<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Sustainability doesn’t just happen]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by JMG http://www.grist.org/article/daves-first-law-of-sustainability-politics/ Mon, 20 Aug 2007 10:06:11 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/daves-first-law-of-sustainability-politics/1 Misreading the Moustache

I think The Moustache's argument is exactly the opposite:  from my reading, I hear him arguing that it is HIGH oil prices that PREVENT the need for reform in petroleum producing societies.  He essentially argues that Iran would be docile and tractable at $20/bbl but is impossible to deal with at $60-$70/bbl, and so on with other countries (Venezuala, etc.)  

Perhaps you meant that high oil prices would spur investment in renewables and if those investments paid off in terms of a massive drop in demand for oil they would drive prices down, which would spur reform ...  That's what I think he's actually arguing anyway.

It's a false hope though, because, as far as "renewables" affect the oil situation, they do not reduce demand at all--most are more expensive than oil anyway, and so they don't constrain oil's price (quite the opposite).  And all renewable liquid fuels do is launder coal and natural gas into transportation fuels, helping to prop up the happy motoring life a while longer, allowing demand for oil to remain high in the West and to keep climbing in ChIndia.

There is no hope for reducing oil prices through supply side actions; only sharply reduced DEMAND will force wholesale oil prices down---and if we don't maintain the high retail prices through carbon and vehicle taxes then we'll just promote more usage through lower prices.

Save the world: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions 5% annually.

]]> Misreading the Moustache

I think The Moustache's argument is exactly the opposite:  from my reading, I hear him arguing that it is HIGH oil prices that PREVENT the need for reform in petroleum producing societies.  He essentially argues that Iran would be docile and tractable at $20/bbl but is impossible to deal with at $60-$70/bbl, and so on with other countries (Venezuala, etc.)  

Perhaps you meant that high oil prices would spur investment in renewables and if those investments paid off in terms of a massive drop in demand for oil they would drive prices down, which would spur reform ...  That's what I think he's actually arguing anyway.

It's a false hope though, because, as far as "renewables" affect the oil situation, they do not reduce demand at all--most are more expensive than oil anyway, and so they don't constrain oil's price (quite the opposite).  And all renewable liquid fuels do is launder coal and natural gas into transportation fuels, helping to prop up the happy motoring life a while longer, allowing demand for oil to remain high in the West and to keep climbing in ChIndia.

There is no hope for reducing oil prices through supply side actions; only sharply reduced DEMAND will force wholesale oil prices down---and if we don't maintain the high retail prices through carbon and vehicle taxes then we'll just promote more usage through lower prices.

Save the world: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions 5% annually.

]]> Comment #2 by Biodiversivist http://www.grist.org/article/daves-first-law-of-sustainability-politics/ Tue, 21 Aug 2007 08:01:03 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/daves-first-law-of-sustainability-politics/2 Good analysis JMG

This is kinda depressing if you think about it "so let's don't," is how most people deal with seemingly intractable problems. What is the point in using less oil if it will all be used by someone else and when it's gone an even dirtier source will be used? Put a price on carbon, and not just domestically. Stick it on imports.

It does seem pretty unlikely that any oil will be left underground. If we stop using it, China, India, Africa, and everyone else will, but it still won't be cheap and that will slow its use.

We need to prepare for the coming high oil prices (paying twice as much but getting twice as much mileage).

Slowing the use of oil is almost as important as not using it.

In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world


]]> Good analysis JMG

This is kinda depressing if you think about it "so let's don't," is how most people deal with seemingly intractable problems. What is the point in using less oil if it will all be used by someone else and when it's gone an even dirtier source will be used? Put a price on carbon, and not just domestically. Stick it on imports.

It does seem pretty unlikely that any oil will be left underground. If we stop using it, China, India, Africa, and everyone else will, but it still won't be cheap and that will slow its use.

We need to prepare for the coming high oil prices (paying twice as much but getting twice as much mileage).

Slowing the use of oil is almost as important as not using it.

In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world


]]>