300,000. Neither of these figures are properly documented and this study has been roundly debunked.

older vehicles

I do get and agree with the original post to a degree, though I think the flock of us who want to do more have a point to.

"Note that if you trade off a stinky old SUV and buy another clean machine, you have ADDED to global warming.  Didn't know that, did you?"

Like everything, it's complicated.  Yes, you'd need to scrap a car to be sure it logged no more miles.  But the good news is that VMT (vehicle miles traveled) does decline with vehicle age, and 2nd and 3rd owners do tend to drive less than 1st ones.

But we could hasten that, if we had the guts, say by increasing vehicle registration fees for gas hogs.On When is a Tundra a better buy than a Prius? posted 1 year, 11 months ago 47 Responses

speaking of bounds

LifeHack is running 7 Stupid Thinking Errors You Probably Make.On Economists cannot predict the future posted 1 year, 11 months ago 69 Responses

oh

I guess the contrast between computers and cars looks more impressive when you look at average examples in use.  Nobody runs a one mips computer anymore, but basically everybody drives a 20 mpg car.On TED talks posted 1 year, 11 months ago 19 Responses

oh!

I'm actually listening to Chris Anderson talk about his upcoming book, "Free," right now.  I'm doing the mp3, missing the pictures.

"Free" might relate to recent threads about limits to growth.On TED talks posted 1 year, 11 months ago 19 Responses

moth tracks

You've got me backwards if you think I undervalue observers of nature (and humanity).  I think there is HUGE value in that.

Not only that, I am not convinced that those who branch out to prediction are unnecessarily the wisest.

Many of us observe that when question X is fuzzy it might be wise to pass on prediction, but the TV producer will keep dialing, and get a guest who "knows."On Economists cannot predict the future posted 1 year, 11 months ago 69 Responses

Naturalists

Can't one spend an entire life as a naturalist, cataloging the moths of the Amazon, without making a single "scientific prediction?"

Really Mark, I would question your list as an example of inductive reasoning.  Scientists do predict, but that does not mean that all scientists predict, or that prediction is an important differentiator.

Wikipedia has a good page on inductive reasoning.  The inductive vs. deductive distinction has a long history in all this, what is science, what is prediction, etc.On Economists cannot predict the future posted 1 year, 11 months ago 69 Responses

Tetlock

I gave you a reference to Tetlock's Expert Political Judgment earlier.  I remember it being "big" in the field of ideas, as was Taleb's Fooled by Randomness.  Heck, if you want another work on human perception of risk (closely related to this discussion) there is always "Against the Gods" by Peter L. Bernstein.

I could answer the following points in detail ... but they don't seem to based on where I was coming from ...On Economists cannot predict the future posted 1 year, 11 months ago 69 Responses

Statistics

"Robin Hogarth makes a good case for the fact that what people do is not prediction (in the technical sense) because that implies statistical inference based on probability theory."

Is that an important distinction?  When an economist says on TV that growth will be X and inflation will be Y, do we know that he did anything other than poll his gut?

And importantly, I think Tetlock would have found "better" predictors if they had been using whiz-bang statistical models.On Economists cannot predict the future posted 1 year, 11 months ago 69 Responses

Science and Prediction

Actually, "Expert Political Judgment" might be termed as people wanting to be "scientific" and thus "reaching" for prediction.

The books I've given you document the hubris in that.

Beyond that, the "science requires prediction" thing sounds better at first hearing than than upon reflection.  A scientist, after observing lemurs for 30 years, might offer a prediction about what "spike" will do next ... but that's not really what we value.  We desire scientific understanding the creature and its environment.On Economists cannot predict the future posted 1 year, 11 months ago 69 Responses

squawk

(And of course the book that cannot be named.  The two books reinforce each other nicely.)On Economists cannot predict the future posted 1 year, 11 months ago 69 Responses

Prediction

I think there is a tension in modern neurobiology and psychology in that (1) our brains are wired for thinking about the future, and (2) we are bad at "predictions."

Our tendency is to predict beyond our ability.  When an answer would be really, really, nice to know, we stretch for it.

It's hard not to stretch for some questions though, because not to stretch is to accept whatever you get.

We want to know if we can burn this coal.  We want to know if Social Security is sound.  What else can  you do?  You predict.

BioD also predicts that we will act on our predictions ;-).  I'm sure we will, but some mornings I'm not sure that our actions will be sufficient.  Look at "managed fisheries" as a model of prediction and action.  Managed fisheries should not collapse ... except they do.  All the time.

Sometimes the end-run is a policy that acknowledges our poor predictive abilities ... like "no take" marine preserves ... or maybe a big walloping carbon tax.On Economists cannot predict the future posted 1 year, 11 months ago 69 Responses

Focus

Sorry Jerry, it's just an ability to focus:

"My position is that no tax is needed."

You are leaving CO2 growth open-ended until someone else caps or reduces it.

It's kind of laughable to think that you've "internalized" anything there.  It is the essence of an "externalized" argument.  Someone, or something, else will take care of it.  That may be true ... but what's the line?

A wish is not a plan? On Cato's Jerry Taylor responds to Michael Tobis posted 1 year, 11 months ago 131 Responses

In other words

Your real plan is to pass the buck, to whoever takes us off the "fossil fuel age."

What if that's us, Jerry?On Cato's Jerry Taylor responds to Michael Tobis posted 1 year, 11 months ago 131 Responses

had been avoiding this thread ...

Happy Monday Jerry!

"IF we want to go about internalizing the costs of greenhouse gas emissions, THEN a $2/ton carbon tax would probably be the best policy."

That seems to contradict your answer to my comment that recent energy price increases, probably more than equivalent to $2/ton, had not curbed consumption:

"Yes they have ... demonstrating that it would take a major increase in the cost of fossil fuels to get even minor reductions in their use.  A very important point with a lot of implications."

Why on earth would it be "best" policy to do a burdensome tax that would not reduce CO2 emission?  I mean if your choice is to go to hell in a hand-basket, you can do that with even less tax burden.On Cato's Jerry Taylor responds to Michael Tobis posted 1 year, 11 months ago 131 Responses

1/2

I'll score myself half credit.  I got that "moderate proposals" have a history, and that your post was meant to be ironic ... but I did not know the Swift reference at all.On Cato's Jerry Taylor responds to Michael Tobis posted 1 year, 11 months ago 131 Responses

Funny

Your economic rules are not everyone else's, and certainly there is no genetically-determined rule that everyone is an "economic actor" in the neoclassical sense from birth onward.

I never said there was such a thing, or that our economic nature was our only nature.  Indeed behavioral economics documents some interesting things about cooperation as well.

(For instance we have a bias toward cooperation, even when it costs us "profit," but this bias is strongest when we are face to face with another person.  The more "remote" a person seems, the less the cooperative impulse.)

Obviously my point is that some people want to ignore, or worse, rewrite our nature.

(I believe police work within our nature, and not in opposition to it.)On Cato's Jerry Taylor responds to Michael Tobis posted 1 year, 11 months ago 131 Responses

Jevons' Paradox...

The key thing to remember is that it is a tendency and not a law.  It is true sometimes, in some markets, and not in others.

(My new Asus Eee PC uses 1/10th the power of my old web-surfing desktop ... can I possibly surf 10x more with my newfound efficiency?  I don't think so.)On Cato's Jerry Taylor responds to Michael Tobis posted 1 year, 11 months ago 131 Responses

it's all about me

Yes they have ... demonstrating that it would take a major increase in the cost of fossil fuels to get even minor reductions in their use.

For what it's worth, the other side of my man-in-the-street experience is that it's been trivially easy for me to slash my carbon footprint, while reducing my costs, and increasing my health and happiness.

I think pessimists (those who moan that "it'll cost us a trillion) just haven't tapped their own creativity.  Heck, maybe some are even afraid to open that door marked "creativity" for fear of where it will lead.On Cato's Jerry Taylor responds to Michael Tobis posted 1 year, 11 months ago 131 Responses

$2

First, I believe the $2 per ton (mode) estimate of environmental externalities that come from greenhouse gas emissions is probably more accurate than the $14 per ton median estimate and $93 per ton mean estimate found in the literature for reasons that are made clear in the text of Richard Tol's paper.  If you go beyond the executive summary - to page 2069 and then through to the end - you will see why.

I guess my man-in-the-street boggle on this is that I think energy prices have risen more than would correspond to $2/ton in the last few (5?) years, with no decrease at all in CO2 emissions.On Cato's Jerry Taylor responds to Michael Tobis posted 1 year, 11 months ago 131 Responses

Pigou Club

I thought the "defense of mainstream economics" became redundant, once we saw the Pigou Club, with its roster of "mainstream economists."

Noise since then has tended toward uninformed rants against an extreme strawman (there are those who deny "externalities" but they are hardly "mainstream.")On Cato's Jerry Taylor responds to Michael Tobis posted 1 year, 11 months ago 131 Responses

in the middle again

Unreformed moderate that I am, I sometimes criticize economists and sometimes defend them.  I think evolutionary neurobiology, proto-economics, and behavioral economics are all tremendously interesting for their recent advances and their overlaps.  If I were going to build my own image of a non-scientific economist, it would be someone down in his basement with his models ... who ignores those same things.On Cato's Jerry Taylor responds to Michael Tobis posted 1 year, 11 months ago 131 Responses

$2

Quick question.  I'm only part-way through the above, and enjoying it.

In another place you wrote:

I am all for internalizing negative environmental externalities. So are most economists. But their work on this area suggests that the negative externalities associated with greenhouse gas emissions are probably no more than $2 per metric ton - not enough to justify more than, say, a 2 cent increase in gasoline costs. For a review of the literature on that matter, see a recent academic survey by Richard Tol: [link]

At that link I found the summary:

One hundred and three estimates of the marginal damage costs of carbon dioxide emissions were gathered from 28 published studies and combined to form a probability density function. The uncertainty is strongly right-skewed. If all studies are combined, the mode is $2/tC, the median $14/tC, the mean $93/tC, and the 95 percentile $350/tC. Studies with a lower discount rate have higher estimates and much greater uncertainties.

After wiki-ing "mode" ... I had to wonder why you chose that as your answer, rather than the mean or median?

I'd think in any widely distributed cost estimate the mode will be too low.

And thanks for joining the discussion.On Cato's Jerry Taylor responds to Michael Tobis posted 1 year, 11 months ago 131 Responses

economics

I fall back to the stand-up economist.  People are stupid but not that stupid.

We'll try corn ethanol for a while, but I think we'll figure out the downsides after a time.On Bush to ethanol industry: don't worry, you're gonna get your fat mandate posted 1 year, 11 months ago 10 Responses

cite

I'm in a hurry, more later ... in particular I wish I could remember the "collapse" theorist who relies on this most heavily, but in the meantime ...

<blockqutoe>So what Heubner describes as a decline in innovation is not, in fact, a decrease in the total number of innovations being developed, but rather a drop in the number of innovations per capita.

from the speculist.  only had time to glance at that ...On The only way to a soft landing is down posted 1 year, 11 months ago 54 Responses

bits

Are you suggesting that Moore's Law (observation) implies an infinite reduction in the size of bits?

Not infinite, just far enough to be very interesting.  Put another way, my asus eee pc works now, one doubling would make it better ... two doublings would make it crazy.

(In the 80's we thought we'd hit a "smallness" limit now, and resort to very large chips, wafer-scale integration, and the like.  We still have that out.)On The only way to a soft landing is down posted 1 year, 11 months ago 54 Responses

just so you know

I never really felt debunked.On And other revelations from the latest big-media expose of local food posted 1 year, 11 months ago 9 Responses

growth again

BTW, I did find some of the growth discussions interesting above, even though I still feel somewhat growth agnostic (if that's the right term), and that we should "let the growth fall where it may."

Even as I consider these competing ideas about growth I think I'm correct to have a fuzzy and imprecise idea about what "growth" is, or what it should be.

Specific point measurements, like GDP growth may have limited value in limited domains.  Equations to explain that kind of limited growth may have limited value ... but I'm sure reasonable economists would not define life or joy or human progress along such narrow lines.

I certainly think that when pundits narrowly define growth (so that they can be for it or agin' it) they are making a serious error.On The only way to a soft landing is down posted 1 year, 11 months ago 54 Responses

curves

They are ahead of us, that's for sure.  As I said in another thread, I think we still have our history as "oil producers" hanging over our heads.  Gushers in Texas are too recent in memory for us to drive ... little French cars.

... but I think we're heading that way (aren't little German-Swiss cars sneaking in even now?)On French government charges fees to new owners of gas-guzzling vehicles posted 1 year, 11 months ago 20 Responses

quote

"In the original DeSmogBlog post, Murgatroyd was taking the exact quote from the second to last paragraph here:" link

The extra '"' makes the paraphrase look literal, but no matter, Taylor's clarifications at DeSmog help us understand.  I guess the bottom line would be this:

I am all for internalizing negative environmental externalities. So are most economists. But their work on this area suggests that the negative externalities associated with greenhouse gas emissions are probably no more than $2 per metric ton - not enough to justify more than, say, a 2 cent increase in gasoline costs. For a review of the literature on that matter, see a recent academic survey by Richard Tol: [link]

He agrees with the tax, it's left to argue appropriate prices per ton.On The only way to a soft landing is down posted 1 year, 11 months ago 54 Responses

economists and global warming

BTW, even as "economists" are cartooned here as co2-emitting monsters, the Harvard University economics professor Greg Mankiw celebrates another backer of the carbon tax.On The only way to a soft landing is down posted 1 year, 11 months ago 54 Responses

conversions

I'd think there would be a conversion factor.  I don't have time to try my own math (based on my rusty chem degree) right now, but I did find another source in a quick search:

"Standard for passenger cars in Europe is 175 CO2 g/km which equals 6.6l diesel (43 mpg UK / 35 mpg US) or 7.5 l gasoline per 100 km (37 mpg UK / 31 mpg US) respectively."

From Low-energy vehicle at wikipedia.

The rude conversion from 31 mpg (gasoline) to 175 g/km says that "5425 / US mpg" equals grams per km.On French government charges fees to new owners of gas-guzzling vehicles posted 1 year, 11 months ago 20 Responses

defeatist

A blurb I used in a related conversation:

I think it would be nice if we could get ahead of the curve a bit on alternative energy (and conservation) but my feeling this morning is that it is "natural" that we are not.

We are slowly, at a human pace, moving from the mindset of an oil producing nation to that of an oil importing one.  We don't have oil subsidies as high as in Venezuela or Iran, but neither to we have conservation measures as high as in Germany or Japan.

I think we are on our way to policies like those in the last two countries, but we have a lot of inertia to overcome.  Some people fear that we'll never get there.  They cite Jevons' paradox as a reason we "can't" reduce our consumption.  I don't think the situation is that dire.  Japan and Germany show that a net decrease in oil consumption is possible.

... it will still be some time before American society truly accepts that such changes are necessary.On What a fossil-fuel free agriculture might look like posted 1 year, 11 months ago 68 Responses

parts count

I think if you just graphed automobile "parts count" over time you'd see it fairly explode.  Power windows, air conditioning, CD players - these things were not always "standard equipment."

When air conditioning becomes standard, why not hybrid drive?On Gas prices impact car-purchasing decisions in the U.S. posted 1 year, 11 months ago 5 Responses

factors, not absolutes

It's important to remember that factors can weigh in various directions, without becoming absolutes.  Jevons' paradox does occur "in nature" and then again it goes missing.

The Japanese and German reductions in total oil consumption are an example of it going missing, in nature.

Thus it is inaccurate to make the blanket statement that efficiency leads to greater consumption & etc.

In fact, you'd think "problem solvers" would be more interested in the German/Japanese solutions, and emulating it, than ... basically ignoring it, as is so often the case in peak oil circles.On What a fossil-fuel free agriculture might look like posted 1 year, 11 months ago 68 Responses

price

I like the graph found here, as an explanation for why people might be getting serious:

One Perspective on Gasoline PricesOn Gas prices impact car-purchasing decisions in the U.S. posted 1 year, 11 months ago 5 Responses

hypothetical diesels

Those are the best ;-), it's unfortunate when our actual choices are so limited, and yes, marred by bad service records.

That bites on two levels.  It is pretty easy for one repair to eat the net fuel savings over a year, for an individual.  But on the global scale, repairs and replacement parts have their own upstream carbon impact.  A replacement water pump is not "free" either in the sense of dollars, or the CO2 put out by its foundry.

(In my v-dub owning days I was the happy purchaser of a couple water pumps.)

So I say compare in the real world, with those reliable and efficient models we have around us.  If you want to be a (non-bicycling, non-mass-transit) carbon king, drive a used Echo.On High gas prices make hybrids look even better posted 1 year, 11 months ago 45 Responses

shoes

I'm waiting for one to drop on this.On Me, in the Guardian, on the energy bill posted 1 year, 11 months ago 3 Responses

you made me do it

best and worst used cars.On High gas prices make hybrids look even better posted 1 year, 11 months ago 45 Responses

tools, boxes

Any intellectual tool is good when it works, and not beyond ...

For that reason it's good to have a lot of tools in one's intellectual toolbox.

Certainly it's nice to know about Pigou (who "personified the Cambridge Neoclassicals"), his invention of "externalities" and his taxes.  That gives us an answer that fits right into the discussion with "free market" advocates.  Many of their own acknowledge environmental harm, the inability of a truly free market to price in that harm, and the need (at times) to price-for-harm through taxes.On What a fossil-fuel free agriculture might look like posted 1 year, 11 months ago 68 Responses

Pigou Club

The webs being what they are, there is actually a Pigou Club, with the subtitle "where the Environment Meets Good Economists."

The member's list might have some familiar, and some surprising, names.  (They have a fairly honest, but somewhat sneaky, way of populating it.)On What a fossil-fuel free agriculture might look like posted 1 year, 11 months ago 68 Responses

neoclassical economics

That continues to give me the biggest "huh?" on this site.

We've just had days and days of "give us a carbon tax."

That is neoclassical economics in action.  Get over your cognitive dissonance.  Either abandon Pigouvian taxes and neoclassical economics for real, or stop complaining. On What a fossil-fuel free agriculture might look like posted 1 year, 11 months ago 68 Responses

water and energy

FWIW, I did blog something related to this last year.  The California Energy Commission has produced a paper on our state's water and energy equation.  (The link has changed but the redirect seems to work.)

From what I remember, the bottom line was that for a small (electrical) energy increase, we can cut our agricultural water use significantly.

That and trains to market (the 1800's solution), and cities need not panic (in, as I said, an Affective Death Spiral).On What a fossil-fuel free agriculture might look like posted 1 year, 11 months ago 68 Responses

decades

So how long do you suppose it will be, before we actually have to worry about "oil free" agriculture?  I'd guess 3 or 4 ... decades.

BTW, my new EEE PC (Asus) is pulling 2 watts right now (0.17 kwh in the last 24 hours, per my kill-a-watt monitor).  Things change, and not always in a bad way.On What a fossil-fuel free agriculture might look like posted 1 year, 11 months ago 68 Responses

i said

"If you price carbon-based fuels for their end user,"  So it would be the last person to take possession, without resale of the fuel itself.

I'd hardly say that was "before it gets into the economy."

It is very much in the economy, and encourages everyone in the chain to deliver "value" to the consumer at the lowest fossil fuel (and tax) cost.

I'm not following that a VAT-like tax would be "easier."  Fuels become more expensive, firms adjust, as they have been doing for the last 3-5 years.On Conservatives still don't seem to get global warming posted 1 year, 11 months ago 12 Responses

strategy

I think it is a (egregious) strategic error to yield to "bad economics" all that is "economics."

Mainstream economics understands, and broadly endorses, Pigouvian taxes and yet somehow the far right and the far left want to ignore that.  They both prefer their straw men.

Criticisms like the "post-Autistic" essay above cut at an angle to that.  I believe, for instance, that Pigouvian taxes are "neoclassical".

Nonetheless we Gristers call for Pigouvian taxes daily!On Our challenge: surviving the rule of economists posted 1 year, 11 months ago 9 Responses

right

We are talking about parallel things.

The total fleet mileage is ridiculously low:

"This report confirms that average fuel economy rose in both 2005 and 2006, the first consecutive annual increases since the mid-1980s. The 20.2 mpg value for 2006 and 2007 is 0.9 mpg higher than that in 2004, reversing a long-term trend of slightly declining fuel economy since a 1987 peak."

At the same time politicians (and apparently scientists) pride themselves on regulating this segment called "cars."

Cars must have a fleet mpg of 35 by 2020.  Big deal, according to that previous graph they are at about 30 mpg right now ... and the "ethanol loophole" bridges the gap to 35 mpg pretty easily:

"But a senior congressional staffer close to the behind-the-scenes negotiations said the only significant concession to the Detroit 3 will be temporary continuation of CAFE credits for building vehicles capable of burning alternative fuels. The main one is E85, which is 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline."

At the same time, yes, people can retreat to the segment called "light trucks" (including SUVs). There is no limit to how many people can buy trucks/SUVs, so effectively the light truck requirement defines the total fleet requirement.

The new light truck requirement is 22 mpg by 2020.

Our total fleet mileage is now 20.2 ... so this is effectively a legislated increase of 2 mpg.On Pelosi says bill up for vote next week will contain CAFE, RFS, and RES posted 1 year, 12 months ago 29 Responses

follow the link

There is fleet, fleet car, and fleet truck.

The CAFE standard is most strongly associated with cars, but fleet car mileage has always been higher than the requirement. (except perhaps for a moment around 1985).

If the standard were "forcing" people we'd expect compliance to that level and no further.

(I don't think the graph at that link is in error, it just addresses the "domain" that CAFE regulates.)On Pelosi says bill up for vote next week will contain CAFE, RFS, and RES posted 1 year, 12 months ago 29 Responses

Union of Concerned Scientists

I've argued with them, on their blog, about the stupidity of their CAFE support.

The fact is that our real fleet economy has always exceeded the CAFE requirement.  We've never passed a law that "forced" us to do more than we were already doing.

I'm sure this will be the same.  The new CAFE is mild enough that we'll be doing it anyway, for reasons of gasoline price and economy.

All the UCS ended up convincing me of was that scientists are not always as smart as they think they are.  Imagine thinking this is a "a strong, comprehensive energy package!"

Or, maybe it is the nature of the lobbying apparatus, that after a bill everyone must congratulate themselves, pretend success, and begin again ... look forward to another UCS membership appeal!On Pelosi says bill up for vote next week will contain CAFE, RFS, and RES posted 1 year, 12 months ago 29 Responses

rate of decline

I was going to say something, but when Big Gav says (at the link you give) "I was viewing it as more of a doomer porn cartoon than a literal prediction of the future."

I hardly need say more.On How will you ride the slide? posted 1 year, 12 months ago 7 Responses

Eee PC

The Walmart machine looks like a good contender for a light-to-moderate use desktop machine.  FWIW, I'm planning on getting an Asus Eee PC as a portable, and to cut down on the time I spend running the desktop at home.On Cheap, possibly green PC hot item at Wal-Mart posted 2 years ago 2 Responses

ok

I've been doing some pretty bad sentences myself lately.

I think the interesting thing about "business as usual" is that it is really "change as usual."

And so it becomes a question of whether our current rate of response (which is not zero) is sufficient.  That's a hard one to call, because it hinges on things not directly seen or measured in our world.  It hinges on unknowns that we may (or may not) be able to predict.On Jeremy Carl argues that coal will be with us for a long while posted 2 years ago 43 Responses

uncertainty

I think also, we have some uncertainty about which problems are most pressing.  I think I rank overfishing at a more critical issue than global warming, for instance ... but most people don't.

In the fog of problems, and maybe-problems, before us ... we have to choose not just how to act, but which to act upon.On A critical issue wrapped in a dose of black helicopters posted 2 years ago 10 Responses

huh?

"I don't know if there are many examples of rebuilding a one-of-a-kind-system that had never been built before in order to prevent collapse.  But I still think we have to try."

Oh, and I think this sentence is completely insane.On Jeremy Carl argues that coal will be with us for a long while posted 2 years ago 43 Responses

I hate debt

but I don't hate monetary growth.  The problem has really been debt-love in our society, and how growth (while still possible the good, old fashioned, way) has been heading in that direction.

As an aside, I think this history of the sub-prime problem rocks.

I was raised the old fashioned way, with the idea that a family's only long-term debt should be it's mortgage ... and that you should actually pay that off by late-middle age.  Once you make that paydown, you can still "grow" without debt.

The current generation has it much harder.  The system has sold them ridiculous tuitions enabled by a ridiculous college loan industry.  Pile on that a lot of 'spring break' credit cards.  They have a lot to climb out of.On A critical issue wrapped in a dose of black helicopters posted 2 years ago 10 Responses

rearview mirror

Don't the most reasonable peak oil proponents say, in fact, that peak oil will only be visible in the "rearview mirror?"On Jeremy Carl argues that coal will be with us for a long while posted 2 years ago 43 Responses

peak price

"odo -- Peak everything and ecosystem destruction, or whatever you want to call it, is not a financial question, it's more of an engineering question, will the global production system work if these trends continue?"

I was trying for a parallel, between our poor perception of future and risk in the financial world, to the need for absolute clarity to hit "peak everything" like a nail on the head.

If we are lousy at prediction, how lucky would we have to be to nail that one?On Jeremy Carl argues that coal will be with us for a long while posted 2 years ago 43 Responses

growth paths

"How likely is it that people will accept the necessary paradigm shift to reverse consumption and live in a manner that only takes things from the Earth at the rate they are replaced by nature?"

Not likely, but hopefully we can avoid the very worst outcomes.  For that we have to keep our eye on what are the most damaging practices at the moment, and going forward.

We want to grow, ideally, by the least damaging route.On Jeremy Carl argues that coal will be with us for a long while posted 2 years ago 43 Responses

numbers

I hope you are aware that it is perfectly possible for AC to be California's highest peak load, and for other states to still have higher per-capita AC consumption.  I mean, jeez, look across the way at Nevada.

On California and sprawl, I think jobs and services are starting to be distributed a bit more within the sprawl.  Sprawl-haters want to refuse the idea that sprawl could become or resemble 'mesh villages' ... but I see glimmers.On New report summarizes clean tech in California posted 2 years ago 11 Responses

growth

elbarto, the problem with many pro-growth and anti-growth arguments is that they don't pause to  define "growth."  They both, for their own reasons, want you to assume you know what it means (good or bad).

Sometimes these same articles will use GDP as a measure for growth.  That's a narrow financial measurement, and not one directly related to environmental or sustainability arguments.

Sure, we might conceive of a sustainable society with static GDP.  We might also conceive of a sustainable society with growing (or falling) GDP.

In the here and now, I think GDP, and other simple measures of economic growth, are interesting for what they don't tell us about the environmental.

It is simply not true in our world that GDP is proportional to economic damage.  Some nations manage to do less harm while making more GDP, and some unfortunates do a great deal of harm while struggling to produce very little GDP.

When the real world shows a flexible connection between "growth" and sustainability, even in the narrow sense of "GDP growth" ... maybe the thing to do is to understand that flexibility and to turn it to our advantage.On Jeremy Carl argues that coal will be with us for a long while posted 2 years ago 43 Responses

'per barrel'

Surely Louisiana, and Alaska(!), make more literally per barrel than most other states.  That is, their GDP might be low, but might be more oil-based.

Someone needs to hit the numbers again, looking at oil employment per state or something.On How oil-intense is your state's economy? posted 2 years ago 10 Responses

$20

"If people don't pick up Amory's famous $20 bills lying on the ground, maybe that's because they aren't really there."

Or $20 isn't worth stooping for.  The median US new-car price is up to $28K these days.  Our Priuses, starting down at $20K, are affordable for most of the market ... but most will spend more both on car and on gas ... as they pursue luxury or whatever.

(The devil on my shoulder says that if the Indians and Chinese are going to keep burning coal, I should trade in my Prius for a 400HP monster ...)On Jeremy Carl argues that coal will be with us for a long while posted 2 years ago 43 Responses

california

"California emits fewer GHG emissions per capita than Germany, the United Kingdom, or Japan."

I'd love to be proud of that, but I'm sure part is just climate.  It would be fairer to compare us to same-latitude industrial states.On New report summarizes clean tech in California posted 2 years ago 11 Responses

The Chart

Heh, I just looked at the chart, saw that the Plug-In Hybrid would be a net win on C02 for my power mix, and called it a day.  I skipped the text because that seemed to be the bottom line.

(I get 'power mix' tags from my electric company: 16% renewables, 11% large hydro, 17% nuke, 41% natural gas, 15% coal.)On Giving up car-lessness for Rob Lowe's plug-in hybrid posted 2 years ago 27 Responses

the science of the possible

So what's actually possible right now G., given our  infrastructure and social constraints?

(Some people don't like to think of "designing for acceptance" as engineering, but I do.  Books like Mastering the Dynamics of Innovation, and The Innovator's Dilemma reinforce my view.)On Giving up car-lessness for Rob Lowe's plug-in hybrid posted 2 years ago 27 Responses

Peak OIl and Telecommuting

There are well over 100 million blogs now, and it's sometimes good to break out of the rut, and search to see what you find.  I did a "lastest posts" search on "peak oil" a little while back, and found this guy: part one, part two.

Interesting stuff.On We have $100-a-barrel oil due to speculation and fear posted 2 years ago 54 Responses

intrinsic

I thought about it a bit more, and I think what you are calling "intrinsic price" is the theoretical production cost for oil supplied to the US.

That's a hard thing to actually calculate because (a) the list of suppliers is constantly changing and (b) the list is very large.

That is illustrted by this "source country by year" matrix.  36 thousand barrels from Israel?  146 thousand barrels from Jamaica? 505 thousand barrels from Lithuania?  I'd guess that there is a lot of international trading going on there, and all we have is the most recent owner of record.

Now, way back above you say:

"Oil should only cost about 50 USD a barrel."

First of all we have to assume that all those nations in that matrix "should" sell their oil to us at cost(!), but beyond that we have to assume that we know what there aggregate costs are ... and that they will have any meaning 10 minutes from now.

Where does that $50 come from exactly?

More recently you say:

"The fact is the crude oil market does NOT respond to supply and demand curves all the time like you'd like to see in Econ 101.  I've been around long enough to know better."

I think the market does certainly respond to supply and demand curves, though overlaid on that we have human emotion (bounded rationality) and governmental intervention (texas railroad commission, opec embargoes, carbon taxes ...) On We have $100-a-barrel oil due to speculation and fear posted 2 years ago 54 Responses

Sorry

"o Odograph, perhaps I can help.  Let's assume that crude oil has no value - none.  By the time it reaches the docks at a receiving terminal it now does have value.  That's because you had to find the oil, drill it, maintain it, extract it, de-gass it, settle it, de-brine it, store it in huge tanks, pump it into a ship or pipeline, transport it, and so forth.  All these costs are fairly well known, and come out somewhere about $50 per barrel today.

I hope that makes some sense as to what are "inherent" costs.  There's quite a bit of economic theory behind it.  If that doesn't feel good for you, well at least I tried."

Did you catch when I said "without resorting to up (or down) stream 'ask, bid, and settle" prices.'?

I guess not.  You named a series of costs, themselves changing over time.  Not only do they change as the ask/bid/settle price on land/labor/energy change, they change as the average energy mix changes.

You've reduced "inherent" price to an arbitrary point-measure of whatever is going on in the world at the moment.

Funny that you frame that as "economics" because it flies in the face of Econ 101 - starting supply and demand curves, but continuing on to substitutability of inputs for your oil production and etc.On We have $100-a-barrel oil due to speculation and fear posted 2 years ago 54 Responses

ask, bid, and settle.

And tomorrow there is a new "ask, bid, and settle."

If you think one is "inherent" there is probably not much I can do to help you ... other than perhaps to ask you how an "inherent" price could ever be calculated without resorting to up (or down) stream "ask, bid, and settle" prices.

The money itself (as we are seeing in recent, unfortunate, currency trends) is subject to "ask, bid, and settle."

At some point, IMNSHO, you have to grow up and say "prices just are."On We have $100-a-barrel oil due to speculation and fear posted 2 years ago 54 Responses

EIA

I've pointed out in the past that I think the EIA just moves it's predictions to match the present.  They essentially predict a new base price that is the same as today's price.

Now, you might think at first sight that they've changed their stripes with this higher price prediction, but really they are playing the same game.

They say today's market conditions will last until 2030.  You may agree, but ... remember that's what they said five years ago.  They were wrong then, because the 'safe' prediction that 'all things being equal' did not hold.

I say 2030 is totally up in the air.On We have $100-a-barrel oil due to speculation and fear posted 2 years ago 54 Responses

prices

OK, it's silly to say prices should be this level ... but why is it any less silly to say they should be at some other level?

Prices just are.

It's the stuff of empty punditry to say why exactly they are, or why exactly they should be something else.  Puffery and hackery I say, Sir!

(It is somewhat more interesting to talk about factors contributing to prices, but always with humility, of course.)On We have $100-a-barrel oil due to speculation and fear posted 2 years ago 54 Responses

2% is not that big

electrical power generation by sourceOn OPEC nations demand that petroleum-consuming countries maintain current thirst for oil posted 2 years ago 13 Responses

jatropha

The craziest thing I ever heard was that the Saudis were going to plant Jatropha: linkOn OPEC nations demand that petroleum-consuming countries maintain current thirst for oil posted 2 years ago 13 Responses

Pfft.

Way to miss the point Ron.  It was never about who was frightened.  It was about who gave up, surrendered, went out back and off'd themselves.

No one?On Delusional Beltway optimism about energy posted 2 years ago 32 Responses

Tempest in a Teacup

This is the same old argument (mostly without me this time).  It is "how will today's world solve tomorrow's problems."  Obviously that never happens, ever.

If the world becomes convinced that a problem is looming it will investigate, change and adapt.  The research into hydrogen cars and plug-in hybrids is that kind of investigation.  That's good news, right?

We aren't out of the woods (maybe) but we're tryin'

I'm with John B. We didn't give up when the Martians landed at Grover's Mill.On Delusional Beltway optimism about energy posted 2 years ago 32 Responses

Tom

I knew I was drawing a bit of a caricature, but not totally.  I might not be the isolated moderate that I sometimes imagine myself to be ..

But.  The main reason I respond is to note that last night on NPR a Republican spinner listing the reason people can't vote for Democrats.  It's because they listen to "special interests" ... a list .. blah ... blah .. "trial lawyers, environmentalists."

At that point I perk up and shake my head.  To his side, environmentalists are still bogey men.  They are a scary thing to lock in that rightist party vote.On Obama condemns mining reform package as too hard on the mining industry posted 2 years ago 18 Responses

if it's not obvious

The Democratic candidate knows that (s)he owns every vote here.

The same kind of thing is happening on the other side, as the Republican candidate knows that he owns every evangelical vote.On Obama condemns mining reform package as too hard on the mining industry posted 2 years ago 18 Responses

sail

You made me chuckle.

But I've always thought naval battles under sail must have been the pinnacle of warfare ... America's Cup, only with cannon.On Disturbing news is more likely to be ignored posted 2 years ago 41 Responses

human nature

"The peak oil fantasy is really a well crafted diversion created by oil traders through their mouthpieces, oil and energy analysts and pundits."

I don't think they need to bother, when human nature casts about for things to fear.

I mean, again, why the freaking heck (family friendly version) is there a show called Mega Disasters on TV every week?

... because it is in our nature.On Disturbing news is more likely to be ignored posted 2 years ago 41 Responses

pop

population scenarios are hard, but I point to the gapminder videos again to remind you that we are not on some fixed train-track to the chasm.

We are bubbling toward our future ...On Disturbing news is more likely to be ignored posted 2 years ago 41 Responses

response

It's not no response, it is just a split response:

US Consumers Shifting Away from Average Fuel Economy in Both Directions; Sales of Less-Efficient Vehicles Increasing as Well as Sales of More-Efficient VehiclesOn Why we're not conserving like it's 1980 posted 2 years ago 13 Responses

subtext

A humorous subtext for me is just how many values people calculate for 'inflation adjusted' oil and gasoline.  Whenever we hit a record it seems, a new calculation moves it away again.

Now, the reality is that "inflation" as judged through prices and not money supply, has as one of its components energy prices (oil and gasoline).

So of course even the 'rational' calculations of 'inflation adjusted' oil and gas are a bit irrational.

More appropriate are the measures of oil and gas per household income & etc.On Why we're not conserving like it's 1980 posted 2 years ago 13 Responses

nightly news

You had me with "nightly news" but lost me with "Mote in God's Eye" ... which I read, appropriately, as an adolescent.

Yes, "bad news" in the sense of war is on the nightly news, right now.  So predicting things that are existing and true in today's world is a fairly safe bet.

Extending that to (in the case of Mote) the rise of 3-armed, post-apocalyptic, mutant races ... not so much ;-)On Disturbing news is more likely to be ignored posted 2 years ago 41 Responses

visceral

Trock, I think you've brought us back to that Time magazine article on risk.:

Which risks get excessive attention and which get overlooked depends on a hierarchy of factors. Perhaps the most important is dread. For most creatures, all death is created pretty much equal. Whether you're eaten by a lion or drowned in a river, your time on the savanna is over. That's not the way humans see things. The more pain or suffering something causes, the more we tend to fear it; the cleaner or at least quicker the death, the less it troubles us. "We dread anything that poses a greater risk for cancer more than the things that injure us in a traditional way, like an auto crash," says Slovic. "That's the dread factor." In other words, the more we dread, the more anxious we get, and the more anxious we get, the less precisely we calculate the odds of the thing actually happening. "It's called probability neglect," says Cass Sunstein, a University of Chicago professor of law specializing in risk regulation.

OMG

I hope people went to my "Mega Disasters" link above, to hear what it was about.

It is a cable show that caters every week to the human need for visceral (but safe) fear.

It is about watching a disaster, getting briefly scared, forgetting about it, and tuning in the next week to get scared again.

In the blurb I quoted, glacial melting script was combined with mid-west flood video to present an absurd and immediate threat: "What would you do ... if the ice caps melted?  would you go to the airport?"

Excuse me?  It is a rational fear that ice might melt so fast that we have to run to the airport?

And now ... someone is happy that Peak Oil has made it to that venue?

I am shocked by that ... but I'm also left asking, is that where the more bizarre, compressed, fears about Peak Oil belong?

... be sure to tune in the week after, for pandemics.On Disturbing news is more likely to be ignored posted 2 years ago 41 Responses

the mix

I think we should be back to 'the mix,'  some necessarily messy combination of individual, public, and private action.

I don't doubt some 'shocks' could yield some 'emergency measures.'  The Great Depression and the World Wars provide models for that kind of thing.

But (a) I'm not sure central planning will get strong traction in this society without those shocks, and (b) I don't think we'll know the nature of the planning until we know the nature of the shocks.

And so, history moves like a slime mold, reaching its waxy tendrils into spaces that will be the future.On We don't need to destroy our economy to save the planet posted 2 years ago 79 Responses

umbrellas

I think my comment was a worry that you won't get a rethinking of those concepts, in terms of environment, or whatever.

I'm afraid that behind those top issues are fixed positions, set piece battles, ready to be repeated.

... time will tell.  NPR just did a bunch of quickie interviews with voters from across the country.  Some seemed to be repeating the fixed positions from '00 and '04.  Some seemed ready for a rethinking.

One guy (an independent from the south) actually mentioned global warming!On New Kaiser poll reveals voter priorities posted 2 years ago 9 Responses

predictions after known errors

One of the things we aren't supposed to talk about are Kunstler's old Y2K predictions, but really that is like forgiving him for the '05 stock market crash prediction, and then moving on.

I guess it's kind of nice and human for us to forgive our sooth-sayers, but it's kind of weird too.

I don't know why we should suddenly expect them to be right in the future, especially on "the big one."On Do the experts know anything about oil prices? posted 2 years ago 12 Responses

moderation

and no amount of moderation will sway the fringe.

Of course it's true on the other side too.  There are those who think Ronnie should have gotten every idea he wanted through congress ... and that they were eeeevil for not going along.  Such is the polarization of American politics.

Why be pragmatic when you can make an effigy?

(I'm up chatting with Russia about work, that's my excuse.)On The renewables revolution posted 2 years ago 20 Responses

BTW

If I recall correctly, there is a bit in the middle of that presentation, about the habit oil industry analysts have to reset their predictions, and move on, without explaining what happened to the old ones.

That is, the answer to new conditions is a new prediction, and not a backwards looking analysis about the value of their predictions.On Do the experts know anything about oil prices? posted 2 years ago 12 Responses

My Goodness

I pointed to Marginal Revolution a day or two ago, as an "economics" site that did a good job of tying that field to ... whatever I said.

Today's posts have all been winners, but would you believe this China fact?

"...there are 100 gigawatts of "illegal" electric power plants in China, meaning plants not approved by the central government. (The entire nation of France uses 80 gigawatts of power. China uses 650 gigawatts.)"

Attached to the "Clinton energy" subject because it drives home how much the problem is actually international at this point.  Whatever we do here, it must be a lever to ultimate international agreement ... or we lose anyway.On Some reflections on the strengths and weaknesses of Hillary's new proposal posted 2 years ago 9 Responses

BTW

Is there actually any Presidential candidate who does not endorse corn ethanol subsidies?

Need to form the Cynic's Party ...

It is sad that we have to work so hard to figure the "net" advantages and disadvantages of plans that are all in some part "stupid."On Clinton lays out her new energy policy posted 2 years ago 7 Responses

consumption

I, the moderate, don't think it is either or.  I don't think we have to stop spending if we redirect spending in the right ways.

Indeed, we might have to.  If organic, free-range, potatoes cost cost more than bulk chemical potatoes, then maybe we have to skip the Starbucks to pay for them.

(If a really nice bicycle costs a few grand, that might not be so bad, if we are saving that much on fossil fuels.On Working with cities to create markets for green products posted 2 years ago 18 Responses

gut politics

(BoiD, politicians found to be imperfect humans ... film at 11)

You know, I used to listen to KPFK out here in California (part of Pacifica Radio for those who know their politics).

It used to surprise me how much people could personalize their anger, really at the country's direction, and put it on Reagan.

But that wasn't the MOST surprising part.

The most surprising part was that I could tune into KPFK years later and find the same anger, from the far left, directed at Clinton.  He had "abandoned the left."

Now of course Clinton is raised (praised) for the Reaganish things he did.

This is really the bizarre nature of American politics.  You always need "someone opposite" to do something that needs to be done.  You need a Nixon to go to China.  You need a Clinton to rethink welfare.On The renewables revolution posted 2 years ago 20 Responses

BTW

I don't believe those social cuts have been "optimal" and agree about limitations of "the legislative process" On The renewables revolution posted 2 years ago 20 Responses

his claim

"The one area in which I have been persistently disappointed throughout my term of office has been in the efforts to bring the budget under control. Time and again I have proposed measures to help curb Federal domestic program spending. Time and again these proposals have been rejected by Congress."

That was his perspective, and I believe he was honestly trying.On The renewables revolution posted 2 years ago 20 Responses

Britain circa 1948

is that what you guys are looking for?On We don't need to destroy our economy to save the planet posted 2 years ago 79 Responses

cutting spending

Reagan was one of those old time Republicans who thought if you were going to cut taxes, you should actually try to cut spending too.  (How quaint.)

If I were going to make a defense of those cuts though, I might do along the lines of The Mythical Man Month and diminishing returns.

If the tech was just not ripe for (say) solar energy, what makes anyone think an extra billion would necessarily make it right?  (The disproof seems to be that we've spent those billions later, and still have not got that magic solar tech that beats fossil fuels on price.)

I think the tricky thing to argue is where R&D spending is "non-optimum" and why.

Spending more just cuz we want it sooner is the response of a pointy-haired boss, or a non-technical voter.On The renewables revolution posted 2 years ago 20 Responses

replenishing aquifers

That is the textbook story, that rains replenish aquifers.  But don't we know that many regions in the US (and world) are running on fossil water?On More evidence that industrial ag is destroying the planet posted 2 years ago 18 Responses

quant

'externalities' are nothing more than 'quantitative harm.'

Is the argument between who want all these arguments to remain qualitative?On We don't need to destroy our economy to save the planet posted 2 years ago 79 Responses

Post-Soviet

One pundit put it that they went to economic think tanks, and the sort of economists who had never run a business.  Of course they had a hard road anyway, given the way their economy was broken along the new national borders.

Maybe we agree that the framework is good, when you really use it honestly.  When you use just part of the framework, to prove some point ... that's like any other selective truth-telling.On We don't need to destroy our economy to save the planet posted 2 years ago 79 Responses

Doh!

And me with my Ortleib bike bags.On We don't need to destroy our economy to save the planet posted 2 years ago 79 Responses

distance

How far do you want to be from the real world?

That's the question economists, and we outsiders, face as we discuss 'interesting' questions.

It is certainly true, observable in the real world, that stiff taxes can limit consumption.  One reason Denmark has the highest bike ridership in the world is that they support bikes.  Another is that they put stiff fees on cars.  (When I was a kid the tax on an imported car in Denmark was 100%.  Not sure if that is still true, but I'm sure you can picture how it influenced the decision then, of car-or-bike.)

So I'm confuse Bart, are you saying that there is no point in pursuing, through trial and error, the right kind of incentives in the market?

.... because economists are sometimes "bad?"On We don't need to destroy our economy to save the planet posted 2 years ago 79 Responses

price

Why don't we have gold clogging our landfills Jon?

I'll answer for you.  It is priced by nature at a level that forces us to shepherd it very carefully.  Same with Kopi Luwak coffee, etc., etc.

The question is a societal one.  Are we willing to artificially price carbon high enough that people will shepherd carefully?

Maybe not, but I think we'll get a lot more immediate progress by changing the carbon equation for everybody, than by attracting a few dozen people world-wide to a dedicated 100-mile lifestyle.

I mean, didn't basically everyone (who didn't have a book deal based on their diet) break down in less than 12  months?On We don't need to destroy our economy to save the planet posted 2 years ago 79 Responses

visions

I think a nice vision of backyard avocado trees (and maybe chicken coops) works in conjunction with a weekly trip to Trader Joe's, or even web-buy from NewEgg.

(Note that some stores are evil for important an equivalent share of their goods as Trader Joe's, while TJ tends not to be a target.)

There are better-practices (though the accounting for 'best' practices are difficult).

In my opinion though, the "shallow" visions with 100 or 200 mile boundraies are not it.  They can easily rope in the bad as the good.

And to show how much this is about contagious ideas rather than good theory ... consider how few 100 mile advocates can actually describe the math that favors that number, or that plan, over any other.

X mile diets, or X mile consumption, sell because they are easy to say.  On the other hand, the market works on the assumption that costs are embedded in price.  When externalities are included, that certainly works.

The real problem we've had is that externalities not included.On We don't need to destroy our economy to save the planet posted 2 years ago 79 Responses

great post

and if this is really about global warming, let's just work toward global carbon taxes, and then let the market adjust.

Put the other way, as long as Chinese carbon dioxide emissions are "free" it doesn't mater what we smaller(!) nations do.On We don't need to destroy our economy to save the planet posted 2 years ago 79 Responses

trains

The WSJ reports that "Momentum is growing in Congress to bolster Amtrak and help states expand rail service as lawmakers grow concerned over global warming, transportation gridlock and high oil prices."On Progressive pundits don't seem to be fully grappling with the oil problem posted 2 years ago 10 Responses

looking wrong-way through a telescope

So why didn't 1906 SF bring permanent collapse?On Why I don't agree with James Kunstler about peak oil and the 'end of suburbia' posted 2 years ago 65 Responses

Creativity

There are a lot of creative responses yet to be explored.

We are again arguing pre-adaptation, while "current gasoline prices are actually quite low as a share of household income by historical standards"

We can pilot, test, report on our adaptation techniques, and they might be picked up as energy prices rise, and more people (each at their own individual threshold) respond.

(I can report that my Prius works very well for me, though my adaptation in 2005 was "premature" by mainstream standards.)On Progressive pundits don't seem to be fully grappling with the oil problem posted 2 years ago 10 Responses

to be clear

I believe in helping people in need.  Habitat for Humanity sent me a stupid award ($20 shipping!).

The thing is, I can separate small tragedies from the overall trends of human history.On Why I don't agree with James Kunstler about peak oil and the 'end of suburbia' posted 2 years ago 65 Responses

selective editing

Pangolin, surely you know someone could have done that kind of hit and run, bad news summary, at any time in the last 2000 years?

The problem is that each one does not stand, without selective editing, on its own.  Take this one:

"I've seen multiple point systems failure in action when Oakland lost 3,000 houses in a single afternoon due to fire, poor plannning and lack of foresight."

So what's happened since then?  Does Oakland have fewer homes, of less value, now than before the fire?

Or did they build back from what was actually a small tragedy, typical of human history?On Why I don't agree with James Kunstler about peak oil and the 'end of suburbia' posted 2 years ago 65 Responses

natural gas

John, you know that "cheap hydrogen" is reformed from "currently cheap natural gas" ... right?

Just burn the natural gas in your car and you'll come out ahead.On Why I don't agree with James Kunstler about peak oil and the 'end of suburbia' posted 2 years ago 65 Responses

"in their current form"

Does anyone really believe that?

The world is reinvented every minute, and anyone who doubts that should look back at the Gapminder video David linked in a little while back.

And so I say "false dichotomy" to this idea of a static present, versus one great leap we all must make (led by the appropriate prophets and elites of course).

(When I talk to people about 'walkable communities' hidden in the suburbs, they start to think about it, and name a few they already know.  This is something ripe for evolution.)On Why I don't agree with James Kunstler about peak oil and the 'end of suburbia' posted 2 years, 1 month ago 65 Responses

Q & A

"After a certain point, the marginal cost of efficiency improvements becomes greater than the marginal value of fuel saved, even at extremely high oil prices. What is that point? Is a rough estimate possible?"

Of course not, but I think it's a good bet that this will unfold over decades rather than (say) between now and Christmas.

That makes it really hard to guess how creative we'll all get over time.  Most of us haven't started.On Why I don't agree with James Kunstler about peak oil and the 'end of suburbia' posted 2 years, 1 month ago 65 Responses

tuning

I'm more in tune with Mr. Romm on this post than others.  The only quibble I'd make is that his prediction, made with admirable hesitance, is just one possible future:

"Suppose oil hits $160 a barrel and gasoline goes to $5 dollars a gallon in, say, 2015."

I think that's actually pretty mild, almost business (change) as usual.  Then again, that may be all we get, and nothing more extreme.

I think I'm more rankled by the Kunstler "worker bee" quote.  There are certainly worker bees, folks with low creativity, in every field ... but it's dangerous to dismiss a whole aspect of ourselves (we are all builders, creators) with that slur.

The scientists and engineers are going to try, and we have since the days of the pyramids, we'll part of what they dream (after trial and error).On Why I don't agree with James Kunstler about peak oil and the 'end of suburbia' posted 2 years, 1 month ago 65 Responses

too optimistic

I was going to try to be funny, and give you a hard time about being too optimistic, but ... it's too early.

Essays like this can be useful, especially if we remember that there are thousands of parallel essays possible, with their own outcomes.   We are charting possible futures.

(When I say this to some people they say "You mean like Sliders."  Yes I do, though that "literary" reference makes me slightly nervous.)

I can see bits and pieces of Alan's essay being more likely than others ... but whatever happens will be organic and evolving.  We don't know.  Stay flexible.On An electrified transit advocate tries soothsaying posted 2 years, 1 month ago 2 Responses

ANWR?

Here's one for you Zeus:

Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz:

    "America's energy policy has been based on 'drain America first'; as we have used up a significant share of our scarce oil reserves, the country has become poorer, even if GDP has done well."

So what exactly are you going to do, AFTER you drain ANWR?

(that's from an interesting article, on Why relying on GDP as a leading economic gauge can lead to poor decision-making.)On No supply-side energy solution will come to our rescue posted 2 years, 1 month ago 16 Responses

Pretty Good

I thought the Landsburg article was pretty good, but I think he avoided the issue of "reversibility."

If someone needs help now (in ours or a foreign land), we can help them now or later.  But if we are facing some kinds of irreversible environmental change we may have one and only one chance at heading them off.

We (or future generations) can't say, "OK, let's save X" when X is long gone.

... just as we can't say "ok, lets save the already extinct species."On Says uptight libertarian wonk posted 2 years, 1 month ago 5 Responses

attitude

"World oil production is at its peak and set to fall 32% by 2020 as discoveries wane, said Ali Samsam Bakhtiari, a former executive of Iran's state oil company..."

Those of us open to this could do 32% standing on our heads (if we haven't already).  The interesting thing to watch will be the cultural response, as actual decline is documented.

I've used metaphors like "this is a hill we can't see over" etc.On No supply-side energy solution will come to our rescue posted 2 years, 1 month ago 16 Responses

thanks

Thanks for the update.  I'll have to review those in more detail.  On the surface Carl Pope seems to be the one who gets it.  Well, the NDRC comes close, but calling for Federal funding is a bad idea.  If houses on the fringes of chaparral lands need management, why not their owners?

FWIW, I tried to track down actual ignition causes for some major/recent California fires.

The best link I found for solid data was with the InciWeb for California (incident management system).On Greens should talk about climate disasters when people are listening posted 2 years, 1 month ago 16 Responses

Chaparral and Fire

I'm slow to accept a strong or obvious GW linkage to our California fires.  We've had them here all life.  Not only do I remember dads up hosing off roofs as the hills burned, I remember learning that the plants in our hills are evolved for fire.

So sure, let's investigate the linkage.  Let's try to see what fraction of the problem might be GW, what part might be land use and land management, what part might be invasive species ... and what part might be natural.

(The GW linkage might be more pronounced somewhere else, some place where fire is 'foreign.')On Greens should talk about climate disasters when people are listening posted 2 years, 1 month ago 16 Responses

seven percent solution

my research futzing around on the web shows that the "7%" number was probably in error.

(that was an olde movie reference!)On Reports bring various doomy and gloomy predictions posted 2 years, 1 month ago 5 Responses

volver

Did you see Volver?

Interesting how the wind turbines were used as scenery and as metaphor.  I think I've seen that in other films/tv as well ...

I don't "get" the idea that they are bad.  By maybe that is in my genes.  They get a century or two old and they're scenic, dontcha know.On Is wind worth it? posted 2 years, 1 month ago 72 Responses

Profits?

I thought the funniest line in the source article was this one:

Interestingly, the windmill companies proposing to build in New York are primarily European-owned. Consequently, the profits will leave the area.

If the author is worried about "profits" fleeing, then yes, they are obviously "worth it."

Maybe he should build one himself, to snare those same profits!

BTW, blogfish posted a question about wind farms, and then a link to this summary of the Danish experience.

Is it true that the European experience, when you really look at it, is stacking in wind's favor?On Is wind worth it? posted 2 years, 1 month ago 72 Responses

peak oil by another name

I think it sometimes happens Jon, that if a group holds a line that "we are not mainstream" and "that is not enough change for us" they can win (in the sense that many of their ideas are adopted) even as they never win (they never get the whole enchilada).

I don't doubt that Hubbart's Peak (or something like it) will sink in.  Heck, after last night's discussion I turned on the TV and there was a BP ad saying "Oil won't last forever."

I'm not sure that the mainstream will call it "peak oil" though.  Like me, they might think that "links in" a whole lot of other ideas.On A review of a new doomer cult classic posted 2 years, 1 month ago 55 Responses

Archdruid quotes

From Climbing Down The Ladder, October 10, 2007, a few clips:

Industrial civilization faces collapse, in turn, because when fossil fuels are scarce and expensive, and the biosphere is undergoing drastic changes, its ability to maintain itself against the challenges of nature and competition from other, less energy- and technology-dependent human social systems is doubtful at best. The forms of human society that rise to prominence in the aftermath of industrialism, in turn, will be those that can establish and maintain themselves more effectively than their rivals in the changing world of the deindustrial age. We may have our preferences, but nature has the final say.

...

It's quite likely that for some decades or centuries, deindustrial societies that would not be able to build a hydroelectric plant or a computer could still maintain the rather less demanding knowledge and resource base needed to keep them functioning, in much the way that Dark Age communities all over Europe used and repaired Roman acqueducts they could never have built themselves. Still, much of the legacy technology inherited by the deindustrial age will not be a renewable resource; when it finally breaks down, it's gone - for decades, or centuries, or forever.

...

In the middle term, societies that combine sustainable subsistence strategies and economies with an effective use of the industrial age's legacy technologies will likely do much better than the lingering fossil fuel-dependent societies they replace, or the ecotechnic societies that will replace them in turn. Only when fossil fuel production has dropped to the point that coal and oil are rare geological curiosities, and the remaining legacies of the industrial age no longer play a significant economic role, will ecotechnic societies come into their own.

...

This approach is evolutionary rather than revolutionary - that is, it relies on incremental changes and a continuous process of experimentation rather than trying to break from the past and impose an ideal that may turn out to be no more viable that what it replaces. Among other things, this means that it can be carried out on local and even individual scales, a detail that makes it much more viable in practical terms than attempts to change society as a whole from the top down. How this process might unfold will be the subject of several future posts.

That boy's got vision, I'll give him that.On A review of a new doomer cult classic posted 2 years, 1 month ago 55 Responses

Binding Yourself To Doom

Actually I don't know Megan at all, I only think she missed her chance to differentiate between "Peak Oil" and "Doom Theory."

And when you fail to do that, when in fact you step up to support Doom Theory, you bind yourself to it.

You may pick up the random madman who surfs the web looking for new paranoia, but you'll drop a lot of rational readers who rightly say "this stuff is nuts!"

Expecting them to keep a scorecard, and to differentiate the voices in a site that reads like a Doom Club is unrealistic.

(To me The Archdruid reads like a guy so held by his vision of the future that he stops seeing it as a vision.  It is real to him, questions of uncertainty are long past.  All disagreement is denial.)On A review of a new doomer cult classic posted 2 years, 1 month ago 55 Responses

models

I don't think (Nissim Taleb reader that I am) that models have really worked that well in the past, certainly not for complex social trends.

If you have evidence of a success rate ...On A review of a new doomer cult classic posted 2 years, 1 month ago 55 Responses

Worst-Case Scenarios

I think Dave, that it's a special case of a wider question in environmental circles.  That is do you try for a rational and balanced discussion of uncertain risk, or do you present the worst case?  Do you try to sell fear?

FWIW, my evidence of the "turn-off" effect in Peak Oil starts with the Harper's article "Imagine there's no oil: scenes from a liberal apocalypse."

As with Global Warming & etc., when you go too far you risk backlash.On A review of a new doomer cult classic posted 2 years, 1 month ago 55 Responses

collapase

"To say that civilization will collapse just because oil is gone, to me, is wrong."

And yet Jon, I "predict" that this prediction will be made again, in these very pages.On A review of a new doomer cult classic posted 2 years, 1 month ago 55 Responses

Sunstein

Interestingly, Prof. Cass R. Sunstein was reported in one place as being one of Sen. Obama's legal advisors.

His opinions on risk (and global warming) may matter to you in the future.On A review of a new doomer cult classic posted 2 years, 1 month ago 55 Responses

gut probabilities

I think I might want people who are going with their gut to be less forceful than:

"All signs are that we may be facing a kind of global economic collapse because of peak oil."

That "all signs" bit is a pretty strong warning for the neophyte.

But lets talk about "intuition."  How good is that in the field of futurism, political prediction, etc?

Don't a lot of studies tell us we, as a species are not good at that at all?On A review of a new doomer cult classic posted 2 years, 1 month ago 55 Responses

well

I think you might understand the difficulty people outside the (insular and self-referential) peak oil community have with this kind of analysis.

Basically, you look at all the hard numbers (oil production and prices), and then with your experience, and your gut, you assign "probabilities."

Surely you will admit that someone with similar background might choose a different set of probabilities?

Isn't that kind of disagreement in fact common?

It's not like everyone with a breadth of experience like yours picks the same values?

"Global over the next 15 years
business as usual - 10%
mild (recessions, tensions, small wars) - 40%
moderate (depression, revolutions, wars) - 40%
severe (collapse) - 10%"On A review of a new doomer cult classic posted 2 years, 1 month ago 55 Responses

shorter

Sorry for the choppy text above, maybe this sums it up in more of a nutshell.

First, from the movie you are linking:

"All signs are that we may be facing a kind of global economic collapse because of peak oil."

Then you tell me:

"So your demand that people writing about peak oil assign probabilities to it is essentially meaningless -- we all agree that peak as a physical reality is occurring or is near."

This is deeply contradictory, and deeply irrational.

It cognitive dissonance.On A review of a new doomer cult classic posted 2 years, 1 month ago 55 Responses

a familiar cycle

I can remember previous posts JMG has made on hard-core peak oil, collapse, etc.

When I step up and say those fears are irrational JMG (and perhaps you Bart?) steps back to say "but peak oil is real!"

I mean, Good Lord, you just quoted Dr. Schlesinger on the widespread belief in peak oil.  How does that relate to the first words of this new movie's trailer:

"All signs are that we may be facing a kind of global economic collapse because of peak oil."

Are you saying that Dr. Schlesinger supports that?  Are you saying that you have a rational case for "global economic collapse?"

Or will you step back again, having opposed me because you saw a criticism of collapse as an attack on "peak oil?"On A review of a new doomer cult classic posted 2 years, 1 month ago 55 Responses

peak oil

JMG, you can read what I really think about peak oil here, and an update based on recent news, my thinking, and that book, in a rare new post by me, today.

It's funny that you should take the "certainty" angle because I was thinking about that after this morning's post, though I came to a very different answer.

I was thinking about my construction "while Peak Oil represents a real risk, it continues to be an uncertain one."  I thought, that's redundant, all risks are uncertain, aren't they?

When they are known, I said to myself, they stop being risks and become losses.

So I guess you can make the bland point that for any series of numbers there must be a maximum, but that really doesn't tell us what we want to know, does it?  What we really want to know is what loss, if any, we will experience.

(caniscandida, the its/it's sounds like one of those things we know, but that we tend not to notice until the "post" button is irretrievably pressed.)On A review of a new doomer cult classic posted 2 years, 1 month ago 55 Responses

risks

A new book, for those interested in accessing risks like peak oil is Worst-Case Scenarios,
by Cass R. Sunstein

From the blurb:

"Nuclear bombs in suitcases, anthrax bacilli in ventilators, tsunamis and meteors, avian flu, scorchingly hot temperatures: nightmares that were once the plot of Hollywood movies are now frighteningly real possibilities. How can we steer a path between willful inaction and reckless overreaction?"

FWIW, I sent a note to Prof. Sunstein, asking him if peak oil "made the cut" for his book on risks, and if he considered it.  His answer was "no and no."On A review of a new doomer cult classic posted 2 years, 1 month ago 55 Responses

TED audio/video

I love TED too.  I've listened to a number of the MP3s on my walks.

more hereOn This blew a few of my circuits posted 2 years, 1 month ago 3 Responses

for me

efficiency was a much easier buy than solar panels.

With a $15 electric bill this is kind of academic.  But, if I had some large demand that I couldn't reduce through efficiency, I think I might view this as a special time.  Right now we are exploring thin film and nanotech, and if they'll actually add anything of value.

I might give it a couple years to see.On The Solar Power Conference revealed no breakthrough solar tech -- and that's a good thing posted 2 years, 1 month ago 13 Responses

related?

I went through a long thought-process, years ago, when starting an open source software project.  I read all the licenses, tried to find one that would benefit 'the good guys' without benefiting 'the bad guys' ... and decided it couldn't be done.  I went with a very open license (close to public domain) to make sure I wouldn't close any doors for the good guys.

I think that relates to sindark's question.  I don't think there are fixed, legal, or technical designs that can be set up to at once benefit all the good guys while excluding all the bad guys.

And we are left with that choice: do we punish the good to exclude the bad?On Always offer full-content RSS feeds posted 2 years, 1 month ago 7 Responses

good news, bad news

The good news it's not going to encourage mansions.  That's wealth-limited.  The good news is that an eco-mansion is better than an anti-eco-mansion.

(and on a world scale, most of us in the US have mansions.  my 1000 sf is probably a mansion.)

The bad news is that there well be countless blog entries (especially on anti-environmental sites) about environmental hypocrites.  It is fodder for pundits everywhere.On Should USGBC certify a 15,000-sq.-ft. home as green? posted 2 years, 2 months ago 40 Responses

i just read that piece there

and popped back over to see if gristmill had picked it up yet ;-)

I think Tom is going to enjoy (and rue) some network effects under the new regime.

On the article ... of course it is possible that he is correct, though higher energy prices (which all this consumption will bring) should encourage everyone toward those compact fluorescents and hybrids.On Urban growth rates in Qatar and China leave Friedman skeptical about climate change mitigation posted 2 years, 2 months ago 11 Responses

eat less meat

Is eat less meat (or less beef) too wishy-washy a message for vegetarians?

Or is that a good, practical, path to vegetarianism?On On PETA's latest campaign posted 2 years, 2 months ago 256 Responses

Strange Question:

So ethanol policy is raising beef prices, and probably doing more to reduce consumption than the PETA campaign.

Is it doing enough of that back-end "good work" to make up for poorly thought out ethanol policy?On On PETA's latest campaign posted 2 years, 2 months ago 256 Responses

oh

per this page, coal generate 2,460 kWh/ton.

So dividing that $28.50 for a ton of coal by 2,460, yields .. about a penny.

Something's not right.

(And I expect that something between a penny and a dollar would be required to change usage.)On WSJ on the carbon tax vs. cap-and-trade debate posted 2 years, 2 months ago 17 Responses

it takes a ..

I think a shrewd millionaire would build a village of eco-cottages rather than a mega-mansion.  Each cottage would demonstrate green living in a small footprint, but they would add up (with a village theater, gymnasium, and pub) into the grand presentation they desire.On Because I know Grist readers love them posted 2 years, 2 months ago 3 Responses

skimmer

I'm a skimmer, I'll cop to that.

But that said, I don't think beets buy us efficient ethanol, and certainly not efficient enough for those SUVs.

So if you really want me to knock my forehead on the ground three times and say I'm sorry, you have to show me a beet (or any US) solution that produces economic and sustainable ethanol, in volumes requred for a ~25 mpg fleet.On A closer look at producing ethanol from poplar trees posted 2 years, 2 months ago 39 Responses

here you go, john

America is not BrazilOn A closer look at producing ethanol from poplar trees posted 2 years, 2 months ago 39 Responses

oops

I should have used table II-6 above, but that only makes the story worse.  Actual fleet mileage, combined for cars and trucks, foreign and domestic, fell from 25.1 mpg in 1982 to 24.6 mpg in 2002.On Norway bans generic green terms from auto advertising posted 2 years, 2 months ago 9 Responses

intensity

I think the first guy to do the intensity calculation made a valuable contribution.  He showed that some societies were able to prosper with a much lower energy footprint than others.

You can use intensity to argue that Americans could halve their energy use without pain (bringing themselves in-line with Japanese or European levels).

In fact, I've used intensity in arguing with the "we can't do anything about global warming because it would destroy the economy" types.

On the other hand, obviously, you can use that (valuable) number to divert the eye from the final goal.  That's the scam, not the number.On APEC's draft plan to reduce GHG intensity will do nothing to curb emissions posted 2 years, 2 months ago 3 Responses

cars

I think stuff like this is counterproductive.  Big old gas guzzlers still sell in droves.  Their buyers can say, with this degree of truth, "what difference does it make, no car is green."

On another, geeky-techno level, remember that "cars" are just 4-wheel transport for small numbers (one to six?) of people.  When you rag on electric cars you are saying, arbitrarily, that we will never ever have a satisfactory technology for family transport.

You are saying, peering into the future, that only buses and trains will pass that bar (or something).

That's kind of bizarre, because on the geeky-techno level a mini-van is a small bus.  If you can make one work, you might with the right tech make the other work as well.

... unless of course this is religious.  In that case, bring in the priests to see if a mini-van is a car or if it is a bus ;-)On Norway bans generic green terms from auto advertising posted 2 years, 2 months ago 9 Responses

brazil

Tiny little cars, though not as little as in the movie. ;-)

Seriously while many us are ready to downsize (or have downsized), the claim that 'Brazil did it and so can we' is made by stupid people to justify ethanol SUVs.On A closer look at producing ethanol from poplar trees posted 2 years, 2 months ago 39 Responses

tipping point

For those who haven't heard of the phrase in it's recent popular sense, here is Malcom Gladell's tipping point FAQOn A guest essay from Jan Lundberg posted 2 years, 2 months ago 16 Responses

post-capitalism

Galbraith was also one who, long ago, started calling our economy "post-capitalist" (with a new set of concerns).

IMO, "capitalist" like "free market" arguments are all about false dichotomies.

We have a regulated market economy, with as Galbraith noted power resting more among "mangers" than "capitalists."On A review of Peter Barnes' Capitalism 3.0: A Guide to Reclaiming the Commons posted 2 years, 2 months ago 17 Responses

communication

Corrected communication is good.  For what it's worth though, my fear before I checked in this morning was that I was seeing this discussion divorce itself from the mainstream reality, to focus on conflicts that only matter, as David says to the 0.001%.

I tried early on (above) to contrast the small money "kicked in" for offsets with the bigger problem of how you get the mainstream to do anything.

And I don't think we (from our subjective reality) can really answer that.  You've got to ask the buyers of new V-8s or turbos what their thinking is.

For me the combination of Iraq and GW takes all the fun out of mass energy consumption ... but I'm not one of those still buying.On On the problem of carbon-offset projects in developing countries posted 2 years, 2 months ago 49 Responses

I view the dynamic differently

I think our only hope, such is it is, is for a tipping point.  We need enough people shambling in the right direction to create a movement.

Without that the status-quo will stay where it is, and fringe eniros will nip at each others heels forever.

Would-be arbiters of what is "green" and what is "wash" do much to kill that momentum, which is why, again, they find themselves in common-cause with right-wing think tanks.On On the problem of carbon-offset projects in developing countries posted 2 years, 2 months ago 49 Responses

shorter

Do you think a hair-shirt environmentalist who lives in a cave and eats bugs (or less "weakly" simply strangles himself to eliminate his "footprint" once and for all) is actually going to motivate the world to the same change?

Yer nuts.  The problem is how to move the center, not to worry that people already far on the reduced footprint side of the curve might not be quite perfect enough.On On the problem of carbon-offset projects in developing countries posted 2 years, 2 months ago 49 Responses

LOL

I'm sorry, but I've got to laugh.  I think again of my drive in, amongst the gas guzzlers, and think of the words: "it is vital to attack weak environmentalism."On On the problem of carbon-offset projects in developing countries posted 2 years, 2 months ago 49 Responses

as I drove in today

I looked at all the big cars around me, the new Dodge Hemi's with paper plates, the pack of Subaru WRXes winding out their turbo-chargers, the jacked-up 4x4 pickups used as commuter cars ... and I thought of this discussion ... the idea that Prius drivers who kick in $100 bucks on offsets "miss the point."

Pfft.

Environmentalists who turn to fight voluntary offsets in an environment like this are like dogs who turn from the hunt to chase their tails.

This is really about what you do (or if you can do anything) to bring those people on-board.On On the problem of carbon-offset projects in developing countries posted 2 years, 2 months ago 49 Responses

no

You are attempting to put an argument in my mouth that I never made.

At this point voluntary offsets are a way for civilians to do something positive at minimal cost.  You say that I should make sure my $100 will "sequester some tonnes of carbon at least for millenia"

Well, guess what?  Median household income in this country is $48,201 (in 2006).  For a voluntary contribution, essentially a charitable donation, of 100/48201 * 100 = 0.2% of funds you want "millenia?"

That is a distraction.  What you should be arguing, and what I think most offsetters would agree with you arguing, is how you achieve a functional system for worldwide greenhouse gas regulation.On On the problem of carbon-offset projects in developing countries posted 2 years, 2 months ago 49 Responses

if that's true

Why do you find so many allies among the hard right wingers and the anti-environmentalists?

They seem to know that attacking action is a way to forestall action, to dis-empower the players.

As far as I'm concerned, if you want concerted national (or international) action, carbon taxes or limits ... freakin' go for that.

Don't stand around and fret that someone just kicked in $100 to a carbon fund.On On the problem of carbon-offset projects in developing countries posted 2 years, 2 months ago 49 Responses

uncertainty

You know Nucbuddy, we can certainly define the facts as they exist on the ground.  And we can name possible paths to the future.  That's reasonable.

IMO, it is a little less rational to pick a particular path to the future and say that's it, the fat lady has sung, that's what we'll get.

Doomers do that, when they argue that widespread starvation and social collapse are the 'most likely' outcome of peak oil.  And cornucopians do that when they inist that they know, right now, that it will be Scuderias for everybody.

It might be, or it might not.

GreenEngineer reminds us that crude + condensates have demonstrated a short term peak.  They might go up again, but then again, they might not.

This is about planning in the face of uncertainty.On A gaggle of URLs posted 2 years, 2 months ago 24 Responses

water

Water's tricky because it is usually a regional issue (only a tiny, visible, amount traded across vast distances as 'premium' water).

Some regions do run a reasonable water budget based on rain/snowfall and replenishment.  Others withdraw ancient water ('fossil' water) from aquifers - rains that fell long ago.

So while it is becoming in vogue to say 'water' is a global issue, I think it is a bit different than the oil situation.  It's more like global water awareness is an important issue.  Regional water budgets should be examined.

Oil is indeed traded in a world market.  The price and/or supply rise and fall for pretty much all of us.

On the "price band thing" for oil, we did touch (and in some regions exceed) all time highs for inflation-adjusted price.  The worrying thing in the graphs for me is that it hasn't been an even randomness.  Strong bull markets for oil have been rare and this recent one has been unusual.  It seems strongly supply-demand related, and less political than the 80's spikes.

Were the producers just not ready for globalization and higher demand?  Or are they running out of 'easy oil' to drill?

Citing arctic oil as an answer seems to say that we are looking 'less easy' places.On A gaggle of URLs posted 2 years, 2 months ago 24 Responses

non-linear

the exponential is a good starting point, but the interesting questions come after that foundation.

it's fine to say 'at this rate population will be X in 100 years' but it's another to think about what other impacts and feedback loops might influence that prediction.

i suppose you could say the housing bubble is a case in point ;-).  prices were rising on a pretty good exponential for 10 year or so ... until they weren't.On A gaggle of URLs posted 2 years, 2 months ago 24 Responses

end of [cheap] oil

I can relate to the end of [cheap] oil, and have already made decisions to plan for it.

Why wasn't that more moderate message given?

Why did we get the "how will I get food" bit in this paragraph?

At this point, you might be asking yourself: When oil becomes scarce, how will I get food? That's a very good question. Here are a few more: Will my garbage get picked up? How will my water district purify and deliver water and treat sewage without petrochemicals? What if I need an ambulance? What if my home is one of the 7.7 million that rely on oil for heating? Which of my medications are made out of petrochemicals? How will I get to work? Will I even have a job anymore?

That is an understandable emotional reaction to the idea of "peak oil" but it certainly should not be given weight in any rational introduction.

The reasons for this are many, but I think one undercurrent is a misunderstanding by the author of the Hirsch Report, and the famous "10 years preparation."

If you haven't read the report yourself, please do so, and as you do, notice that the Hirsch Report is written with a goal: to maintain the trajectory of our current economic growth in the face of peak oil.

For Hirsch et al, an adjustment to a lower energy and more sustainable lifestyle is out of the picture.  It was not their charter.

On the other hand, we environmentalists might find quite a few win-win scenarios in lower energy economies.

We certainly do not need to declare, as this article does:

Depending on whom you ask, the impacts of peak oil range from dire to catastrophic: At best, get ready for a crippling recession and widespread inflation. At worst, we face severe global food shortages that threaten wide-scale starvation and an overall breakdown of social and economic institutions. And if history is any guide, we can expect a series of military invasions into every remaining oil hot spot in the world - invasions that may, by the way, require even more fossil fuels than we could possibly expropriate by force.

sterling

I've been wondering about those Stirling designs, according to this old quote we should be hearing now how the test system went:

A test site will be built by SoCal Edision which should be complete in the spring of 2007, and produce 1 megawatt of power with 40 units.  SoCal Edison will start construction on their 500 megawatt farm in mid-2008 and finish construction by the end of 2012.  Each dish can produce 25-35 kilowatts, and the site will utilize 20,000 dishes over 4,500 acres and power 300,000 homes and have options to expand to 34,000 dishes with a capacity of 1,350 megawatts.

audit

I used the word "audit" above.  To truly prove what you want to prove you'd need to invade TerraPassers homes, to examine their utility bills, gasoline purchases, and (if any) frequent flier miles.On Offset customers don't buy offsets to justify their other behavior posted 2 years, 3 months ago 37 Responses

wiscidea

You are making the classic, but embarrassing, argument that while available data does not prove your point, if someone would just go out and get new data, you would be redeemed.On Offset customers don't buy offsets to justify their other behavior posted 2 years, 3 months ago 37 Responses

T-Rex

BTW, if this report is true an electric T-Rex is due out here in California in mid-September.  That's almost here.

I don't like "vapor" but I'll count them as soon as they actually ship to live customers.

(found via EV World)On Honda fights to regain green car company mantle posted 2 years, 3 months ago 33 Responses

FWIW

I bought a TerraPass for my old Subaru, but then traded it in for a Prius.On Offset customers don't buy offsets to justify their other behavior posted 2 years, 3 months ago 37 Responses

media

Sorry J, your metaphor crashes on the fact that the hybrids' fuel is the same as cars that came before, and probably quite a few hundred million cars that will come after it.

The 8-track player had a media problem.  It could not play LPs, it could not play cassettes, it could not  play CDs.

Or are you predicting that gas stations will soon close?On Honda fights to regain green car company mantle posted 2 years, 3 months ago 33 Responses

pragmatism

We live in nations with X consumption of fossil fuels per capita.  Anything we can do to reduce the growth in X is an improvement.  Anything we can do to reduce X is genuine accomplishment.

What's the best strategy for that?

I think it's to get people out of < 30 mpg cars and into > 40 mpg cars.  The Prius is an excellent general purpose car that fits that bill, but not the only one.

Getting people to give up cars completely would be fantastic, but what good is selling a medicine few will swallow?On Honda fights to regain green car company mantle posted 2 years, 3 months ago 33 Responses

GreenMiles

You'll save even more by leaping to a Prius.  I used to use things like Jeep Cherokees to get my mountain bike to the trail.On Honda fights to regain green car company mantle posted 2 years, 3 months ago 33 Responses

human nature

I logged in to make a comment about human nature.  Jones already did it much better above

... I was only going to say "what a bunch of dirty monkeys we are!"On Survey reveals truth about environmental fibs posted 2 years, 3 months ago 8 Responses

we

I think we are the ones grappling with CO2 emission limits (by mandate, tax, or traded credits).  If we do that, get something in place, what happens then to this argument that we should inject any of that (limited) CO2 into oil fields?

I don't know, maybe the thinking in this topic ("no enhanced oil recovery") is that without CO2 emission limits, a ban on "oil recovery" will somehow amount to the same thing.  Or maybe not, because that doesn't really make sense to me.On Injecting CO2 into oil wells is not real carbon sequestration posted 2 years, 3 months ago 15 Responses

you know

"Enhanced oil recovery" is a general term, of which CO2 is just one technique.

Is "No enhanced oil recovery" the right title here?

The three major types of enhanced oil recovery operations are chemical flooding (alkaline flooding or micellar-polymer flooding), miscible displacement (carbon dioxide [CO2] injection or hydrocarbon injection), and thermal recovery (steamflood or in-situ combustion). The optimal application of each type depends on reservoir temperature, pressure, depth, net pay, permeability, residual oil and water saturations, porosity and fluid properties such as oil API gravity and viscosity.

- Schlumberger's Oilfield GlossaryOn Injecting CO2 into oil wells is not real carbon sequestration posted 2 years, 3 months ago 15 Responses

quick comments

First, I think Lomborg is more of an environmentalist than those deniers who quote him.   They always say things like "Lomborg says we should only spend $X on global warming, therefore I believe we should spend nothing."  (If you parse out their positions.)  Or better yet, they imply that Lomborg (who owns not car and rides a bicycle) says they can all keep their SUVs.

Other than that, on this:

Lomborg advocates spending 0.05% of GDP on low-carbon R&D. That's about $7 billion a year for the U.S. He also advocates a maximum $2.00 per ton carbon tax. That values U.S. CO2 emissions at about $13 billion a year. To put those numbers in perspective, just consider a single statistic: Exxon alone is worth half a trillion dollars. Lomborg doesn't want Exxon's cash flow redirected by climate policy because he believes society will overspend. Instead he prefers government-backed R&D to pick the technology winners of the future.

That's a misunderstanding of what carbon taxes are for.  They aren't to hurt corporations, they are to change user behavior.  The interesting question (is there an economist in the house?) is whether a $2.00 per ton carbon tax would be sufficient to do that.

I'd think not, but that would be a different sort of proof than just how much money Exxon has.On Bjorn Lomborg's new book misunderstands risk and investment posted 2 years, 3 months ago 11 Responses

FWIW

We are on "tiers" here in SoCal, in which residential users over "baseline" pay more per kwh.  I think JMG is suggesting that be the norm, and I agree.On And it's goood ... posted 2 years, 3 months ago 14 Responses

Personally

I'd like a nice fat carbon tax.  That would price up inefficient products (be they local or not) and allow the efficiency winners (be they local or not) to stand out.

Without that, consumer preference for local food should be an improvement ... but what do you actually do in some place like SoCal sprawl?

Do you spurn the supermarket (with its unlabeled mix of local and distance foods), and and travel further to a "farmer's" market?  When you get there do you quiz vendors on whether they are jobbers or growers, and the MPG of their van?

A middle ground might be to stick to the local market, but to avoid "obviously distant" foods, especially when they are treats rather than nutrition.  Is there a movement for that?On The vexed question of exactly how far our food travels. posted 2 years, 3 months ago 19 Responses

odds

John B., if you re-ran the 1950s and 1960s a thousand times, what fraction do you think would get an atomic war?

(Our view is blinkered because we have just one history, with some combination of long-odds and better-odds events.  We can never know which were which.)On Existential threats are a bummer posted 2 years, 3 months ago 14 Responses

diorama of the future

You know, when I was a kid the Museum of Science and Industry still had one, complete with little moving sidewalks, between Jetson-style buildings ;-)

While it is probably useful to imagine futures, it is probably outmoded thinking to cast one in balsa wood.  What do the actual Futurists do now?  Maybe imagine a bundle of futures possible from here on out?On Would the biosphere care? posted 2 years, 3 months ago 41 Responses

vim

A good word in this context, and a text editor ...

I've thought about that a little, but I got it wrong enough to notice.  I used to say "imagine supermarket shelves and just think of all the silly things that will drop out of the 30,000 items they carry as energy prices rise."  I singled out snack foods and potato chips as "mostly air" and I thought shipped with mostly waste.  Then that darn Walker's Crisps bag had it's CO2 footprint calculated out to 75 grams, and by that measure, it's upstream gasoline demand identified as 1/120 gallon.

If that wasn't enough, we just had early warning here on gristmill that fossil fuel might be better for GHGs than biofuels!

What's a would-be planet designer to think!

(It will be interesting to watch the future pieced together out of these twists and turns.  With vim and vigor we might just make it.)On Would the biosphere care? posted 2 years, 3 months ago 41 Responses

transitions

It's interesting.  If I step back and try to look at energy and environment news with a long-term perspective, as if I were gong to summarize a decide, I'd say that we are in an energy transition.  We are doing fairly massive research into batteries, solar cells, wind turbines, hybrid and electric cars, etc., etc.  Efficiency investments have surged ahead.  All that isn't just in obscure engineering effort, it attracts mainstream attention.

We don't know how it will all work out though, because we don't know if society has got the right sense of the problem.  We won't know "unless and until" we hit some crisis.

And we have, for better or worse, the gas crunches of the 70's and 80's for reference.  Those looked like energy transitions (Peter Tertzakian does an excellent job of summarizing them in "A Thousand Barrels A Second").  But they didn't stick, because they didn't prove to be the oil "endgame."On Would the biosphere care? posted 2 years, 3 months ago 41 Responses

BTW

I have argued myself that we could be fuzzily at something fuzzily like peak oil.  But I'm not going to bet the farm.  I'm not going to offer someone 100:1 odds because I am "sure."

It's a fuzzy bet, even if I lean toward it being "true" in a fuzzy sense.  And I can still be wrong.On Would the biosphere care? posted 2 years, 3 months ago 41 Responses

meaning

"You keep hearing with biofuels that "Oh these are just a transition fuel"

What do you mean?"

I think it means "I know this fuel doesn't make sense, but I don't want to return those checks."On Would the biosphere care? posted 2 years, 3 months ago 41 Responses

"pulling all levers"

That metaphor has always been given me of someone working frantically in an old steam locomotive, pulling all levers, in an effort to stop.

I think it's possible that we might have passed something like peak for conventional (light sweet?) crude ... but as you say there is uncertainty.  We have to add that "unless and until" caveat.

But I think too if we were standing at it, it would be a little more obvious.  If world oil companies were finding they could not ever again boost production, alarms would be going off.

When that happens, governments will be pulling all levers.

By all means, let's build some consensus for to pull the right levers.On Would the biosphere care? posted 2 years, 3 months ago 41 Responses

erm

thanks bioD, but I know I've got plenty of bad habits ... some of them probably apparent here.On Except not really posted 2 years, 3 months ago 61 Responses

mortgages

That is an interesting one, and it might say something good about prediction.

I live out in California where people have worried about a bubble ... certainly since I first bought in 1986.  There was one solid dip, with 5 years of "negative price growth" in the mid-nineties.  We look to be entering something like that again.

Some people worried publicly about prices, and as the crescendo certainly more and more people called it a bubble.

I think Taleb would ask us to look back at the data though to see how far in the future our predictions ran, and to monitor how good they proved to be about the length and depth of this downturn.

Did anyone, say 5 or 10 years ago, call this date?  Did they call the ultimate extent of "negative price growth?"  Duration?

You might think I'm setting a high bar with those questions, but again think about what I am opposing - it isn't "peak oil" as a concept.  Instead it is the binding of peak oil to very specific (and often very negative) long-term predictions.

If (big if) we could do things like call a real-estate crash with specificity fat in advance (a) no one would get caught out while flipping, and (b) we probably wouldn't have the crash in the first place.

(Taleb would caution us not to create a "retrospective narrative" in which we listen only to those predictions that proved correct.)On Except not really posted 2 years, 3 months ago 61 Responses

Blink

BTW, I'm reading Malcolm Gladwell's Blink right now.  As with other books I've read on minds, prediction, risk, and investment ... I find similar themes that apply to "my time in the peak oil world."

There's an interesting chapter on when "more data" does or does not improve our analysis.On Except not really posted 2 years, 3 months ago 61 Responses

theme

You know, I started this talking very broadly, about "humans" limits, including myself of course in that category.  I said that I thought "we" have to be fluid, prepared, responsive to any number of futures that come down the pike.  That means, certainly, that we should prepare for "tighter" energy supplies even if we cannot specify the exact "tightness."

Most recently I said The Black Swan, and Stubling on Happiness, is that "we" filter our histories.  That is one of the things that should give "us" humility about "our" present world-view, as well as our predictions about the future.

After all those "we" and "our" and "humanity" (not to mention "humility") do we get an answer to the big picture?  What can you document about "our" true strengths in predicting far futures?

But we don't get that, just another ad hominem attack.   What do you think that says?On Except not really posted 2 years, 3 months ago 61 Responses

prediction and history

One of the interesting themes that echoes both in The Black Swan, and Stubling on Happiness, is that we filter our histories.  That is one of the things that should give us humility about our present world-view, as well as our predictions about the future.

We can see that, sadly, in JMG's response to me.  I have argued for efficiency, and action "now" again and again in these pages.  I've talked about hybrids, and appliances, and lighting, and low-power computers.  I'm a member of the American Solar Energy Society.  I've done weeks "without taking the car out" and riding by bicycle or walking.  I've extolled the League of American Bicyclists and suggested that others might join.

... but JMG illustrates an interesting linkage.  If I cannot also buy into dark predictions, he must return again and again to me being a do-nothing Pollyanna.

He says, just above:

"Tell me, do you want to fly on the plane or live near the nuclear plant designed by the guy who has your attitude about risk?  Doesn't the fact that we're bad at prediction argue for taking greater measures rather than fewer?"

I think the correct answer to that is, WTF?

(Sadly, I think this linkage is common in "Peak Oil" and that's why I actually stay away from Peak Oil sites.  If you don't believe the doom, they don't want you, and they can't believe that you are helping.)On Except not really posted 2 years, 3 months ago 61 Responses

Prius

It's a win, win, win.

Peak oil, but failing that global warming, but failing that it saves me money.  It doesn't "need" more that the last, most basic, to work.

In an uncertain world one purchase that can cover multiple (uncertain) threats ... what a deal.On Except not really posted 2 years, 3 months ago 61 Responses

what about...

oceans collapse, bird flu, earthquakes, terrorism, tidal waves, global warming, stock market collapse, meteors, cancer, ... ?

The problem with V.P. Cheney's "1% rule" is that we don't have resources to apply it to each and every possibility:

"Even if there's just a 1 percent chance of the unimaginable coming due, act as if it is a certainty. It's not about 'our analysis,' as Cheney said. It's about 'our response.' ... Justified or not, fact-based or not, 'our response' is what matters. As to 'evidence,' the bar was set so low that the word itself almost didn't apply."

I guess my response to that is humility.  I don't know which risk should really get the 1% rule applied - and I know they can't all be.  So I try to live a moderate, responsible, and happy life ... and do a little to make the world a better place.On Except not really posted 2 years, 3 months ago 61 Responses

common mistake

Whenever I talk about this, people imagine that there are only two possible positions:

a) peak oil will end western civilization, or
b) peak oil is not a problem.

When I argue that peak oil is a risk, but one with unknown probability, you toggle between "a" and "b" trying to categorize me.

And sadly when peak oil as presented at gristmill, it has to be presented as "a" or "b."

Or perhaps a glancing middle ground position (similar to my own) is taken, as if to support "a" or "b" as the ultimate destination.

The truth is, we don't know.  And if you are strong enough in your convictions, you can say that without sliding to "a" or "b" as your endpoint.

(But don't tell me "we don't know, therefore 'a'" because that proves you haven't been listening.)On Except not really posted 2 years, 3 months ago 61 Responses

jon

I could respond to bits of this, but I'll just ask you one thing:

What is the "model" for post-peak downslope?

Because what happens to us hinges on that unknown number.On Except not really posted 2 years, 3 months ago 61 Responses

lots of books

See also Tetlock on "expert opinion."

Or Stumbling on Happiness by Daniel Gilbert, on how our expectations for the future betray us time and again.

Or this time magazine article on how we miss-understand risks.

The last is most accessible because it is right there on-line.

(I've actually referred to these, and probably others, in gristmill before now.)On Except not really posted 2 years, 3 months ago 61 Responses

Original text

Sean, note the "prediction" in the quote up above:

"The future is likely to be a bumpy ride toward cliff's edge."

I don't suppose that was the sort of peak oil prediction you were rising to defend?On Except not really posted 2 years, 3 months ago 61 Responses

But!

Dave is still a chicken, bock bock!On Except not really posted 2 years, 3 months ago 61 Responses

P.S.

Don't be a chicken Dave, read The Black Swan, and then see how it forces you to change your framing.

You may come to a similar conclusion, but if you are rigorous, you'll have to abandon some of the "skips" and "jumps" in Peak Oil logic.On Except not really posted 2 years, 3 months ago 61 Responses

though

in a practical sense, I'm with BioD that it is about changing the "mean behavior" over time.On Current TV wants to know posted 2 years, 3 months ago 13 Responses

blankets

That's pretty much where I'm at sindark.  I disagreed with the blanket headline, and then when I found how that sentence had been molded in the quote it became clear to me.

This is about whether we want to close the door on investigation, on all future study and invention, and create a religious injunction (against those things we categorize, politically, as "geo-engineering").

P.S. - remember Terra Preta soils? ... geo-engineering.On To solving our global warming problem posted 2 years, 3 months ago 6 Responses

Yikes!

You quote Mr. Holden (though you did not include his previous sentence, recommending further study into geo-engineering) ... but what comes immediately after your quote?

The second approach--increasing removal rates of GHG and soot from the atmosphere--has considerable promise, above all in the domain of afforestation and reforestation (wherein building up the global "standing crop" of trees pulls CO2 out of the atmosphere and stores it in wood and soil organic matter). The total carbon currently stored in all the world's vegetation is estimated at 500-700 billion tonnes of C; increasing this by as much as 20% seems unlikely, and that would take care of only 100-150 billion tonnes of the 600-900 billion tonne requirement. (Whether the carbon stocks in soil, as opposed to vegetation, can be increased at all in a warming world is unclear; the higher temperatures may well increase decomposition rates on the average, driving carbon out of the soil and
into the atmosphere.)

Geez, not only is that geo-engineering, it runs a bit at odds with your "trees" post!On To solving our global warming problem posted 2 years, 3 months ago 6 Responses

carts and horses

We are talking mechanisms without a mandate.

I think it matters more to get 70% or whatever to answer a poll that they are ready to make significant changes to their lifestyle.  The rest will then follow, and at that point it matters little what mechanism is used.  They will be tried until one is found that works.

On the other hand, trading favorite methods in absence of that majority is only a game for would-be wonks, for eco-geeks.  No point in getting carried away ...

Don't call me a sock puppet though, because I'm really telling you to get out there and get that majority, in order to make things happen.

(Some few of you might thing the right policy will "sneak" lifestyle changes past the voter ... I say don't count on it.)On Correcting two misunderstandings posted 2 years, 3 months ago 19 Responses

completeness

Are you really arguing against taxes or caps that do not apply to all GHG emissions?

Obviously an incomplete system would be ineffective, but is that the fault of the system or its incompleteness? ;-)

(I think everyone agrees that the perfect theoretical tax or cap and trade system would be global and uniform.  And sadly it might be arguable how far any one player should go in "unilateral" taxation or caps.  Certainly, a system that aggressively taxed US natural fossil fuels but still allowed import of finished goods from (say) China would be by its nature incomplete.)On Correcting two misunderstandings posted 2 years, 3 months ago 19 Responses

flying cars

Put another way, people who chart the future hate it when flying cars are brought up.  That's not fair, right?

But the truth is people talked about them just like people talked about hydrogen cars just a few years ago ... full of hope and promise and vision of a better world.

Now, which future tech will replace (or at least reduce our need for) oil?  If we are good students of history we'll say that some things will be invented, but we won't know what or how good they are until we get there.

We don't want to get caught out as flying car proponents.On One economist says no posted 2 years, 3 months ago 58 Responses

limits to prediction

I'm glad we've got that much common ground.  FWIW, another of my beliefs is that when you start talking beyond a few decades you start to get into science fiction.

I mean, look at the futures that people imagined and the fears people managed in the 1950's.  Were they preparing for the problems of today?  Perhaps in part ... but only in part.On One economist says no posted 2 years, 3 months ago 58 Responses

pragmatism

It's easy to name bad outcomes for uncontrolled markets and central planning: international fishery collapses and our national ethanol policy.

It's easy to present a polarized view based on one type of failure.

It's harder to make a nuanced and pragmatic argument, that both markets and central planning fail at times, and that they should both be used in careful measure.

(Put another way, I don't think it is pragmatic to "specialize" in one sort of criticism.)On One economist says no posted 2 years, 3 months ago 58 Responses

credit

On a related note, it amazes me that we try to "credit" our way out of problems.  We are heavily in debt, but write checks as fast as we can.

The Prius credits are a case in point.  We are weak, so we do not tax hummers.  Instead we run up more debt to credit hybrids.

Who pays for that?

It's the same deal with ethanol subsidies.  We don't have the guts for a gas tax (reducing consumption) so we write checks to corn growers.

Who pays for that?On One economist says no posted 2 years, 3 months ago 58 Responses

carbon tax

FWIW, I'm still on board with a carbon tax (or the near-equivalent auctioned credit system, cap and trade).  I think broad and simple rules are (1) easiest to implement, (2) easiest to administer, (3) easiest to understand, (4) hardest to evade, (5) most likely to lead to adaptive solutions.On One economist says no posted 2 years, 3 months ago 58 Responses

bikes

I think Bush backed some bicycle measures in the previous energy bill, being the (mountain) biker himself (maybe even how he got tick-bit).

Anyway, I hope someone suggests to him that it isn't "making" Americans ride bikes.  There are many who want to, and are looking for safe routes.

The strategy of the biking community to support "safe routes to schools" is valid and valuable in this situation.

Rep. McHenry ... you don't want kids to be safe on their bikes?On Congress' dimmest bulb laughs at bikes posted 2 years, 3 months ago 8 Responses

good news

After claims that trees are net-negative, isn't this story an improvement?On They're not going to save us posted 2 years, 3 months ago 11 Responses

Icelander?

Don't you eat sharks or something?On NYT dating advice: Eat more flesh posted 2 years, 3 months ago 24 Responses

promised

I think I'd draw a stricter line ;-), because some of the things on your promotion list are not yet shipping (in California).

But other than that, yeah.

("amazing" the verb "has" should not be associated with the "Volt" which "has not.")On Sure looks that way posted 2 years, 3 months ago 50 Responses

thumbs

I co-worker bought that magazine, just so he could put his thumb over the bottom corner (with the "" explanation) and show me just "Global Warming is a Hoax"

He was disappointed when I asked him what was under his thumb.On Finally posted 2 years, 3 months ago 6 Responses

432 kWh / yr

That's what a White Kenmore 20.6 cu. ft. Top Freezer Refrigerator shows on their site.

While we'd be better off if the nation in general used 515 kWh / yr ... I think 432 kicks all over that.

(I think mine is a 21+ cu ft at around 445 kWh / yr.  I know that I've got a 6 cu ft freezer, and a $14.50/month electric bill.)On The WSJ asks and answers posted 2 years, 3 months ago 19 Responses

top-freezer

ac5p, choosing a "top freezer" also makes a big difference.  My (too large) top-freezer does much much better than even an "energy star" side-by-side.On The WSJ asks and answers posted 2 years, 3 months ago 19 Responses

found it

I gave references here once beforeOn Think again posted 2 years, 3 months ago 29 Responses

on PCs

There is an interesting new blog:

Real life with the Zonbu Mini-PC

from that:

How much power did the Zonbu consume?

I confirmed that I had rolled exactly 5h 0m on the Kill-a-watt time counter, and I looked at the total KWH used. As you might have guessed, since the box runs ~10W, it used a paltry 0.05 KWH of power over the last five wall-clock hours.

how is that not a dodge?

This started as an environmental argument.  When people move to "arguments about food security, health, self-sufficiency, and the value" I can only assume they are (in the grand tradition of the Internets) moving the goal posts.

(For each of those things you calculate, and show your math, you don't assume that local is better.)
On Think again posted 2 years, 3 months ago 29 Responses

algae

Isn't algae (for fuel production) also in danger of becoming a fad?

It's another technology that would be nice to have (in proven and cost-effective from) but one that we don't have currently.

History will write whether it is another 'hydrogen' or not.On If you only read one book, pick this one posted 2 years, 3 months ago 10 Responses

food miles

I posted this here back in April:

I made a little list, which I might as well drop here.  It has to do with the efficiency of various shipping strategies.

• A small farmer bringing vegetables to market in an old pickup truck might move a ton of goods 10 miles on a gallon of fuel.  If that.

• One gallon of fuel moves a ton of goods 59 miles by tractor-trailer.

• One gallon of fuel moves a ton of goods 202 miles by rail.

• One gallon of fuel moves a ton of goods 515 miles by inland barge.

• One gallon of fuel moves a ton of goods 1,043 miles by container ship.

lifecycle

This pages seems reputable.  It's a little bit good news and a little bit bad.  The energy consumption for manufacture is low, but toxic releases are high.On The green cartopia ain't likely to happen posted 2 years, 3 months ago 12 Responses

what i'm sayin

"'Hey, I hear that Toyota is bringing out a just totally awesome PHEV next year!' doesn't cut it for that responsibility."

That's a perfect way to end this thread, about GM's purpose with the Chevy Volt.On Sure looks that way posted 2 years, 3 months ago 50 Responses

democracy

The tricky thing is deciding when people are lying for someone's benefit.   Sometimes politicians make happy talk and do nothing ... can I hope that ethanol and coal make happy talk leading to the election, but the right candidate will be lying?

What's that "cynically optimistic?"On YearlyKos: Obama and coal posted 2 years, 3 months ago 13 Responses

oh

as far as what "environmentalists should" ... how many are still feeling green in their Subarus?

At 22-23MPG (real world, non road-trip), they are only strictly average.  They are not moving consumption or reducing greenhouse gases any more than they 'typical' car.On Sure looks that way posted 2 years, 3 months ago 50 Responses

today

I'd hope that people visiting these pages are already moving to more efficient vehicles.  Anything that moves you from the bad old national fleet average of 23 MPG is good.  Anything.

That said, when you talk to folks outside the environmental community I hope you won't let urban legends lie.

It's an urban legend that the Prius has maintenance concerns.  Years of data from Consumer Reports & etc. disprove it.

The diesel VWs may not be far wrong.  In small numbers they don't pose a huge health risk (relative to diesel trucks & etc.).  Their owners do report higher maintenance costs, again from data at Consumer Reports & etc., but if you're comfortable with that go for it.  (gmunger admits you might want to look for a good independent mechanic if you have a TDI.)

There are all sorts of 'future cars' to consider ... but here's where I think there is a real danger.  It's all to easy to not worry about cars today, because future cars will solve everything.

That is something environmentalists should oppose ... we should be saying "move today, not tomorrow."On How the Prius stacks up against other cars posted 2 years, 3 months ago 37 Responses

boy racer

That doesn't bother me space, because that's not where I was going.  I was looking at the car from the standpoint of market acceptance, today.

The top G-Whiz model will carry two people at a top speed of 45 MPH for 40 miles of mixed driving.

That may be sufficient for those who commute smaller distances and don't need to get on the freeway, but ...

In a sense it's good news because we know that we can drive them if we need to, but on the other hand don't we have to accept that it is a niche vehicle at this point?

When a Prius can do 70+ MPH and 500 miles on a tank?

(I will laugh if my Prius makes me a 'boy racer' in anytime soon.)On Sure looks that way posted 2 years, 3 months ago 50 Responses

what?

"Hybrids are better city
Diesels comprable highway, but better for the cost of ownership"

Who ignored the total cost of ownership numbers from Edmunds, above?

(A hypothetical Japanese diesel might beat the hybrid on TCO, but like hovercrafts, we have no Japanese diesels, currently.)

"This is your stereotypical male on male hybrid/TDI pissing match, repeated daily on the Internet, and a thousand times on Grist. Any experienced blogger cringes when they bring this topic up because it invariably kicks off at least two guys doing exactly what we are doing."

Sadly, when someone opens with you can either take it or let it lie (pun intended):

"How many very expensive batteries will the average Prius have gone through at 300,000 miles while my VW diesel is still chugging along?"On How the Prius stacks up against other cars posted 2 years, 3 months ago 37 Responses

another data poing

Zipping Down the Road on the Electric Vectrix

... $10,000 for a scooter ... another indicator that it is still costly (with current and not "future" tech) to move metal down the road with electricity.On Sure looks that way posted 2 years, 3 months ago 50 Responses

6o

"Maybe not. Isn't the Prius supposed to excel at 'city' driving? That's one of the reasons we opted for the VW. Most of our driving is highway."

In my experience, the Prius will get try to get 50 mpg in city or highway driving.  You can drag it down with a lot of short trips or a headwind.  You can pull it up with longer trips or a tailwind.

I've done 65 mpg for shorter stretches in-town, but rarely for a full tank (maybe once, following my friend's U-Haul).

(If the 1300 samples at one site prove that just 94 samples at another can give a reasonable number, how can we reject 38 samples out of hand?  Do we actually know the minimum number of samples required?)On How the Prius stacks up against other cars posted 2 years, 3 months ago 37 Responses

again

How are you going to get a better number?

When you were shopping did you assume that the EPA computer or the Consumer Reports test driver would drive exactly the same "favorable mission envelope" that you now enjoy?

Conversely, if a "just get in it and drive" person was looking for a number, what should they expect from the EPA or from Consumer Reports?

Single test loops and single dyno tests cannot be all things to all people.

On the other hand, when you get a large enough mix of basically cooperative people you might average out.

The average report starts to serve the average prospective buyer.

And heck, you can broaden the pool by looking at more shared mileage databases.

When they agree that closely, "47.2" and "48" you might increase your confidence.

(remember some Prius drivers are out there doing 100 MPG with drugs in the car!)On How the Prius stacks up against other cars posted 2 years, 3 months ago 37 Responses

my 2005 prius

is a "PZEV" ... heh, but I see not that is a California thingOn How the Prius stacks up against other cars posted 2 years, 3 months ago 37 Responses

physics

I believe the physics dictate that a US-legal car be a "hybrid with a bigger battery."

It needs to be, if you want to run far from home on your overnight charge.

If you take the other approach, and lighten it to the point that it works as an electric car, you get the sort of things they drive now in London, to avoid congestion charges.

I don't think that is a heck of a lot of car for £3999 or $8122USOn Sure looks that way posted 2 years, 3 months ago 50 Responses

real-world mpg

There is a sizable database of real-world mileages run by the EPA.

The '06 Jeta TDI manual does very well, with:

Number of Vehicles:      38
Average User MPG:     41.7
Range:     35 - 54 MPG
Updated On:     07/30

FWIW the '06 Prius in that same database shows:

Number of Vehicles:     94
Average User MPG:     47.2
Range:     37 - 60 MPG
Updated On:     07/30/2007

There are a variety of other cars there as well, for those curious.
On How the Prius stacks up against other cars posted 2 years, 3 months ago 37 Responses

safe

FWIW, my call after reading all these numbers is that bicycling is a relatively safe activity.

But.  Those numbers include a lot of judgment calls by a lot of local people.  If your local roads look safe, they might be.  Conversely, if your local roads (and the drivers you share them with) don't look safe, they might not be.

I ride my bike lots of miles on and off road (tend to hurt myself off road), but I'm very conscious about choosing my risks as I do so.

(In my town sharing works because we think of ourselves (beach town) as bike riders.)On Time to get serious about bikes posted 2 years, 3 months ago 15 Responses

parallel

cmurthi, would you say that since running is a healthy sport, the average middle-class shmo jump and run with the bulls at Pamplona?

It sounds like that is the parallel BioD found at his Critical Mass.On Time to get serious about bikes posted 2 years, 3 months ago 15 Responses

apples-to-apples

The only way I know to do an equal comparison is to choose a year where models overlap (like 2004) and do an "true cost to own" calculation for the Prius, and I choose the Jetta GL TDI wagon (because that's a car I looked for).

For my zip the Jetta true cost to own is $39,033, of which $6,421 is maintenance, $3,388 is repairs and $5,945 is fuel.

For the same year the Prius true cost to own is $35,569, of which $4,656 is maintenance, $1,902 is repairs, and $4,727 is fuel.

(We do have expensive diesel here in Southern California.)

I say "hataz" because these theoretical reasons not to trust the Prius pop up a little too often.  Luckily for Prius owners, the track record of the real cars isn't looking too bad.

Heck, Edmunds says the retail value of my 2005 Prius is (slightly) more than I paid for it (carpool stickers help).On How the Prius stacks up against other cars posted 2 years, 3 months ago 37 Responses

were we watching the same show?

I got the "survival requires constant work and continual reallocation of resources" bit after watching penguins and leopard seals try to outwit each other on National Geographic.

Such is life.  We all get up in the morning to do something.  If we are clever enough we survive the day and get to do it again tomorrow.

... and then a thousand years later some smart-alec historian groups us into a "civilization" and buries our threescore and ten into a generalization of some century or another.

So in terms of problems, let's do what we always do, get up and work on the most pressing (the marketing of environmentalism is to "pop" a few issues into the mainstream mind as pressing).On A review posted 2 years, 4 months ago 70 Responses

The claim

above was that "all" civilizations "collapse" ...

If you are telling me that Minoans did not "collapse" for "because it badly managed its environment" I'm going to take that as reinforcement of my point.On A review posted 2 years, 4 months ago 70 Responses

minoans

I'm with you wiscidea, borrowing from wikipedia:

The Minoan civilization was a bronze age civilization which arose on Crete, an island in the Aegean Sea. The Minoan culture flourished from approximately 2700 to 1450 BC; afterwards, Mycenaean Greek culture became dominant on Crete.

What's important in a situation like this?  The 1250 years of success, or the few of change?

The historical perspective is funny.  Our eye is drawn to the discontinuity ... probably for the reasons outlined in that Time magazine article above.

And of course that distorts our perspective.On A review posted 2 years, 4 months ago 70 Responses

non-celebrity endorsement

In fact, the idea of resiliency and building slack into a system is to have some leeway precisely because you know that it is hard to predict what will happen -- which is where this thread more or less started.  In other words, the fact that we can't predict precisely leads to the conclusion that a different kind of civilization is needed, one that can survive shocks, and one that does not assume that there will not be shocks.  In fact, one of our biggest problems is that the mainstream view depends on weak induction, the view that things are going a certain way now, so they will be going that way into perpetuity.

I'll endorse most of that.

(I suspect that the mainstream view might include some expectation of adaptation.  Some of that might be justified, but I'd take exception with folks from far on the other side as well ... those who believe success or adaptation is certain ... a different sort of precisely predicted future.)On A review posted 2 years, 4 months ago 70 Responses

LOL

On that topicOn A review posted 2 years, 4 months ago 70 Responses

civilization

I think you are using a certain historical filter there BioD.

I'm sure "Romans living in Rome, Egyptians living in Egypt" went through a lot of changes.

People living in a place evolve over time, adapt, and change.  Historians group people/place/time into a label, especially when the are focusing on a "collapse" ;-)

What we are interested in now are people/places/times that don't make it into a collapse book.

(I'm quite sure that if Euro-Mexican culture had collapsed it would have been given a name.)

... so what about Scandinavia?

Modern Scandinavians seem to have a model for happy and sustainable lives.  And I can't think of any past Scandinavian collapses at the moment ... ?On A review posted 2 years, 4 months ago 70 Responses

expectations

Paul, you just said:

"The main difference is that I expect these things to help mainly after the collapse rather than before it.  If they do help before it so much the better, but I don't expect them to be able to forestall it."

If you expect collapse you are doing more than batting around possibilities.On A review posted 2 years, 4 months ago 70 Responses

discuss

First of all, I never said discuss.

I also never said that collapse was not a possibility.

In fact, I think the rational position is one recognizing uncertainty and such possibilities.

That out of the way, I don't think you took away what you could have from my link.  You say:

"All past civilizations have collapsed. It's not like this is science fiction."

The link says:

"However, the link between the premise and the inductive conclusion is weak. No reason exists to believe that just because one person hangs pictures on nails that there are no other ways for pictures to be hung, or that other people cannot do other things with pictures. Indeed, not all pictures are hung from nails; moreover, not all pictures are hung. The conclusion cannot be strongly inductively made from the premise."

The fact of the matter is no, not all past civilizations have collapsed ... and proponents are loathe to discuss civilizations that did not collapse.On A review posted 2 years, 4 months ago 70 Responses

how the heck

... the above was supposed to be on a bicycle thread of course.On A review posted 2 years, 4 months ago 70 Responses

the everyday bicycle lifestyle

You might like this (long, well-linked) post, You don't have to dope to ride this bike at the Bicycle Design blog.On Alan Durning on whether biking is for children and for losers posted 2 years, 4 months ago 26 Responses

league

An easy way to assist is to grab a membership at The League of American Bicyclists.  I get a kick out of it being founded in 1880 ... and the bundled magazines aren't bad.On Alan Durning on whether biking is for children and for losers posted 2 years, 4 months ago 26 Responses

BTW

I think the longstanding presence of the "SUV" (and light truck) loophole essentially negates CAFE as what gave us out fleet MPG.

Total fleet (achieved) mileage fell from a 1987 high of 26 MPG, to today's 23 MPG, as people chose SUVs, or not.

Since there was no upper (government mandated) limit on the number of trucks and SUVs that could be sold, we could have really had any "mandated" number for our fleet average between 22 and 27.5 mpg (the "LTD" and "Car" limits).

The market totally decided on our 23 MPG.

Now, I certainly hope going forward that we can tilt things again, with a combination of cultural and mandated factors ... but my reading of history is that culture has to lead.

MPG has to be what everybody wants, before congress will follow, and legislate it.On Walkable town centers are hip posted 2 years, 4 months ago 45 Responses

perspective

"Shifting some car traffic to trains does not hurt us - especially if we build more trains."

I'm sure many would feel that as hurt ... the same who would feel hurt now if they were "forced" (by economics or mandate) to drive a smaller or more efficient car.On Walkable town centers are hip posted 2 years, 4 months ago 45 Responses

oh

on this:

"I don't particularly like the idea of a carbon tax, it makes me nervous that the middle class, which has been hammered, will wind up paying for somethihng that the rich,corporations, and the military should be paying for."

In my opinion there is no way to protect the middle class (what? screw them, protect the poor!) in a move from carbon fuels.

There is simply no way to stop using the fuels without impacting the users.

("military" is not yet a profit center to tax ;-o)On Walkable town centers are hip posted 2 years, 4 months ago 45 Responses

tax

Some economists would tell us that if you are going to do an intervention you should do it in the simplest possible way. (With the fewest lines in the Federal Register.) Set a goal (not a method) and let people (sometimes called the market) figure out how to do it.

In this case, you might just tax fossil fuels at a rate proportional to their carbon emissions.

Done and done.

The people (AKA the market) will promptly figure out how to avoid those taxes (by using less fossil fuels).On Walkable town centers are hip posted 2 years, 4 months ago 45 Responses

act now

FWIW, while I'm down on precisely predicted futures, I think there is plenty of documented damage in the world today to act on.

And future problems, even when phrased as uncertain risks, argue for insurance.On A review posted 2 years, 4 months ago 70 Responses

and my risk is the best risk?

"We also apply a hyperbolic discount function to risks."

The rude fact is that we (as an aggregate population) will be wrong about most risks, and some lucky soul out there through sheer odds will be right.  Maybe it will be a comet, maybe it will be a pandemic, maybe it will be a superquake, maybe it will be a civil war ...

Now, your risks are the best risks?  How exactly do you leap from "a hyperbolic discount function" to "my risks are the real ones?"On A review posted 2 years, 4 months ago 70 Responses

solutions

"Hirsch's 'solutions' ...are almost worse than the disease"

They are not particularly creative either.  But they are constrained to answer a question which might not be obvious at first sight: "how do we continue our current use patterns?"

Hirsch answers that with coal-to-oil and such ... but I don't think we particularly need