http://victorhanson.com/articles/hanson111204.html they say that the world's oil supply will be gone in less than 50 years. what if the US actually can't wait for it to be over with? the hydro- or electric car is not universal yet because the impact it will create will deal a massive blow to the US economy by reducing its competitiveness, and a blow to US influence by disrupting (or significantly weakening) economic ties with OPEC states. these (OPEC) in turn will strengthen ties with countries that don't care much for KYOTO or green environment, which has political ramifications. the US, since its existence, has been the leader in innovationl it holds more patents than any other country. US scientists can come up with a plan to save energy, but they don't do it because all of the above. instead they wait till oil supplie runs out, and then introduce the new technology. that way everyone will have to adopt it and no one's competitiveness will be unproportionally hurt. when oil does run out, the environment will start getting better. that's why they don't even bother with implementing all these "earth saving" policies. it makes sense.
Let me see if this makes sense. The USA is going to ensure it has the technology to do without oil, but will keep it secret until the oil runs out, at which point the rest of teh world will have to beg for the secrets, and a gracious USA will let them have a fwe dribs and drabs as long as they do as they're told? Hhmmm, whatever happened to freedom, free trade and the simple fact that other countries will steal the secrets first? (And by the way, the USA was not a leader in technology since its existance began, since that was over 200 years ago. First it was the UK, then Germany and finally in the early 20th century the USA overtook Europe.)
Let me see if this makes sense. The USA is going to ensure it has the technology to do without oil, but will keep it secret until the oil runs out, at which point the rest of teh world will have to beg for the secrets, and a gracious USA will let them have a fwe dribs and drabs as long as they do as they're told? something like that, just not as radical as you put it. and it's not "secret technology". i'm sure it's available and known now - just not implemented on a large scale, if at all. And by the way, the USA was not a leader in technology since its existance began but today it is. does this make sense to you at all? if it does then the world doesn't need to worry about oil running out, and about Muslim extremism. once their only source for revenues runs out, they'll have to embrace free markets, which will destroy extremism in their midst. i mean, if this military interference is not going to help, then the very same bloody oil that has enabled them to have the west's balls in their fist for so long, will be the main reason for their downfall
Ahh, now your making more sense. And I was merely cavilling at your saying the USA had been the world leader in innovation since its founding, since by the most easily measurable means, that is not the case. But indeed it is now, as I said. So if I rephrase it again, what your saying is that there are mthods out there and to be discovered that will mean that the oil crisis wont be so bad, and that ultimately the middle east wont be so important because its oil wont be so needed? Of course. I am trying to find a way to say this that isnt insulting, but its very hard. I mean of course that is very useful, and is likely to happen in some ways, its just such a bleeding obvious statement to make. You can expect small upswings of extremism as the changeover occurs/ as the oil runs out. If you remember that SAudi Arabia has a large population of youngsters, but the oil isnt bringing in enough money to give them all jobs, then yes, we can expect quite a bit of trouble. But then that always happens when more "backward" areas of the world meet more "advanced" ones.
Otheadp, On the whole I agree, nuclear fusion is expected to be commercially ready in another 30-50 years, just in time when the oil runs out, or when it cannot be pumped up fast enough to quench world thurst, another round for us dominated technology, guarded by the patent-office and F22 Raptors... It also makes perfectly clear why many people not living in the united states do not like Bush at all. In a countermove, China is already investing heavily in alternative energysources , so they will not have to go back to goattrading based economy or find itselve at the whim of usa moodswings, like the Kuwaiti may be in 50 years Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! BTW: what do you think about the united states being in bed with the the saoudi kingdom, surely you must have (considering your support for the israeli cause) some mixed emotions about all this saoudi rooted terrorism...?
I find it pathetic that the citizens elected a President with well-documented financial and personal ties to the House of Saud. Unlike (apparently?) the person to whom this question was addressed, I'm not particularly fond of the State of Israel and its government, although I have no more rancor toward its individual inhabitants than I do toward the Palestinians. Nonetheless, I think the real engine behind Islamic terrorism is the House of Saud. We took out the wrong guy. Every poll taken of experts in foreign affairs rates the Saudi ruling clan among the top three most evil dictatorships on earth. And our President is their bosom buddy and accepts money from them.
Fraggle Rocker: I would love to find a President who would not support the House of Saud. But I don't think it's likely. As far as I know, the US government has been propping up the Saudi regime since the Roosevelt-Saud agreement in the early 40s. I don't think this would have changed suddenly, whatever the outcome of the election. But I do think if we had elected a Prez with fewer ties to the oil industry, we might have had a halfway decent chance of starting to fund the development of alternative energy technologies. That might (eventually) allow us to ease up on the death grip we're currently keeping on our oil suppliers. (If the earth-friendly Gore had made it in in 2000, I think we'd be in a much better position today vis-a-vis non-petroleum energy sources.) The way things are going, of course, there doesn't seem to be much chance of that. I guess we'll just keep on buying and driving gas-guzzlers until we choke to death on our own emissions or get bombed out of existence by disgruntled Middle Easterners.
I think that the notion about oil companies inhibiting energy research is quite ridiculous. Had oil companies seen a potential profit in green technologies/warp drive/sauce pans/etc. they would have invested big $ there. Too bad, all green energy stuff is little more than wishful thinking. Still, knowing all futility, oil companies invest quite big $ in the alternative energy research (mainly for PR sake, I guess). World needs principally new solutions. Conducting fundamental research is not private bussiness's bussiness. that's why people feed federal government.
If you guys think, energy conservation is the answer, here is stuff you can do: 1.Ban the Buffet Restaurants. That makes people fat, causes medical expenses, you need a lot of energy to produce those fat cows and pigs etc etc...for no useful purpose. 2. Genetically modify or socially adjust to midgets and small people. They consume less food, and less resources. 3. Everyone move from north to south where sunshine reduces massive energy needs in the winter. 4. Force corporations to let workers work from home with the computer than work at office on the computer. 5. Stop downtown sprawl where you have to drive or use train for an hour to two everyday to go to work. I am sure you get the idea. As to nuclear fusion, give me $20 billion, I will give you your first working model from China or India in 10 years!
6. make it illegal to consume more than 2,000 calories of food. 7. limit individual energy usage to 100k joules, violators are lobotomized but keep alive to produce heat. 8. ban sex (haha thats a great idea), consequences are same as above. 9. all areas not exposed to sun for agriculure are to be covered with solar panels. Sammy Sosa smacking a plutonium ball with a uranium bat, would cost less than 10 large and would destroy China and India, removing 50% of the worlds population allowing the individual limit to raised to 200k. Sammy Sosa will then be lobotomized.
nuclear fusion is expected to be commercially ready in another 30-50 years come on, you know i wasn't talking about that. what do you think about the united states being in bed with the the saoudi kingdom there's good and bad about it. the bad... well i'm not sure. i guess the argument is that Saudis exert much influence on Bush's White House? think about that. i think the biggest argument is that the cheap oil US gets from them is "immoral". the good, well, there are all these changes and reforms occuring in the kingdom right now. i guess as a 'friend', Bush might have more leverage than a hostile arrogant bastard. or maybe not. i don't hear anyone complaining about cheap oil in the US. you do get to hear it once it goes up, but that's another story. imagine another '73 scenario? such an act (oil embargo) can be considered an Act Of War and may give a reason for invasion, but who wants to deal with that?? then, if you believe Michael Moore, the Saud family has investments in 7% of the US economy. imagine they pull all that out... at once.. and divert it to.. say... China. meet Saudis' new best friends. scared? US is in fact very lucky that Bush and the Saudis are friends. the Saudis wouldn't have taken shit from Gore if he were to invade Iraq (i know he wouldn't have, probably, but if he would have...) from an Israeli point of view, from one side i don't like it that Bush is so friendly with the Saudis, for multiple known reasons. but i do know there is more leverage with them with friendly relations... and i do know that there is pressure being put... small moves is how you work with fanatics. either that, or total war. the latter is inconceivable right now. so in conclusion, i don't like it but it's the best alternative. You can expect small upswings of extremism as the changeover occurs/ as the oil runs out. If you remember that SAudi Arabia has a large population of youngsters, but the oil isnt bringing in enough money to give them all jobs, then yes, we can expect quite a bit of trouble that is precisely the reason why the Bush White House doesn't want to stop buying oil from the backwards country with the many fanatic youngsters. we have a full half-century to bring in market-economy and liberalization into these countries... once they have that, there won't be a "large population of youngsters" with not enough jobs. that's why the original point makes so much sense. Had oil companies seen a potential profit in green technologies/warp drive/sauce pans/etc. they would have invested big $ there that's just another reason why switching to non-petroleum based economy doesn't make any sense. before i read that article i used to think that it's important to reduce gas usage and disconnect ourselves (West) from the evil Saudis... and it is the answer, but simply not now. technology exists today already. there is no need in much research. just a decision to implement. today it is not only not economical, but is also dangerous for the reasons Guthrie was talking about
OK, here we go again. I've posted this on at least twenty threads. Here's number 21. The activity responsible for the greatest consumption of energy is commuting. A huge majority of American workers spend their entire workday huddled over a computer and talking on the telephone. Nearly 100 percent of those same workers just happen to have a computer and a telephone in their homes, as well. The answer to the energy problem is TELECOMMUTING. It works. It was proven to work in the early 1990s, in thousands of telecommuting experiments across the country. There was no dropoff in productivity. There was a modest increase in quality, as less-stressed-out workers made fewer mistakes. And there was a huge dropoff in fuel consumption. Nobody published national statistics, but the individual workers were raving about the fact that they only had to fill their tanks once every two weeks. The telecommuting experiments ended abruptly as the energy companies realized that they were working and they would mean a massive drop in their profits. At my company there was a two-line e-mail broadcast to everybody: As of next Monday, telecommuting will no longer be authorized except on an occasional basis to accommodate family illness or transportation difficulties. That was it. Telecommuting had worked wonderfully, and now it was over. Tell me that the energy companies don't control this country!
that post was very interesting but completely off topic. in response to what you wrote though, research or statistics site would be nice. from what i've read, telecommuting is not as productive as people think. for example, i don't know a single person, including myself, who can study at home. they have to go to the campus so they'll be in that studying-environment, even though what they have to do is read a chapter or do exercises. the home environment gets you too relaxed and productivity DROPS. plus, how are you going to have a meeting online? it's so cumbersome. what about a presentation? and in response to "energy companies controlling telecommuting experiments", i can't see how some manager at Esso (or any other oil company) can decide for XYZ company how their workers will do their work.
We need to have a mass email campaign on TELECOMMUTING to every media, company president and the general public. Once there is a ground swell, it will be hard to stop by the oil companies (that is how India got its independence against the powerful British!) Grass root....
I wonder about the oil byproducts that we cannot live without today. Hopefully in the long run we'll leave enough oil to be able to still produce these materials because using plants to produce compounds which can be used for the same purposes in the manufacture of synthetic matreials is soooo much less economical.
Don't worry about things made out of petrolium. Most of those can be manufactured using mostly methane or alcohol. Glycerin, plastic, whatever. It will just cost twice what it does now.
