Check out the link above and also the Film "The End of Suburbia" It does contain a little too much Kunstler (sometimes he can tend to rub architects the wrong way) but he stays on point here and it does present some very ignored issues with regard to Peak Oil.

the US is also the saudi arabia of coal. there is enough coal and oil shale that can be converted to gasoline in this country alone, albeit through somewhat expensive processes, to provide us with petrol for hundreds of years. i just read an article in wired magazine about this. they say if the price of gas peaks up much more, probably those sources will become more profitable. that is not to mention all of the renewable energy technologies that have already gained a permanent foothold in the energy industry.

Big topic, Let me see if I can make this short:

I've seen the 'End of Oil' (documentary). At the same time that I saw that film, I was reading Jeremy Rifkin's 'Hydrogen Economy' (Amazon). I didn't think that Rifkin's answer to our problem of oil dependency was very good (switching to Hydrogen) but I thought that his analysis regarding why we need another energy source was VERY good.

The book makes the case that everything around us needs oil. This problem is not just about your car. Every time we move something in this culture, we consume oil. Medical plastics are oil based. Our food is transported by truck.Therefore, an alternative is imperitive.

The movie, 'The end of Oi'l, focuses more on the SUV driving suburban resident and his wasteful trip to a wal-mart ten miles down the road for a bit of savings. While I think this is truely a ploblem and that this kind of living consumes more oil than is 'sustainable', this doesn't mean that city dwellers (such as myself) are non-consumers.

In fact, if more money means: more likely to live in a city rather than a suburb, and living in a city means more likely to do alot of flying, then non-car owning-city-dweller is also desperately dependent on oil and will be screwed when it ends. This is the good point made by Rifkin.

I think that the 'End of Oil' is the key question of our age and near future. Good for the 'End of Oil' guys to bring it up. (and you too. )

Unfortunately, I don't think this is a problem that can be fixed if all the a.holes driving ford explorers (and they are aholes) stop driving them. It's bigger than that.

Also, point to keep in mind: visual beauty and fashion is still important despite the fact that the whole economic engine of our economy is slowly, and painfully coming to a grinding 'point of change'.


We need inventions quick.

the problem has never been a lack of awareness.

hubbert (an expert working for shell) was writing about it in the 50's and was instantly marginalised. there are no easy answers so we are collectively ignoring the issue as long as we can.

kunstler doesn't help very much as his deliberate use of disinformation make his valid points hollow (i have all his books, out of professional interest). pity cuz being obnoxious and rigidly dogmatic doesn't work well with the convincing of people to take action.

it is a serious problem and the answers just aren't there yet...

below is a chunk from a times article by THOMAS HOMER-DIXON and S. JULIO FRIEDMANN called "Coal in a Nice Shade of Green". if you are a member you can search for the rest...

"Take nuclear power - a source that produces no greenhouse emissions. Even assuming we can find a place to dispose of nuclear waste and deal with the security risks, to meet the expected growth in total American energy demand over the next 50 years would require building 1,200 new nuclear power plants in addition to the current 104 - or one plant every two weeks until 2050.

Solar power? To satisfy its current electricity demand using today's technology, the United States would need 10 billion square meters of photovoltaic panels; this would cost $5 trillion, or nearly half the country's annual gross domestic product.

How about hydrogen? To replace just America's surface transportation with cars and trucks running on fuel cells powered by hydrogen, America would have to produce 230,000 tons of the gas - or enough to fill 13,000 Hindenburg dirigibles - every day. This could be generated by electrolyzing water, but to do so America would have to nearly double its electricity output, and generating this extra power with carbon-free renewable energy would mean covering an area the size of Massachusetts with solar panels or of New York State with windmills."

no wonder no one is taking these alternatives very seriously. and these are the more realistic ones. yikes.

yep, i'm aware of the peak oil arguments. can't speak as to why most of the media seems to ignore the issue sense i don't follow much of the mainstream media outlets. as i understand it though, the natural gas crisis will probably hit first.

at any rate, i'm skeptical of the future and i suspect that regardless of whether we develop alternate energy sources or not that we are probably headed for some major economic restructing in america within our lifetimes. it will probably be rough, maybe as bad or worse than the great depression. as to what to do about it? i'd suggest getting used to walking.

I'd also suggest growing your own food (at least some of it), or as a start learning how to do that, so dependence upon store-bought foods that are shipped thousands of miles to your local big-box or corner grocery is lessened. If enough people take this sort of action, it would force the market to adapt and move away from an oil-based and dependent agribusiness and towards sustainable agriculture.

Interestingly, global warming makes more headlines in the mainstream media than "peak oil", even though it's not treated as seriously as it should be. In the long run, global warming will probably be a much bigger problem than the end of cheap oil. We might find other sources for energy (say, moving from natural gas to coal for heating), but if they're not clean (and I'm definitely not promoting nuclear here) then we're just postponing a solution to our problems.

Back in July I was surprised to see a major oil company admitting that the "era of easy oil was over", though I can't say this, or other public relations campaigns, has made a dent in this country's attitudes towards oil use, dependence, and its future supplies.

funny thing, living in tokyo i rarely use a car, walk everywhere, density is fairly high, etc etc... those are the norm for the city i suppose, but where i live (about 30 minutes from the center by subway) there is also a very cheap local farmer's market within walking distance of my flat and NO BIG BOX GROCER at all, so the amount of energy needed to support our lifestyle is not as high as may seem on first blush. When i go to the countryside it is the exact opposite, i drive more than walk and the big box grocers dominate the town. ironic...