The gas-price election
It is not going to be pretty and it will not win friends in the formerly McCain-loving media, but John McCain is increasingly looking like someone who has a belief that he has a real shot at this and he had better not mess it up.
The drilling-U turn is abrupt and open to all manner of attack but it seems to suggest he grasps what may well turn out to be a fact, that this election will be won or lost not on Iraq or healthcare but on the price of a gallon of gas.
He is still opposed to drilling in Alaska (for how much longer?) and still a believer in man-made global warming and the need for action to combat it... but could this too be watered down by November?
Hello, I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~33~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
I disagree completely with your analysis. The media so far has been McCain's only friend - I don't see how getting them offside gives him any chance at all. And moving to an extreme position will likewise only alienate independents - who so far in polling have been split between McCain and Obama- and such policy pronouncements will seem extreme and reactionary unless he suddenly discovers magical powers of persuasion (otherwise known as oratorical skills) which have thus far in his long life eluded him.
Complain about this comment
Will McCain now be touring the US in the "Flip-Flop Express"?
If McCain carries on like this will the headline be "Goodbye Mr Chips"?
You're all doing very well !!
Complain about this comment
The rising cost of fuel and correspondingly higher food prices are sure to be important election issues, but I would expect much more spin to deflect attention away from the underlying cause. For example, the drilling issue being spun as reducing our dependence on foreign oil rather than focusing on reducing our need for oil in general. The soaring costs of healthcare and the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will be important, but the solutions proposed will likely not get at root causes.
Complain about this comment
The media loves Obama and laughs at McCain; they don't take him seriously.
"Poor old man, he really thinks he has a shot at it this time."
The generalized and dismissive strategy of calling McCain's proposed administration a continuation of failed policy will back fire because, while the democrats are assuming that they've got this election in the bag the strait talk express is still out there showing ordinary Americans that McCain know what concerns them.
Complain about this comment
Remember Justin, HR Clinton changed her position and offered the gas price holiday just before the NC and Indiana primaries. This gave Obama a brilliant opportunity to look presidential and dismiss her offer as pandering. McCain has to be very careful he doesn't fall into the same trap.
He's already compromised his maverick position enough on issues (e.g. Hamas, talking to Iran, troops time in Iraq going down from "100 if needed" to 2013) and if he does this sort of thing more times then it plays right into Obama's hand and can potentially blow the GOP's and his election chances sky high.
Complain about this comment
#5: McCain's 'election chances' are pretty nigh 'blown sky high' as it is - you can see how things currently stand according to the polls
here. 317.2 to 220.8 EV's means McCain has to try something, and you're right it will likely backfire but what can you do when your opponent has already staked out the smartest positions. The bottom line is the status quo suits Obama fine. It's McCain's turn to move and he will need more courage than he showed in Vietnam to get out of his current hole.
Complain about this comment
"The generalized and dismissive strategy of calling McCain's proposed administration a continuation of failed policy will back fire because, while the democrats are assuming that they've got this election in the bag the strait talk express is still out there showing ordinary Americans that McCain know what concerns them."
That's what the Democrats have relied on for the last two presidential elections. It didn't work.
Besides, I don't think that Obama thinks he has it in the bag (although I will now say that the election is his to lose), although the rank-and-file are getting a little hubristic. Neither does Obama's team, which proved itself over the primaries to be very slick operators (apparently, some of the old timers are comparing Obama's machine to LBJ's in 1964 - an encouraging omen!)
http://tinyurl.com/3jp6vo
/-_
Complain about this comment
Bush called it "addiction to (foreign) oil", and thus the junkies proceed to try and find supplies of non-foreign oil. Others identify it as an addiction to energy, and thus try to encourage the development of 'alternative' supplies.
Of the two, I find more common ground with the second lot, but neither seems able or willing to address the addiction itself, by considering a reduction in use.
http://www.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/~ira/illich/texts/energy_and_equity/energy_and_equity.html
The most useful reduction in use would be to stop manically rushing about in cars, planes, etc., and to reduce the food miles on our dinner plates, but then we'd have to spend more time with our 'loved ones' and re-learn to enjoy foods in season.
Ivan Illich pointed out that in developed countries we devote as much as one third of our 'active' time to mobility, what with the hours spent 'in transit' and the hours spent earning the money to pay for it. Less developed people devote less than 10% of their time to getting about, and that mostly on foot.
All that said, McCain is probably onto a winner, because it's well known that a junkie will sell his mother to get the next fix....
Salaaaaaam, etc.
ed
Complain about this comment
#7: that's a mighty-fine-looking electoral college map if I may say so though I'm not much of an LBJ fan myself. Interesting that Goldwater, too, was an Arizonian senator.
Complain about this comment
#8: What are you are trying to say, Ed? That modern life is madness? Shucks! Re 'curing the addiction': could a bit more of this help?!
Complain about this comment
Problem is that McCain has a tendency towards unilateral policy statements (flip flopping if you like) that make him seem removed from the rest of the Republican Party. It's becoming increasingly hard to fathom exactly why he was chosen as their mainstream candidate, other than the fact that there wasn't a whole lot of competition.
Compared to Democratic nomination race, the Presidential race probably feels like a walk in the park so far to Obama.
Complain about this comment
McCain is right. We should be drilling our planet full of holes and draining all the oil right into our SUVs. Future generations can figure out their own way to rape the Earth! Just what the USA needs - one moron to replace another.
Complain about this comment
From James Howard Kunstler (ironically in a review of Syriana)
And we all know what comes from a sense of entitlement, don't we Hillary? I couldn't have put it better.
Slainte!
ed
Complain about this comment
If the price of oil does become the key issue here, I guess you could argue that 2008 was the moment when the Us last its' last shred of moral authority; when the future survival of the human race and the ecosystem was less important to US voters than the 'right' to cheap oil.
Complain about this comment
Well, if the election turns on the price of gas, one thing is certain: in 2012 - indeed, in 2009 - there will be a very disappointed electorate.
Because nothing any president can do is going to fix that. The future is going to be difficult: get used to it.
Complain about this comment
Here's some more bad news for McCain. The Florida poll suggests that Obama has now 'bounced' in all the 'big key swing states' that Hillary Clinton (remember her, anyone?) would bang on about ad nauseam.
Complain about this comment
l strongly disagree with justin.... That is not a fact but another shameful act by the republicans to disuade illiterate Americans... Any serious candidate will always stand by his decision even in stormy periods. McCain has once again proven to be an old chameleon....:) The republicans started the war in IRAQ which brought the fuel price to it's highest levels.. If we end the war.. we are definately ending the rise in fuel prices and Exxons his earnings... :) Alternatives we have this...hahah.. http://gizmodo.com/5016343/genepax-unveils-a-car-that-runs-on-water-and-air
Complain about this comment
I think many of you will by now have forgotten who I was referring to by the arcane terms 'Hillary' and 'Clinton', so here's a beautiful reminder !
Complain about this comment
Why vote Republican?
http://candlepunch.blogspot.com/2008/06/vote-republican.html
Complain about this comment
Though I agree with the need for prudent off shore drilling and drilling in Alaska, McCain unfortunately is really McBush.
In America, neither of these presidential candidates have anything new to offer.
Obama reminds me of my student days in the 1960s at best. His insignias remind me of Marxism. My wife calls him the flower child of the flower children.
Complain about this comment
From what I have seen of the moral fiber of
the Americans during my relatively short stint in U.S and my observation of the goings-on at close quarters outside the U.S,
they are anything but the ones to "sell their
birthright for a mess of pottage". Much as they feel the pinch from hiked fuel prices,
the large majority of them at least would not allow that to influence them when it comes to the choice of the Presidential nominee. Further, the cut back in oil production at this time may even be a ploy by interested parties to influence the outcome of the Presidential elections. McCain, while being sensitive to the issue, will not, I am sure resort to mere vote winning, 'sugar coated' solutions, but some
long term meaningful ones. It's no big deal.
Complain about this comment
McCain's problem runs deep, and as the campaign continues, it will only go deeper. He keeps flip-flopping to try to appeal to independents on an issue (oil and energy in this case) one day, and then panders to the far right the next day. If he has any hope of holding onto any base at all, he just needs to pick one side of the fence and stick with it. If he keeps going back and forth he will alienate both sides, and lose in a colossal landslide. The problem for him there, of course, is that if he commits to one or the other, he loses the one he doesn't commit to, and still loses the election. Barring any major screw-ups by Obama, or major electoral Tomfoolery by the RNC. I genuinely think McCain won't win this, and that there is indeed hope for us all.
Complain about this comment
Sen. McCain suggests doing unpopular things in difficult times.
Sen. Obama suggest doing popular things, which is nothing.
[at least he won't offend anybody]
Complain about this comment
Although it is hard to tell what will happen with McCain's support, I can see a number of possibilities. It could rally Republicans behind a more solid issue, making them look like the party that's better suited to dealing with the oil crisis. Another possibility is that it could alienate coastal and environmentalist Republicans causing a split, even if it's only small, that could cause serious damage to McCain's chances of winning the election in November.
The "wild card" of this move is the independents. It's hard to tell what they will do. It probably depends on their region. The independents on the coast, fresh from memories of oil disasters off the coast of California, may back closer to Obama; and the one's more inland and towards the eastern coast may move towards McCain.
Whatever the case, the Democrats will still be united behind their environmentalist standings. Little will change with them because they've stayed on the same side of the issue all along.
Complain about this comment
Scribe,
"McCain, while being sensitive to the issue, will not, I am sure resort to mere vote winning, 'sugar coated' solutions, but some
long term meaningful ones. It's no big deal."
A curious statement, seemingly based upon faith. What do you mean, "It's no big deal"?
Also, I wasn't aware of any "cut back in oil production", simply that output has been relatively 'flat', while demand soars.
Global oil production fell by 126 kb/d or 0.2% to 81.5 mb/d in 2007. The share of global supply from the Africa, Asia and the FSU grew in 2007, meanwhile, Middle East, North America, Latin America and Europe lost share. This is consistent with long term trends.
Global oil consumption grew by 1 mb/d. 2007 global oil consumption growth was stronger than the 0.9 mb/d (1.1%) growth in 2006. China and the Middle East oil exporters accounted for much of the net growth in global oil consumption.
US Oil data, if interested.
Salaaam, etc.
ed
Complain about this comment
Because nothing any president can do is going to fix that. The future is going to be difficult: get used to it.
or at least try to do something or is sitting with something stuck somewhere good enough.
Mc Cheap's oil plan stupid really.
Like I said on the previous blog. drilling off cali presents real problems in the event of an earthquake (one that is predicted at a high chance , inevitable. Will happen.).
It is short sighted.and dangerous.
ANWAR provides next to nothing so why screw up the arctic there.
To all yuo euros, heres something they do not tell you.
Gas prices shot up a couple of years ago. Big Truck and car sales went down.So the manufacturers began throwing the cars away almost with incentives like"free gas for a year" . Sales were up thing cooled on the gas market we adjusted(a little). Tax breaks for vehicles for business. So every one gets a big rid again(short short memories).
well now that gas is up again ,how are they going to sell these crap cars.
Guaranteed $3 gas/petrol for 3 years.
GUARANTEED $3 GAS FOR 3 YEARS?
This is what should be illegal.
Check it out. this means the car company has to buy all the gas now and in the future to pay the bribe money. What is that speculation doing to the market.I doubt it is making prices go down.
So short term that it is driving up the prices which is what's driving down the prices of their vehicles.
Amazing and these people are "smart"
these offers that do no good and encourage enviromental and economic catastrophies should be illegal.
But it is GM so what the heck who cares eh.
Complain about this comment
Meerkat,
I reckon McCain is expecting that promises to find and deliver more oil (by any means) will be popular, rather than unpopular.
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
Pro-Democrat,
Of course, McShame can afford to offend the Californians because he has little hope of any West Coast state's electoral votes. Texans love to drill for oil, and East Coasters (and the rest) love to burn it.
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
ed your comment on comment
"McCain, while being sensitive to the issue, will not, I am sure resort to mere vote winning, 'sugar coated' solutions, but some
long term meaningful ones. It's no big deal."
A curious statement, seemingly based upon faith.
That does seem to be true but are not these the same people that would knok us Obama supporters for having faith in him,just because he says something that is not stupid.:):) here fishy fishy.
AMERICANS BEWARE YOU ARE BEING CONNED
Diesel prices are up. so then everything else goes up as a result.
AMERICAN BIODIESEL is being sold cheap on the euro market .The european commision is even complaining about it.
Now we send biodiesel in petrodiesl tankers to europe ,to piss them off and in return have to pay more for our diesel.
What A GREAT DEAL.
How environmentally concerned is that?
the same Bio diesel made from GM trash seed from monsanto, who want subsidies to develop biofuels.
because we don't have enough.
Mc Crazy
Courtesy of your local and international old thinkers society.
LIOTS
Complain about this comment
Meer what makes you think any of us" anti american" cynics would think that McClaims idea would be unpopular with the selfish americans we all deride so much?
we are not delusional.
America prove us wrong.
Complain about this comment
Hillary gets some needed R&R
Awwww, a nice quiet time somewhere romantic with Bill....
Complain about this comment
An interesting journalistic dilemma?
It's further discussed here.
;-)
ed
Watch for the uncensored version at a Youtube near you....
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Michelle Bumps!
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
And the mainstream corporate media love affair with McCain goes on. When he opposes offshore drilling, he's a "lovable maverick". When he flips and supports it, he's "in the election to win". Stop acting like a stenographer and start upholding the BBC's remit as a public service broadcaster, and actually ask some serious questions and do some serious analysis. You can save yourself some trouble and get some background by talking to the journos in Arizona. They'll be only too happy to tell you about the real McCain.
Complain about this comment
A gallon of gas, a gallon of milk, a gallon of IV drugs - the election will be about the economy. It is my belief that Obama began pulling ahead when he began speaking to Americans as adults capable of digesting complex ideas - McCain was once a similar candidate and there is enough time before November for him to revive his "Maverick" ways.
While pandering to an increasingly small conservative base, Sen. McCain has drifted right and has become easier to beat in the general election. Unfortunately, there are many months to go, many debates to argue and many chances for McCain to move back to the center and pick up votes.
The Sen. McCain who believes suspending the gas tax will help the economy; touts preservation of national security over the human treatment of prisoners; and commits to the appointment of another Chief Justice Roberts or Justice Alito does not stand a chance in the general election (provided Dems make it to the polls).
However, the Sen. McCain who supports closing Gitmo; promotes alternative energy as a way to limit U.S. dependance on a volatile region and simulate industry; and garners bipartisan support for progressive immigration reform is not a person to be written off.
This race will be much harder if McCain remembers to be McCain.
Complain about this comment
Conservatives have always said that we should let market forces solve our problems, not jump in with government intervention. Well, guess what? Market forces are starting to bite. If we open up previously prohibited areas to oil drilling, it will only put off the inevitable adjustments for a few years.
On every American street and highway during commuter hours you can see a substantial percentage of large SUVs, mini-vans, and trucks, usually with only one occupant. We have allowed our public transportation system and our passenger rail system to decay. The best fuel-efficient autos are made by foreign companies, while American manufacturers continue to build gas guzzlers. We live in sprawled communities where it takes most people a lengthy commute by auto to get to their jobs. This all has to change. Gas-tax holidays and drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge aren't going to fix any of this, and the sooner we accept that and begin to make some changes, the better.
Complain about this comment
As a student and professional participant in the electoral process in my USA, it never ceases to amaze me that we are so fickle and at the same time so near equally divided on so many issues.
Those anywhere else in the civilized world cannot understand our dismay at $4-5 a gallon gasoline. Just accept that cheap fuel is as the air and water: we deserve it, and accept it as a given fact.
The Republicans might have sprug the issue too early however. Iraq's financial costs are the real reason for the weakened dollar, hence the real reason behind the recent high price of fuel. China and India have yet to REALLY be THE factor that puts some supply pressures into the equation.
Senator Obama's "problem" is that the larger, VERY vocal environmentalist movement, a major base of his, have him "boxed" into a real problem: we have fairly fool proof environmental safeguards to find a great deal of petroleum off our coasts but Obama's support base will have none of it.
But where would they go if he became a realist, and took the issue totally away from McCain by endorsing, at the very least, "studies" and "experiments." Once and for all.. or at least for the moment, we can find out if there are real dangers to the environment that no other nation as found off their coasts.
This turn of events requires brave, ramrod conviction but can give the younger man credibility of doing "the right and best thing" that has political risk, but true opportunity to demonstrate mature leadership.
Complain about this comment
You are right that this election is going to about the price of gas; however, I suspect it is too late for any Republican candidate for any office to suggest a "solution" for gas prices.
Anger about gas prices, and Bush et al, is such that voters are going to obliterate the Republican party in 2008. The loss of three "safe" congressional seats in by-elections this year is but a harbinger of what is to come.
Complain about this comment
#11, Righteousmistyfog,
"It's becoming increasingly hard to fathom exactly why he was chosen as their mainstream candidate, other than the fact that there wasn't a whole lot of competition."
Well, that's very true. The Republicans actually picked the best candidate amongst a cartoonishly weak field.
There was Guilani, whose stump speech consisted largely of him hyping his role in 9/11, forgetting that this is not 2004, and that this election will be fought on Iraq, the economy, healthcare, and so on (for Christ's sake, he was Mayor of New York! Since when was foreign affairs a strength for the Mayor of New York?) Oh, and he didn't bother to actually campaign.
There was Mitt Romney, the plastic man. A lot of conservatives wish that Romney was their candidate, but I don't think that the public at large want as their president a flip-floppinig doctrinaire conservative. And, of course, he tried to very hard to be Ronald Reagan, and just came out looking like a third-rate Spiro Agnew.
And who could forget Michael D. Huckabee, that loveable crazy? A lot more conservatives would like Huckabee as the Republican candidate, but a cultural conservative could not win this election, which will be fought on issues.
Ron Paul... he believes that the Law of the Sea is an unjust limit on American authority. Seriously.
Fred Thompson... John Stewart put it best when he said 'Fred Thompson was leading until he made a fatal mistake - he announced his candidacy.'
The Republicans managed to pick the best candidate. But that isn't enough - the Democrats picked their best candidate (apart from Chris Dodd and Richardson, of course).
/-_
Complain about this comment
ExPrez,
"Iraq's financial costs are the real reason for the weakened dollar, hence the real reason behind the recent high price of fuel. China and India have yet to REALLY be THE factor that puts some supply pressures into the equation."
1. The cost of the Iraq adventure ($720,000,000 daily), is a major problem and driver of incipient inflation and its twin, dollar devaluation, but
2. Oil has gone up far more than the dollar has fallen, and this is due to supply constraints although you're right that the China/India demand is yet to kick in fully. It will.
3. As others have noted, searching and finding more oil will only put off the inevitable, and the time scales for development of new fields are not short.
So, it's arguable that resources would be better applied to development of other, more long-term solutions, including both renewable energy utilisation, but more importantly, reduction in demand, through efficiency and the choice of lower-energy life ways.
That would be thinking 'out of the box' and doing "the right and best thing".
When the historians come to write the story of these times, they will be known as the Age of Scurrying.
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
I think this election won't be decided on the price of gas alone but also on John McCain's 'flipflopping'. Obama should depict John McCain as an unreliable flipflopper just like George Bush and Dick Cheney did to John Kerry in 2004. If he succeeds he will win this election.
Greetings,
DutchNemo
Complain about this comment
An interesting viral email:
Please remember to copy this email and forward it to all your friends. America depends upon your participation.
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
#8 Ed - "The most useful reduction in use would be to stop manically rushing about in cars, planes, etc., and to reduce the food miles on our dinner plates" Since Ed has been in Scotland for 35 years, he seems to have forgotten the vast distances between home and work for so many people together with the general lack of public transportation. The concept of "food miles" is strictly European (possibly British?) since the subject is never addressed by the media or the supermarkets here. In any case, Americans are not going to give up their way of life; the cost of fuel may put a dent in their travels, but they will absorb any increase in the price of foodstuffs.
The "most useful reduction" would be in the obscene profits that oil companies are receiving and which permits the high price at the pump. Back in 1964, after my first visit to New York, I attended a wedding reception where the groom was the son of a Director of a major international oil company. We chatted about the discrepancy of gas/petrol prices between the US and the UK, and he said 'Americans can well afford to pay more, just as the UK does.' His prediction seems to have come true, not overnight, but it is "big oil' which has benefitted. Drilling for more will not necessarily bring the price down because further increases will be rationalised by the cost of new drilling and exploration.
Complain about this comment
Bush and McCain are trying to blame the Democrats for the high cost of fuel, because they don't know what else to do for an issue. They clearly can't blame the Democrats for Iraq.
I'm not particularly opposed to drilling of the west coast of the U.S., as long as the fisheries are protected, but it's not going to have much to do with gasoline prices, if anything.
Complain about this comment
Slasher,
Speaking of Mr "Noun, verb, 9/11",
Rudy Has Little Bite As McCain's Newest Attack Dog
Woof Woof! Grrrrr!
ed
Complain about this comment
#21 Scribesolomon
Thanks for believing that not all Americans are idiots.
#37 Timohio
So True!
Cheap fuel has almost ruined this country and I hope that most of us will have the good sense not to allow increased production to become an issue in this election. Reducing our dependence on oil is the only answer to our current gasoline woes.
Personally, I would like to see an increased federal tax of say 50cents or more to be placed on gas and that money used to build infrastructure for more public transportation such as rail, lightrail and so forth. Americans depend on cars because of inadequate public transport in many areas, especially here in the Western states.
When we lived for a time in Boston, we did not even own a car because the metro system was so efficient and parking in most places was impossible!
I really think that health care is a huge issue with many people and so is education. Iraq, we will have with us until whomever is elected gets us OUT!
THE ECONOMY is not just messed up because of foreign oil. There are other factors that have contributed to the mess we are in.
There is a lot to think about before going into that voting booth in November.
Complain about this comment
Excuse me, Justin and other liberal bloggers, but what media outlets have you been watching or reading during the campaign? The media "McCain loving"? Surely you jest! All three networks have done a hatchet job on him, while cable TV stations and most of the print media have been propaganda machines for either Hillary or Barack. Now of course the Democrat die is cast and Obama is their heir to the throne. Now the liberal media knives are out, and McCain will be vilified unmercifully from here to November.
Jim Webb was just talking in the Senate about "proceeding cautiously" in changing the idiotic Democrat stance on offshore and Alaska drilling for our own oil. You heard it here - if they cave and allow us to become independent of the robber barons of the Middle East they will claim full credit!
Aren't you liberals fed up with the results of the past 18 months of Democratic control of the House and Senate? Look what's happened to gas and food prices during their watch! Enough said!
Complain about this comment
There is a car that runs on AIR. It is not available in Canada or the US. I wonder why. It seems to me we should get rid of outmoded energy sources.
Complain about this comment
David,
"Since Ed has been in Scotland for 35 years, he seems to have forgotten the vast distances between home and work for so many people together with the general lack of public transportation."
1. See the Howard Kunstler link provided.
2. These difficulties have been pointed out for years, and still the suburbs sprawl. The coming difficulties are self-inflicted.
"The concept of "food miles" is strictly European (possibly British?) since the subject is never addressed by the media or the supermarkets here."
It's high time it was, then.
"In any case, Americans are not going to give up their way of life; the cost of fuel may put a dent in their travels, but they will absorb any increase in the price of foodstuffs."
"The American Way of Life is not up for negotiation", eh? Again, see the Kunstler link provided.
Just because folk have chosen to work a long way from home isn't going to change geological or thermodynamic reality. The first stage is denial, then anger, .....
Salaam, etc.
ed
Complain about this comment
Ms Marbles,
Indeed there is a car which runs on compressed air. It will go just about as far on a re-charge as would any other vehicle efficiently using the exact same amount of energy it took to compress the air.
We forget (or ignore) the first law of thermodynamics all too often. That's the law of "no free lunch", or as it was given to me early in Science education, the "Universal law of conservation of matter and energy"
It states that nothing comes from nowhere and nothing goes nowhere. There is a very useful summary of basic laws here.
Happy browsing!
xx
ed
Complain about this comment
The notion that a year and a half of Democratic control of Congress has had or could have had any effect on oil prices is risiculous. Nothing the Congress can do can have such a significant short-term effect on a world commodity. Those readers interested in a substantive discussion of the subject of oil prices might wish to read this report:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32530.pdf
Complain about this comment
Ed (#51), the energy cannot be the "exact same amount" used in compressing the air. No machine is 100% efficient. The compressor would necessarily lose some energy in heat.
Complain about this comment
Gary (52),
Thanks for that report. I'm amazed the mods have let it stand because it's a pdf. Anyone who wants to see it should get it while it remains posted.
Did you see the links about 2006 and 2007 production levels in post #25?
It's telling that your paper shows "high" prices around $55, while today's price hovers around $134....Maybe there's real substance in Jack's analysis and the Car dealers are driving the futures market.
Salaaaaam
ed
Complain about this comment
Gary (53),
Didn't you note my "just about"?
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
Some articles suggest that the current oil prices are being driven in part at least by speculators and not strictly by demand. Regulating speculation would, of course, be against free market principles and thus is unamerican.
Complain about this comment
"this election will be won or lost on the price of a gallon of gas"
Actually Mr. Webb, there's been a lot of gas being blown around, mostly coming from Senator McCain himself. If he thinks he can win this election simply by crowing for that gas tax holiday again, he's even less capable of running a winning campaign than I previously gave him credit for.
But I'm a little surprised that the North American Editor would see gas prices as more important than Iraq or healthcare. The Republicans would sure love to make it that, but simply repeating their talking points won't make it so.
Complain about this comment
Noble,
Just to note that Jim Webb went up from 18% to 22% in the VP stakes in the last hour. Was it due to his words in the Senate?
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
Surprise! Surprise! The oil industry just LOVES McCaint's new policies!
Well, well, well....and well, well, well.
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
Since American (domestic) oil production peaked about 40 years ago, and global demand continues to rise, new production will be a small fraction of US needs. I might agree that more offshore platforms are a little better than the coalbed methane drilling boom that is destroying Wyoming grasslands, but neither will fend off Global peak oil or make much difference in prices.
The calls for more production from ANWR or the Florida coast may be worth examining, and picking a few to pursue that are least irresponsible - but we need to remember these are 19th century answers to our 21st century problem.
As an aside, perhaps we will have a slow motion "On the Beach" for the environment over the next decades, where the northern hemisphere's thawed arctic resources are exploited with the trade-off to protect Antarctica and strengthen treaties there.
We need to look before we leap on the "we can drill our way out!" bandwagon that is so popular with the oil industry. Better to make sure we spend wisely on energy and tranportation technology for the decades-long term, and not squander too much for the short term to enable clinging to the past for a few more years.
Complain about this comment
McCain, the Mavrich, declares "the US should tap reserves off the coasts of Alaska, Florida, California and Virginia to reduce America’s dependence on Middle Eastern oil."
Someone should tell this mature gentleman that the US only gets a fraction of its oil from the Middle East. Why is the Middle East the villain in his political plot? Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States are very friendly. It is only that Warmonger Invader in the Middle East, the United States, that is making things bad. It is interfering in the internal affairs of Lebanon; threatening both Syria and Iran; and will not allow for the promised TWO STATE SOLUTION in Palestine. Perhaps Mr. McCain should consult Joe Lieberman on who are the good guys and who are the bad.
Being in favor of the so-called Surge, I would think that he would want the Status of Forces, Colonization by another name, to pass the Iraqi, Vichy, Government's approval by a wide margin, but saying evil things about the Middle East may queer things.
Sometimes even mavericks have to be let out to pasture where they can graze and let the rest of US have political peace.
Complain about this comment
"the US should tap reserves off the coasts of Alaska, Florida, California and Virginia to reduce America’s dependence on Middle Eastern oil."
Senator McCain, when we don't need the oil, what will be our excuse for remaining in Iraq?
Complain about this comment
DutchNemo wrote:
I think this election won't be decided on the price of gas alone but also on John McCain's 'flipflopping'. Obama should depict John McCain as an unreliable flipflopper just like George Bush and Dick Cheney did to John Kerry in 2004. If he succeeds he will win this election.
Greetings,
DutchNemo
And McCain should potray Obama as Carter second term.
He is naive as Jimmy boy is.
Complain about this comment
#50. Ed - The server for the Kunstler link appears to be busy or overwhelmed right now, so I can't comment on what it contains.
With regard to "still the suburbs sprawl" - the reason being that affordable housing is not available close to where people work. I only have knowledge of California and Arkansas but I would guess that the same thing applies across the United States. For example, here in Los Angeles people commute from Lancaster and Palmdale, where a new international airport has long been planned, and which is 55 miles to downtown L.A. The price of a new house in such areas, not to mention the contiguous counties of San Bernadino and Riverside, is far less than a previously-owned residence in the suburbs of the San Fernando Valley; forget about the "fashionable West Side" or upscale Encino or Sherman Oaks. It was the attraction of lower priced housing that spawned the sub-prime crisis. In Los Angeles itself we have a fledgling underground railway system, but that serves a small segment of the population. Unlike London or New York, there is no comprehensive fixed-rail system, although at one time there were the "Red Cars" which covered the entire county, but which were phased out with the introduction of freeways in 1940, many years ahead of Britain’s motorways. Even if it were desirable, it would be impossible to change driving habits in one generation. Unlike the UK, where driving is at the stage where California was fifty years ago, there simply are few alternatives to get from A to B. Where it is available, the Metro and Metrolink buses have become extremely popular with commuters, not only for the money-saving aspect, but to avoid the congestion that is everywhere on the most used routes.
"Food miles" - where do you expect Americans in the Mid-West or East Coast to get their food from - much of it comes from California which has been America's top producer for half-a-century. That's simply not going to change rapidly enough to make a dent in the consumption of oil. In my youth, it was thought remarkable to see the array of tropical fruits stocked by luxury stores such as Fortnum and Mason or Harrods, but today Britons think nothing of buying 'out-of-season' fruit and vegetables at any grocery store. Are the British going to rely on home-grown cabbage, beans, strawberries, etc., and return to the middle of the last century or earlier? I don't think so, and neither will Americans. And for them, much of it is actually grown in America, not imported "from abroad".
Complain about this comment
#58. Ed Iglehart : "note that Jim Webb went up from 18% to 22% in the VP stakes" - and note that next week, June 26th, Mr Obama and Mrs Clinton will be appearing together . . . Make of that what you will.
Complain about this comment
in the beginning, this Englishman did'nt care whether it was Obama or McCain.
All that mattered was that Clinton did not get there.
Now though, I want Obama to be POTUS.
McCain is a very experienced man but as long as Obama chooses wisely for his Veep (not Clinton!) then I think he'll have that base covered.
I have a very great affection for America, having visited for over twenty years, and Americans yet again have demonstrated, with Obama's nomination, their amazing ability to renew themselves.
Complain about this comment
Once again the Dems showed their more concerned about the environmental lobby than the American people.
They won't care that may have to pay $6.00 for gas
Complain about this comment
The entire discussion about the high cost of oil/gas is a total red herring, and is being used by all sides to justify various agendas.
When one considers the prices (in real year dollars) of a gallon of gasoline in 1960 (roughly 30 cents/gal), in 1970 (0.34), in 1980 (1.23), in 1990 (1.09), in 2000 (1.72), and in 2008 (use 4.50), and compares these to GDP per capita, simple back-of-the-envelope arithmetic results in the following:
one gal of gas equals:
.000109, or just over 1/100 per cent, of per capita GDP in 1960
.000071, or approx 7/1000 per cent, of per capita GDP in 1970
.000105, or just over 1/100 per cent, of per capita GDP in 1980
.000049, or less than 5/1000 per cent, of per capita GDP in 1990
.000048, or less than 5/1000 per cent, of per capita GDP in 2000
.000098, or less than 1/100 per cent, of per capita GDP in 2008
Let's look at it another way: Based on national wealth, we can buy more gasoline at current prices than we could in 1960 at 1960 prices.
Therefore, the issue is not about the price of oil/gas, which, by any objective measure is still very low even at current prices. It is an issue because the allocation of GDP is different than it was in the 60's, 70's, etc.
If the GDP were evenly distributed, mean annual family income in 1960 would have been roughly 11K per year and in 2008 roughly 184K per year. In actuality, the numbers are 6.2K in 1960 and 80K in 2008, which indicates that the distribution of mean income is not _that_ different since 1960.
What is different, is that the median income in 1960 was 5.6K and in 2008 roughly 60K. This indicates that income distribution in recent years is flattening and perhaps even becoming bi-modal, as opposed to a normal distribution. The net result of all this is that in a quantitative sense, there are more people below the median income level who are having difficulty in affording their accustomed quantity of gasoline at current prices, thus the "volume" of the complaints is greater.
The bottom line is that gasoline is still cheap and easily affordable on a national level, but due to income distribution effects, it is no longer cheap to a growing segment of the population. Any attempts at "solving" the problem by trying to make gasoline cheaper is missing the root causes. IMO, both Reps and Dems are pursuing this path because it obfuscates the real problem* and is amenable to sound-bite slogans that the American voters can comprehend.
*The real problem cannot be solved in the short-term by either party, since it requires a complete restructuring of an economy that has fallen victim to the loss of historically middle class jobs which have only been replaced by a rising number of lower-income service economy-type jobs.
Complain about this comment
David,
Whining that Americans in the Middle West (once called the breadbasket) can't eat without California produce, and that we just can't get affordable housing near work, etc., etc., ain't gonna make any progress towards solving the very real and unavoidable adaptations and changes coming.
"That's simply not going to change rapidly enough to make a dent in the consumption of oil."
Don't worry about it. The unavailability and extreme cost of oil will force the change. You'll see. If you didn't already know, the Red Cars were "Phased out" by a Joint venture firm of Motor Trades (GM, Firestone, Standard Oil, etc.) who bought up light railroads in order to close them down in favour of busses and autos.
BTW, the most relevant portion of the Kunstler link is above at post #13.
Magic,
In a few years $6 gas will be fondly remembered.
Salaam, etc.
ed
Complain about this comment
re: post #68
In the penultimate paragraph, the concluding phrase should be changed to ". . . can comprehend and by which they can be manipulated."
In the last paragraph, short-term means "decade or even longer".
Complain about this comment
Wheeeeee!
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
I have the impression that McCain was once a man of considerable honesty and integrity. But he really really wants to be President which leaves him open to temptation.
Some politicians are worthless pondscum from the getgo but when you watch anyone who has a shred of integrity in American politics over the course of time you are watching the struggle for their soul.
Remember Frodo and the Ring of Power...
When McCain ran in 2000, he took the high road. He didn't respond in kind to the smear campaign mounted by the Bushies... And look where it got him.
In 2004, in spite of what must have been a visceral dislike of GW and contempt for his governance, McCain enveloped GW with the magic mantle of his POW status to help GW fend off the perceived threat of John Kerry's war vet status.
Why did McCain help GW? I suspect it was the demons of the RNC whispering in his ear... "If you want to be the nominee in 2008 you better get out there and dance..."
And John really really wants to President.
And this year he is up against Obama whose Internet fund raising is beating all records.
So John really really needs big bucks individual campaign contributors (he ain't going to get any grass roots money). Hence his sucking up to big oil in Houston yesterday... Hence his opposition to raising taxes on Hedge Funds... Hence his sudden support for off shore oil drilling.
And John knows that a gas tax holiday in August is a silly, short term, excuse for a policy that will save the average motorist all of $20. But he hears those voices in his ear... "John, the voters are fools... They'll fall for it."
He knows better... But he cannot help himself. He's been in Washington for 30 years and there have always been those voices in his ear.... And he really really really wants to be President.
And if you listen really carefully, you'll hear him mutter under his breath, particularly when he is near the White House.... "Gollum, Gollum"
Complain about this comment
re: #71 Ed Iglehart
What is misleading in all of the talk about peak oil (including in your link), is that the "peak" is shown as a very narrow, pointed top of a mountain.
If one considers total proven oil reserves as of 2007 (extractable with today's technology) and current consumption levels, the world won't run out of oil for another 40 years even if not one additional drop of reserves were ever found. Even doubling current consumption levels starting immediately (not likely for many years) will yield a 20 year supply.
Given the rate at which reserves are still being found, the drop-off from peak oil is likely to be slow and gradual rather than abrupt and steep. Granted, prices will rise, but the "crash" from peak oil has been exaggerated by almost everyone for dramatic effect.
Complain about this comment
Having a position on drilling when oil is $45/barrel vs. having a new position is $140/barrel is only"flip flopping" if you live in a binary world of black and white.
get real.
Complain about this comment
re # 74
Wesside01,
Ah, yes. Let's get real. For example:
- let's believe in a fair and true judicial system. Then let's lock up a lot of guys without any recourse whatsoever to that system because they're big baddies and don't deserve it and we got really real;
- and then let's drill up all the oil we can find to lower the gas prices. It'll take us at least five years to get really started, and by then whatever we find won't make 10 cents of difference to a gallon, but hey, the prices are just too darn high right now, so we really need to get real;
- oh, and let's go off and bomb Iran. After all, these people are just terrorists and all they want is to kill all of us 'cause they're really jealous of the fact that we're really great, so let's kill all of them first.
- etc. Really.
Hmm, this is fun. I'm getting real real fast, here :)
Oh, and can I sell my mom? I mean, I liked her when she was 40 or so, but now she's 73, so I'm allowed a flip-flop there, right?
Complain about this comment
Peter,
The reason the peak is steeper on the downside is that consumption continues to rise (or at least to remain high) while the reserves remaining are the more difficult (and costly) to recover. It's taken us only about 75 years to use up the bulk of the first half of the oil, and the rate of use has been steadily accelerating.
Actually the oil is likely to last more than your 40 years, because extraction rates will inevitably fall, due to the characteristics of field depletion - the last oil is very hard to get- and rising costs will also tend to force lower demand as we adopt more efficient habits and develop alternatives.
The energy returned on energy invested also falls with the 'remainder' reserves, meaning that it takes increasingly more energy to recover a 'barrel', until eventually it costs a barrel's worth to get a barrel and any sane economy abandons the practice. (in the absence of perverse subsidies).
I'm not as sure as you seem to be about the rate of identification and assessment of new reserves. I reckon you'll find a good number of highly qualified folk here
and here and here, who'll disagree.
We've had the 'easy' oil, and like the pusher's samples, it's got us hooked...
Time will tell.
Salaaaaaam, etc.
ed
There is also the ecological devastation caused by 'recovering' oil sands and shales. Just look at Google Earth in Saskatchewan or, for coal, have a cruise over the mountains of Eastern Kentucky, where they're practising "mountaintop removal"
We can't eat GNP
Complain about this comment
#69 Ed - Since you appear to have all the answers, why not just return to the USofA and let us have the benefit of your insight? Even for your parents, "The American Dream" included property ownership, something to which few Britons aspired in the pre-Thatcher years. The postwar Labour Government (creators of the NHS) embarked on subsidised "council houses" whereas the US government made it possible for their military to return home and buy a new house in the suburbs for no money down, part of the "GI Bill". Now that there are thousands, millions, of houses located far from business centres and places of work, how do you propose that the workforce will get to its destination? As you should be aware, the geographical distances in your homeland are so much greater than in Britain and the infrastructure rather less. Even if oil were to become unavailable in the years to come, which is highly unlikely, alternative fuels are in the works together with electrically run vehicles. What California does today, the rest of the world does tomorrow. If the State Legislature were to mandate a zero gasoline consumption vehicle, as they did with raising emissions standards, then manufacturers would fall into line. The automobile is not going to disappear anytime soon.
Where do you expect food to come from if not California or the Midwest? Even in the first years of the last century California - and Salinas in particular - was known as America's salad bowl and produce (greengrocery) was sent elsewhere, as depicted in Steinbeck's 'East of Eden'. Not every state can produce everything its residents need and transportation will not come to halt. It certainly isn't "whining" to say that the Golden State is essential to America's families. People can live without strawberries, it's true, but will they?
The Red Cars - yes, we are all familiar with the story. The tracks were still in place in the 60s and in some parts they exist even today. Part of the Metroliner bus service uses the right of way dedicated to the old system. Thirty-five years ago, the late Baxter Ward, a Los Angeles County Supervisor (rather like a British County Councillor) had tried valiantly to resuscitate a fixed light-rail or train system, but it fell on deaf ears. However, in 1984, when the Olympic Games were hosted here (for UK readers, at NO cost to any taxpayer!) traffic was as smooth as it was intended to be on the freeways. Perhaps a lesson could be learnt from that.
Complain about this comment
This will be a gas-price election....
Complain about this comment
Peter (and all),
A mathematical note:
One thing which may not be obvious is that the "peak oil" curves we usually see depict "total production" on the vertical scale, not reserves.
A curve representing "total reserves" on the vertical scale would slope downwards from left to right, and wouldn't have a peak.
A curve representing "proven reserves" or suchlike would rise from first discoveries to a peak and then decline, but it would be quite different from the 'production' curve, and might well decline even more steeply, due to the finite nature of 'total reserves' - after we've found all there is, there's no more to find.
If you run the wee video again, you'll see that the peak isn't shown as sharp, but bumpy, and with a plateau in the seventies/eighties....
Shrub on the radio at this very moment is blaming the democrats for the present high price of oil...;-)
Complain about this comment
Salem, a McCain-Gollum partnership would go down well in Florida wouldn't it? Get all those swamp-dwellers to turn out! On the trail together they could swap stories of torture and whatnot. Or he may be tempted to choose Sauron to help carry the state of Mordor-sota where he is 'governor'. Obama could pick Frodo for his foreign policy expertise and to beef up his national security credentials (whatever those are). Gandalf has also been mentioned but he woud undercut a message of 'change', I believe. Toodlepip.
Complain about this comment
David, "Since you appear to have all the answers, why not just return to the USofA and let us have the benefit of your insight? " Thanks to the wonders of the internet, I can do that from the comfort of my treehouse here without using any sort of fossil-powered transport!. As to the "American Dream", do have a look at [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator] take on it.
Cheap corn is behind the magic of the American processed food industry -- all those pizza pockets and juicy-juice boxes that frantic Americans resort to because they have no time between two jobs and family-chauffeur duties to actually cook (note: reheating is not cooking). Behind that magic is an agribusiness model of farming cranked up on the steroids of cheap oil and cheap natural-gas-based fertilizer. Both of these "inputs" have recently entered the realm of the non-cheap. Oil-and-gas-based farming had already reached a crisis stage before the flood of Iowa. Diesel fuel is a dollar-a-gallon higher than gasoline. Natural gas prices have doubled over the past year, sending fertilizer prices way up. American farmers are poorly positioned to reform their practices. All that cheap fossil fuel masks a tremendous decay of skill in husbandry......
I particularly like the steroids image! And he writes books, too! A good read.
Complain about this comment
Kunstler on Colbert Report
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
I just wanted to point out how low the BBC goes sometimes for stories:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7462669.stm
How on earth is this a story? Let's stop with such nonsense...
Complain about this comment
Yes, so many good reasons why Mr Obama should win, and yet he will lose for one simple, inescapable reason: it's the racism, stupid. I recommend The Daily Show for encapsulation of the Republican smear machine already at work, planting doubts, letting an outrageous yet curiously tenacious image or suggestion fester in the American psyche. 'Would Michelle Obama advocate retribution on Whitey once in office?' 'Did Obama spend 5 minutes in a Muslim day camp and get radicalized?' This is the level on which the election will be won and lost, and all the intelligent, ethically sound campaigning by Obama will seem a distant, puzzling memory when Americans realize next January the've been frightened into electing the safe option.
For respite I watch re-runs of The West Wing. It's never too late to escape into this vision of America as she should be.
Complain about this comment
dime666 (#83), I don't know why you would have a problem with that item. Candidates, and their spouses, are constantly being beaten up in the media, and especially on the web, for nothing. Michelle defended herself from misrepresentation, and the BBC web site published it. If you don't like it, read something else.
Complain about this comment
re: #76 and 79
The steepness of the ROI curve is mitigated by price rises as the output drops. Further, the ROEI curves tend to lose their analytical value as alternatives become more available.
You are absolutely correct that consuming a barrel of oil to to produce one makes no economic sense. Yet, the value of oil is much greater than its energy content - burning it in IC engines or heaters, etc., is one of the least effective uses. Thus, as more energy is produced from nuclear power, for example, it will be worth it to expend greater than the Btus which could be obtained from 1 barrel of oil in order to produce 1 barrel of oil.
Since 2003 and through 2007, proven reserves have increased by some 240+ billion barrels. Starting very recently, there has been a spurt of exploration and discovery of reserves in hitherto unexplored areas at a rate significantly greater than in past decades. The expectation is that similar discoveries will continue for some time as other unexplored areas are investigated.
Based on all of the above, plus other factors, I expect that the peak oil "crash" will be a long-duration event taking quite a few more decades.
Complain about this comment
re: #86
Third paragraph should start "1994 through 2007" instead of "2003 through 2007".
Brain, eye, and finger co-ordination apparently going downhill faster than peak oil ;-)
Complain about this comment
re: #85
You miss the point, it's not that I don't like it, it's just that it has no journalistic merit but most importantly no depth or insight into a real story.
It's something a regional paper would write a column about. I hate to be one of those people that complain about how their tv licence money is spent etc. but I am sure there is better news out there which doesn't depend on mishearing people (which btw, if you watch the video, cleared up within a sec by the other guests.)
It's an insult to every readers intelligence to consider this worthy of being published.
Complain about this comment
Obviously Hilrod has a great change to be a VP candidate now. She would be a perfect VP candidate for McShame!! She could push that "no gas tax" slogan - while he could handle the down-and-dirtier "drill the hell out of offshore USA" theme. A dynamic duo of double-talking, doddering duplicity.
Unbeatable AND unbearable! "If it ain't broke don't fix it" - why change the dynamic that Dubya and Cheney have kept going for nearly 8 years? THE BIG LIE WORKS EVERY TIME WHEN IT COMES TO CREDULOUS CRETINS ON THE RIGHT.
Complain about this comment
#89 of mine - also:
Hilrod could also join McShame in their own singing video of McShame's ever-popular ditty, "Bomb, bomb, bomb - bomb, bomb Iran"!!!!!!!!!!! :(
Complain about this comment
Grrrlie, after all these years, I always
thought it was "Barbara Ann".
Complain about this comment
#91 - gunsandreligion:
surely you jest - McShame's big solo singing debut? "BOMB" being the operative lyric item :P
Complain about this comment
re: #91 gunsandreligion
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-zoPgv_nYg
Complain about this comment
#81. Ed "Thanks to the wonders of the internet, I can do that from . . here without using any sort of fossil-powered transport!" Is your house equipped with solar powered electricity? If not, then it is most likely fossil fuel that produces it, although nuclear powered generating stations are proposed for Scotland. My guess is that you probably don't approve of that. If you use gas or oil for heating then you're just as much part of the problem as those who are obliged to drive long distances to earn a living. And if you're burning wood, you're endangering the atmosphere - so you really can't win!
I couldn't look at your link, because of the reason stated, but whatever it is/was, cannot dispute that the "American Dream" of home ownership is alive and well. Subsidised housing and "projects" is not an option, unless connected with a natural disaster.
Since you mention "the magic of the American processed food industry" I wonder when you last spent any time in the US? The picture you paint of American life, with two jobs and no time to cook 'real' food, is completely erroneous. Frozen food cases represent a very small proportion of a supermarket's capacity - there are no chains of stores like Iceland which only sell frozen goods to those in the UK attempting to emulate all things American. (Have you ever had a British BLT? Limp bacon and not on toast just doesn't make it!)
"Diesel fuel is a dollar-a-gallon higher than gasoline." Where did you find that figure? It certainly doesn't represent what is paid on the West Coast, which has higher gas and oil prices than elsewhere. Fifty cents tops between diesel and regular, and even a smaller differential between premium and diesel (DERV).
#83 - Mrs Obama's appearance on The View was covered by all TV news reports, and she made a very good impression; I don't see that the BBC shouldn't mention it - it was important here. There is a softening of her attitude, no doubt encouraged by the Obama campaign - and she had nice things to say about Laura Bush, which the Beeb omitted to mention. In this day of unisex occupations, I was somewhat surprised to read that Whoopi Goldberg is a 'comedienne', rather than a comedian, so perhaps 'political correctness', so evident in the UK, has begun to erode.
Complain about this comment
David,
""Diesel fuel is a dollar-a-gallon higher than gasoline." Where did you find that figure?"
That (and the frozen-food comments were part of the quotation from James Howard Kunstler, which link somehow fell foul of the Mods (who are as Gods). I do hope you're able to follow it and look for the The Clusterflux Nation Chronicle (scroll down).
As to my personal part in our fossil follies, I've never pretended not to be part of the problem. I burn wood, oil, & coal, and consume electricity generated from all three as well as Scottish breezes and the splitting of uranium atoms, though I suspect I'm not "just as much" part of the problem as long-distance commuters.
Certainly, it's far more eco-friendly to bless y'all with the benefit of my wisdom via the web than to feel the need to physically come to bend your shell-like ears....
Peter,
"I expect that the peak oil "crash" will be a long-duration event taking quite a few more decades."
That's agreed, but i have persistent doubts about the reliability of "proven reserves", and I seem to remember (was it BP?) a major oil company which recently had to re-state its reserves, and then there was Shell... and
And Shell has had a further bit of bother on this matter....and Shell ain't the only one.
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
Peter,
"I expect that the peak oil "crash" will be a long-duration event taking quite a few more decades."
That's reminiscent of the title of Kunstler's recent book: The Long Emergency
A brief excerpt:
and, from Kunstler's review of Syriana.....
And finally,
"Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell." - Edward Abbey
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
I may be wrong but...
Isn't China and perhaps a number of other countries ( I'm unsure) already drilling almost within sight of the Florida keys, nearer to Cuba? I also hear tell that they are thinking of slant drilling underneath the United States? All told the laws on drilling need to be revamped, but they also need to keep a close hand on the drilling/pumping process to minimize oil leakage on our beaches.
Complain about this comment
It's telling that your paper shows "high" prices around $55, while today's price hovers around $134....Maybe there's real substance in Jack's analysis and the Car dealers are driving the futures market.
yea that's what I'm saying.
I may hate racism, and may be rude to all I perceive as such, but I'm no fool.
12,000 miles( a years that's the limit) at 3 bucks a gallon , if you buy our crap truck or suv , that we proudly claim gets 23 miles per gallon. and that's the latest model.
But hell I'm crazy . crazy enough to have predicted Saddam was hiding writing poetry, hoping no one called his bluff.
So it was romance novels,almost.
Complain about this comment
Nobel floridian, again you have shown me your ability to spell better than your ability to comprehend.
Best to stick to prof reeding, after all it has not concern for content.
56
Regulating speculation would, of course, be against free market principles and thus is unamerican.
but americans telling GM or dodge that they will not buy their cars and that free gas is a worthless bribe that will lead to huge numbers of vehicles being bought in order to replace just as useless vehicles .Just to get Cheap Gas.
think from the enviroment's point of view here.
Payment on a lease car or truck is the same ,but your gas is cheaper.
So the truck is replaced. the market gets saturated with old trucks.
this happened in the first Bush term and is happening again.
the old truck works, gets the same 13 miles per gallon, so why change,cheap gas.
And another truck is produced ready to head back to the scrappy.
the whole lease truck car(oh and for euros truck means pickup truck with big wheels to waste more gas.
Complain about this comment
68
peter
brilliant.
though gas should be phased out as soon as possible(not soon) the biggest problem is that the suv driving bosses on holiday to Alaska every 4 months don't understand what 10 bucks an hour as a good wage really means.
that and the fact the wealthy here never pay enough taxes to do their share to make sure everyone can go work for them.
'should have just stuck at brilliant.
Complain about this comment
David I hear a lot of can't from the can do nation. whats wrong with trying
Complain about this comment
heathergreene wrote:
Yes, so many good reasons why Mr Obama should win, and yet he will lose for one simple, inescapable reason: it's the racism, stupid.
So you are buying the line that the only reason someone would not vote for Obama is racism? So from your PC point of view his views on the issues and his lack of experience and resume are irrelvant?
Fine than anyone who doesn't vote for McCain is an ageist?
Make about as much sense
Complain about this comment
# 68
Yes, a very very good point about median incomes and a 'middle-class' sinking beneath the waves.
I'd hazard a guess that pretty much the same point would be valid for the accursed Blighty i.e. more folk sliiping into lower-income service type MacJobs.
Complain about this comment
@ magicKirin #102;
Oh REALLY? so there was a 100+ years era in American history when those under 40 in one substantial part of America kept those over 60 as slaves? followed by another cenjtury of segregation, disenfranchisement, oppression and discrimination of the old by the young?
I may not fully agree with Heathergreene (I think race is fortunately getting less of an issue with every day that passes and every 50+ white that passes away, espesh in the South), but to deny that race IS an issue in the way that age is not, and for deep rooted historical reasons, is simply denial of reality.
Complain about this comment
McCain is the consummate politician, bait and switch to whatever gets the votes that day. The fact that for the last eight years of the Bush administration there has seen no long range planning for infrastructure or energy needs is dramatically brought to our attention each day as we cross dangerous bridges with our nearly $5 a gallon gas. McCain was and is an integral part of this failure. If he had the leadership to seriously address the glaring omissions of the past, he would be advocating solid plans for our future and not the opportunistic schemes of "no tax gas for summer:" and offshore drilling. that appeal in a superficial way before you analyze the worth and the repercussions of such a decision. You can't teach an old dog, new tricks!
Complain about this comment
95. Ed Iglehart - And I thought your comments were original to yourself. I had a look at Mr Kunstler's site - he doesn't make any effort to justify his remarks, like any kind of propaganda, he simply states as fact what he would have readers believe. He's a writer, not an economist and that does not make him an authority on the future of America. Other than writing, he appears to have made no meaningful contribution to his own country or the human race.
#101. jacksforge: Where do you get the idea from me we "can't" do anything? Would you propose rehousing millions of people nearer to their workplace so that they use less fuel? New public transportation can't be introduced over night - the problems in getting the Los Angeles Metro built demonstrate that - and extensions to it are mired in consultations and legislative analysis. And that's just one conurbation!
The reliance on oil (for transportation) can only change when an efficient, alternative form of power can be utilised. It will take the will of small nations, such as the UK, and large (US) states like California, to mandate that new vehicles from, say 2020, must run on fuel other than that derived from oil. Unfortunately, Britain lagged far behind in requiring that unleaded fuel be used and just as far behind in requiring better emissions standards; car manufacturers wishing to sell their product in California were obliged to make their vehicles California-compliant. I cannot see Britain leading the way on this since the population has only recently "fallen in love" with their cars and will not be ready to ditch them anytime soon. However, Americans have already taken the first tentative steps, in that smaller, more fuel-efficient vehicles have become popular, as opposed to the 'land yachts' of yesteryear. It's not a big jump from smaller vehicles to those which are alternatively fueled. Nevertheless, Detroit, Japan and Britain (etc) will need to be forced to change their product since it is unlikely that they will do so voluntarily. Of course, since oil is a finite resource, albeit not to be 100% depleted in our lifetime, other sources will be needed to power aircraft, ocean-going vessels and all other users of fossil fuels. Beyond the price of gas and its effect on the November election, there is the future to be considered - if global warming can attract so much attention, why not alternative energy sources? If there are alien creatures from elsewhere in the heavens, you can be sure they aren't using oil-based flying machines!
Complain about this comment
Streathamite in Milano! wrote:
@ magicKirin #102;
Oh REALLY? so there was a 100+ years era in American history when those under 40 in one substantial part of America kept those over 60 as slaves? followed by another cenjtury of segregation, disenfranchisement, oppression and discrimination of the old by the young?
I may not fully agree with Heathergreene (I think race is fortunately getting less of an issue with every day that passes and every 50+ white that passes away, espesh in the South), but to deny that race IS an issue in the way that age is not, and for deep rooted historical reasons, is simply denial of reality.
But Heathergreen is implying that the only reason people won't vote for Obama is racism. There are many who won't vote for him for other reasons.
My point is many Obamaphiles(not Obama himself) are playing the race card when ever he is criticized.
Complain about this comment
David,
"The reliance on oil (for transportation) can only change when an efficient, alternative form of power can be utilised."
Or when the oil runs out, whichever comes first.
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
re: #108 Ed Iglehart
"Or when the oil runs out, whichever comes first."
But the whole point is that, for all practical purposes, we will never _actually_ run out of oil.
At some point, it will become more expensive than alternative A, then somewhat later, than alternative B, and later still, alternative C, etc., etc.
At current prices, it is still much cheaper than other alternatives, when one includes the costs of implementing the infrastructure, etc. changes required.
The break-even points for the alternatives are coming closer and closer as oil prices rise. The faster oil prices rise, the sooner alternatives will be implemented.
The fact that European (and some other) governments force much higher oil prices on consumers only means that the alternatives will be implemented earlier there. It is precisely the fact the US politicians are working to cause decreases in the price of oil that slows down US implementation of changes necessary to reduce reliance on oil.
Unfortunately, the transition processes, whenever they occur, will not be painless, either economically or socially.
Complain about this comment
Peter,
"Unfortunately, the transition processes, whenever they occur, will not be painless, either economically or socially."
You got that right! And, with the powers trying to keep gas prices down, the later the adjustment, the more painful, I reckon.
;-)
ed
Garrett Hardin
Complain about this comment
re: #110 Ed Iglehart
"And, with the powers trying to keep gas prices down, the later the adjustment, the more painful, I reckon."
Absolutely correct.
As others have stated, the entire US (and Western) lifestyle has been based on the availability of low cost energy. (i.e., cheap in terms of fraction of personal/national wealth.)
Cheney's statement that (paraphrased) "the American lifestyle is non-compromisable" is a perfect illustration of the hubris in your Hardin quote. The price necessary to obtain energy must be paid, whether in terms of war costs to steal it from others (but this will only work for decades, at most), or the costs of RandD and infrastructure changes necessary to implement alternatives, or the diminution of "quality of life" due to the fact that energy costs will consume a larger and larger fraction of actual wealth, leaving a smaller fraction available for the "luxuries" we've all gotten used to.
You and I and the other old farts on this blog will merely be slightly inconvenienced by the changes before we shuffle off this mortal coil, but the impacts on our children and grandchildren will be profound.
Complain about this comment
# 111
I believe that nanotechnology will have a profound impact and may help with energy solutions.
For example, using nanotech, it may be possible to construct immensely strong structures, such as pipes, which could withstand the very high pressures, when drilling into the earth.
Thus it may then be possible to use these pipes into earth to turn water into steam to drive turbines to produce electricity.
Which could then charge electric powered vehicles.
Just an idea but you can see the possibilities.
Complain about this comment
Hello Jack: So we are jousting once more! What did I not comprehend? Just what is wrong with becoming independent of the people in the Middle East who hate our guts, and who are backing the terrorists who are killing their own kind and in the process our own troops, in the centuries-old religious wars that will, it seems, never end. Admittedly, that is an overwhelming argument for us to bring our troops home. By the way, Jack, you have a fan in my sister, who, in a lovely town not too far from the Wales border, thinks you are a fine fellow.
And also by the way, Peterm99, Ed is hardly an old fart compared to me, and I would add that I fear for not only my grandchildren but my GREAT-grandchildren, of which my wife and I have five.
And Ed - if Obama gets sworn in as our commander-in-chief (talk about a misnomer!), maybe Jim Webb would be a strong advocate of the military.
McCain for President! Hip, hip, hooray!
Complain about this comment
re: #112 JohnConstable
I see no reason to doubt the feasibility of what you suggest in your post. There are many potential alternatives to a petroleum-based economy, and many of these alternatives are still in their infancy or may not even have been thought of yet.
The points I have made in previous posts were not intended to be that we can't get "there" from where we are now, only that it will be extremely expensive and disruptive to the life to which we have become accustomed.
re: #113 nobleFloridian
I consider being an old fart as a badge of honor, but I had not intended to start a controversy regarding various degrees of old fart-ness. ;-)
As far as your stated Presidential views are concerned, my opinion is that favoring either one over the other is closely akin to arguing about honor among thieves. What's good about McCain is greatly outweighed by what's wrong with him, and similarly with Obama. Just as with the energy debate, the political choices available have _no_ good short- to medium-term outcomes, and, as John Maynard Keynes said, "In the long run we are all dead."
Complain about this comment
#110 Definitely agree re: Cheney/hubris. And remember, Cheney's favorite public hobby so far seems to be "canned hunts" - which he is presumably including in his notion of his socalled "uncompromisable" USA lifestyle!!! (Death-style.)
Haven't heard McShame distancing himself from "canned hunting." I wonder if he's gone along on any of Cheney's little shooting fests? Although, McShame could be concerned about Cheney's proclivity for shooting old duffers on the scene....
Complain about this comment
Here's hoping that Cheney's out-lesbian daughter is one of the legions of donors to Obama's campaign!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;)
Complain about this comment
#108 Ed "Or when the oil runs out, whichever comes first." The oil isn't going to run out in our lifetime; it may be more difficult to extract, but it's not going to vanish anytime soon. The profit motive for car manufacturers should be the incentive to make more efficient engines - for example, GM has just rid itself of its Hummer line, there being little attraction for it today. If they or any of the others were to develop a reliable, alternatively fueled car/truck and it had all the bells and whistles expected of a contemporary product, there would be no problem for consumers wishing to make the transition. The problem is getting them to make the effort; hybrids are not enough and so far electric vehicles seem to be a dud, at least as far as mass acceptance is concerned. Whether in the form of grants, tax credits or some other stimulus, the best incentive is to appeal to the bottom line - profit. Make a better mousetrap and the public will buy it; the same goes for transportation.
Complain about this comment
#117 - David Cunard:
Whether it's hybrid or electric cars - or even more sustainable forms of transit - "mass acceptance" all comes back to mass education. That means proper information flowing to the people.
McShame's Big Oil buddies don't want that to happen, clearly. Obama continues to raise these issues and to oppose quick-and-dirty, fake band-aid "solutions" like a summer of no-gas-tax. McShame's hypocritical statements lauding 'clean coal' [sic] are truly appalling. THE BIG LIE IS MCSHAME'S VERSION OF EDUCATING THE PUBLIC ON ENERGY - END OF STORY.
Complain about this comment
#118. Grrrlie "Whether it's hybrid or electric cars - or even more sustainable forms of transit - "mass acceptance" all comes back to mass education." And mass education comes down to advertising. The auto makers appear to spend far more on TV commercials than the oil companies, but first they have to make a product which doesn't use petroleum products. Selling it should be the easy part; if a political aspirant to the presidency can be sold to the American public successfully, then so can new, fuel-efficient cars. Oil companies need to look at Philip Morris which, knowing that the market was shrinking, broadened its market with non-tobacco products. People will always need a way to get from A to B, but, other than oil byproducts (dyes, detergents etc), the public won't care what the vehicle runs on, provided it is cheap and reliable.
Complain about this comment
@ magicKirin #107:
some sense in what you say (tho the candidate can hardly be blamed for who decides to cheerlead for him).
I think we need to differentiate between 'some' and 'all'. SOME of the anti-Obama bloc WILL - certainly - do so on grounds of race, just as some will support him on same. Some won't - either camp.
However, given that this is nation which had state-sanctioned signs up saying 'whites only' whilst Jaaaames brown was still a hot new thang - it playes a bigger part than in most other western-style 'democracies'.
Complain about this comment
David,
Of course the oil will never run out, but there are signs that the "cheap" oil will, which amounts to much the same.
"If they or any of the others were to develop a reliable, alternatively fueled car/truck and it had all the bells and whistles expected of a contemporary product"
Junkie-speak - unwillingness to accept less than all the bells and whistles for which endless oil has given us a taste.
"Make a better mousetrap and the public will buy it; the same goes for transportation."
Again, Junkie talk - Transportation isd part of the problem, not the solution. The solution is to transport LESS, of people, goods, and everything.
Grrrlie,
"McShame's hypocritical statements lauding 'clean coal' [sic] are truly appalling. "
To be fair, Obama has made similar commtiments to "clean coal" and has sponsored a bill on the production of liquid fuels (the car and truck God) from coal. Neither wants to face the ecological destruction involved in "getting" the coal (or the oil sands.shales)
David,
"The auto makers appear to spend far more on TV commercials than the oil companies,"
I have a game in which I offer a five pound note to anyone who can spot a commercial break without a car advert. No takers so far. The local paper would fold without the Motor Trade ads, which take up virtually half the square inches (I've counted).
"People will always need a way to get from A to B,"
Junkie talk again! Folk have done very well on foot for 99.9 % of our time on Earth.
Salaam, etc.
ed
Complain about this comment
Guys,
I don't mean to rain on your parade, but whether you go for electric plug-ins or fuel-cell-based cars you'll need electric power.
And this power will be still generated by greenhose-gases belching conventional power plants.
Unless, of course you'll go 'NUKULAR'
Something most PC folks abhore.
[they power their PCs to belch out their PC pollution by getting on their bikes and pedaling]
BTW. Do you know that windmills can't handle strong wind and come to a standstill :-)
Complain about this comment
Illich link
;-((
Complain about this comment
PurringMeerKitten,
I WANT MY FREE LUNCH!
(pedalling madly)
ed
Complain about this comment
Have you noticed, Ed, that all them European countries criticizing US plans to re- start off-shore drilling have been drilling in a vicinity of their own shores non-stop (Norway, UK, etc.)?
[I won't mention drilling off Sakhalin and Kurils ' cause Putinland has never been particularly eco-friendly]
Complain about this comment
, Streathamite in Milano! wrote:
@ magicKirin #107:
some sense in what you say (tho the candidate can hardly be blamed for who decides to cheerlead for him).
I think we need to differentiate between 'some' and 'all'. SOME of the anti-Obama bloc WILL - certainly - do so on grounds of race, just as some will support him on same. Some won't - either camp.
However, given that this is nation which had state-sanctioned signs up saying 'whites only' whilst Jaaaames brown was still a hot new thang - it playes a bigger part than in most other western-style 'democracies'.
How may decades ago was this? I am not denying racism still exists. However there are some like Obama's campaign manager David Axelrod who have played the race card
But it goes back to the original post that there are some who will claim racism if Obama does not win. Just as some of Hill's supporters are claiming sexism lost it for her.
Complain about this comment
Magic,
"signs up saying 'whites only'"....
"How may decades ago was this?"
When I was growing up in Florida in the 50s. And there were signs saying "coloured", too, and no bully could have forced me to take a drink from the "colored" fountain....dirty! Thankfully, most of us grow up eventually.
"there are some who will claim racism if Obama does not win. Just as some of Hill's supporters are claiming sexism lost it for her."
Indeed, and they will both be right (to some degree). ;-(((
Salaam, etc.
ed
Complain about this comment
More very cogent and on-topic thoughts from Ivan Illich, first published 35 years ago.
Seriously recommended reading for anyone who considers themselves a "free person".
And, I'm also reminded of Henry Thoreau, So Henry worked it out 120 years before Ivan did!
Salaaaaam, etc.
ed
Complain about this comment
"Have you noticed, Ed, that all them European countries criticizing US plans to re- start off-shore drilling have been drilling in a vicinity of their own shores non-stop (Norway, UK, etc.)?"
He lives in Scotland a country who's economy has been based on offshore drilling for years.
I think it is just possible he knows they are drilling off the coast.All Brits know of the north sea oil. and natural gas.
So just to ask ,you seeing as your so bad a t baiting ,Who complained about the drilling?
It is not Euros complaining,they don't give a damn.
It shows america is foolish,yes. most will laugh.
THE NORTH SEA DOES NOT HAVE THE SAN ANDRAES FAULT.
Big letter easy to read, if you think it wont happen you are really a bigger fool than I took you for.
EARTHQUAKE
Complain about this comment
nobel, smart sister.
but seriously your political views are more than odd from my side and I do believe that yuo were never a democrat.you seem far too willing to go along with McCaned.
Obama would make a great commander in chief.
After all he cares for his troops.
Doesn't look at the as pawns to be played with.
Think I heard some mewing saying windmills don't work in high winds.
Well there's a smart reason to have no wind mills.
Wow what would we do with all that power the rest of the time?
#101. jacksforge: Where do you get the idea from me we "can't" do anything? Would you propose rehousing millions of people nearer to their workplace so that they use less fuel? New public transportation can't be introduced over night - the problems in getting the Los Angeles Metro built demonstrate that - and extensions to it are mired in consultations and legislative analysis. And that's just one conurbation!
Turn all those lawns being mowed and watered into the food production ground in these cities.
Do not follow the Dayton Doughnut, city plan.
Change the fundamentals of the economy make incentives.
START buying buses.
Get GM to buy the rights to re tool in making buses.
Just try and try harder, the rest are trying , have been for quite a while, the whole time the US lifestyle is exported as something good.
JUST TRY.
Stop building the"american dream"
There are brand new developements all over , no jobs there nothing, but can do america can build black roofed, black tarmac road white box housing with minimal insulation codes , no vauge attempt to think of anything except Money.
Oh and hasn't that boom just hit us all in the face .
If America CAN do then DO.
You have to start ,you're way behind .
Complain about this comment
Jack,
I think you may misunderestimate the Kitten's subtlety.
;-)
ed
As to the North sea bonanza, it's well past peak output, having fallen 10% in the last year....Norway played clever with her windfall, setting up a huge and well-funded trust to last for many generations. Brutish Britain has blown the lot, and faces the coming troubles with empty coffers.
Someone said it's best to fix the roof while the sun is shining....
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
@ magickirin #126:
how long ago? not so long ago that all those conditioned by the attitudes that seemed 'normal' at the time to be pushin' daisies, which is the key point.
te older you are, normally the more likely you are to vote, all other things being equal
Complain about this comment
Oh Ed I'm not sure as to what subtlety there is to miss ,yes a clear mewings would be appreciated.
But how do you know where the leeks are?
Complain about this comment
Jack: At least spell my nom de plume correctly - it's noble! And to compare Obama favorably with McCain as our Commander-in-Chief is ludicrous. Surely, as Ed said some time ago about one of his blogs, you had a suspicious bulge in your cheek as you penned those particular words!
And you were correct in surmising that I have never been a Democrat. Perish the thought! The prospect of another four years like the past 18 months makes me want to vomit! All they have accomplished is setting what must be a Congressional record in holding committee hearings. Now they are wasting their time and our money on investigating the horse racing industry! What a lot of horse manure!
Complain about this comment
Jack,
Think like a raindrop!
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
Noble,
I think you'd better keep the vomit bucket close to hand for the next few years. ;-)
I also reckon McCain was never officer material, much less CIC quality. I think he wouldn't have got into (and certainly not through) Annapolis without being the child and grandchild of Admirals.
I also reckon McCain's quality isn't improving with the passage of time. Some folk age better than others, and I reckon you're sharper than he is, despite your age, though it may be clouding your judgement of him. ;-)
Salaam, etc.
ed
Complain about this comment
"Before anyone pulls the lever for Obama they should consider what kind of clout Messrs Jackson, Sharpton, Wright, and Farrakhan will wield if their man should occupy the White House. If anyone thinks the race card is a factor during the run-up to the Democratic convention I suggest that they ain't seen nothing yet. Apologies for this awful double negative and abuse of our wonderful English language, but it DID seem appropriate!"
"And to compare Obama favorably with McCain as our Commander-in-Chief is ludicrous. "
Why not .commander doesn't mean oldest. he who commands. and Obama commands more respect than J mcCrime and can make good decisions.infact I have seen nothing of McCrime that commands anything.
He was a squadie. right?
He is TOO OLD FOR THIS WORLD.
I would be less worried about some old black guys in the future and more worried about the age issue here.
Many younger people are fed up with old farts politely being bigots.
Complain about this comment
Jack: Surely you misunderstood the blog about Obama's old black guys - the race card will be played by THEM, just as they do when some perceived social injustice occurs. Who will ever forget the foaming-at-the-mouth ravings from Rev. Wright - who was the bigot in that pulpit?
And Jack, I can assure you that McCain commands the respect of most veterans, who recognize service to country, and courage above and beyond the call. I don't appreciate the childish attempts at those tired old "nicknames" that you and other Obama lovers are constantly bestowing on our next President. It doesn't become your obviously sharp intellect and is discourteous to a fine man.
Complain about this comment
Noble, I am surprised that you are asserting that Obama's cabinet or even in a larger sense his 'entourage' will be some kind of activitist gallery.
So far he has been on the whole more inclusive than any other candidate.
And so far he has spoken to ease rather than to inflame racial tensions, unlike these fantasy 'cabinet of uppity radicals' posts.
I do agree that the name calling should stop, with candidates names be spelled correctly out of respect for the office they seek.
Complain about this comment
Noble,
You should take the trouble to look deeper than soundbytes. At your age, you are wiser than that, and I expect better from you. I would venture that if you judge Rev Wright on the basis of the bits continuously looped by Faux News, it's you who are bigoted.The 'chickens' sermon IN CONTEXT
Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Dorood/Peace
ed
Complain about this comment
Inclusive, Blue? Let's wait and see! And yes, Ed, at your invitation some time ago I did watch the whole "sermon". Can't think why I should change my mind that that was a disgraceful "performance" that sullied the very pulpit from which it was delivered. Now I await your defence of the rabid speech by the Catholic priest from the same pulpit. I forgot his name - not that I want to remember it!
P.S. Blue, do you suppose the name-calling will cease now that you have agreed with me that it is uncalled for?
Complain about this comment
#130. jacksforge: "Stop building the "american dream"
But that's what sets America apart from the rest of the world. Would you have everyone subject to the restrictive practices found in other countries? If you've ever been to England, you'll see awful high-rise apartment buildings which house the economically deprived, building which spawn gangs, criminal activity and violence. Would you want everyone to live like that? The idea of turning lawns in plots for growing food is most impractical - I for one couldn't do so because there is too much shade. A return to the 1900s is not going to happen.
As for buying buses, who do you mean? Individuals or local transit authorities? 90% of buses in Los Angeles are fueled by natural gas, and the newest by compressed natural gas, so we're ahead of most places.
As for #129 ("Ed) lives in Scotland a country who's economy has been based on offshore drilling for years." Scotland is not a sovereign nation and royalties derived from North Sea drilling go to the central government in Westminster.
Complain about this comment
David,
where they were splurged, leaving the kitty empty, as noted above (131).I live in expectation of the day (and may it come soon!) when Scotland shall once more be a sovereign nation.
Slainte!
ed
Complain about this comment
David,
Natural gas, whether compressed or not is still a very finite fossil fuel adding to greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere.Complain about this comment
"But that's what sets America apart from the rest of the world. Would you have everyone subject to the restrictive practices found in other countries?But that's what sets America apart from the rest of the world. Would you have everyone subject to the restrictive practices found in other countries? If you've ever been to England, you'll see awful high-rise apartment buildings which house the economically deprived, building which spawn gangs, criminal activity and violence. Would you want everyone to live like that? The idea of turning lawns in plots for growing food is most impractical - I for one couldn't do so because there is too much shade. A return to the 1900s is not going to happen. Would you want everyone to live like that? The idea of turning lawns in plots for growing food is most impractical - I for one couldn't do so because there is too much shade. A return to the 1900s is not going to happen."
and concrete blocks went out with the wombles. higher densities can be achieved with other solutions.
"If you've ever been to England, you'll see awful high-rise apartment buildings which house the economically deprived, building which spawn gangs, criminal activity and violence. "
you sanctamonious old fart.
I lived in England most of my life.
I studied architecture at the oxford school of architecture.
Yea I know about crap housing schemes.
But then I heard of ones that work go check out Hunderwasser. Austria
council housing that people moan about because they cannot buy a place, you have to be on the waiting list for years,council waiting list that is.
At least they tried to house the economically deprived, america lets them use railway cars or better still die.
"As for #129 ("Ed) lives in Scotland a country who's economy has been based on offshore drilling for years." Scotland is not a sovereign nation and royalties derived from North Sea drilling go to the central government in Westminster."
sovereign nation when did I say that.
again your argument is based on nothing but illusion.Your failings to comprehend what you read.
The Scottish did make money on the rigs. High paying jobs were on the rigs. that money went home was spent that is how economies work.
Scotland did well out of the oil business(london better) devon for example made nothing.
whisky and OIL that is the big producer of cash in scotland.
All of which was a pathetic attempt as you and others so often do ,to try to distract from the point that was relevent to drilling off the coast of california.
EATHQUAKE> TSUNAMI
JUST THINK it's really easy.
all your posturing with irrelevant and wrong "facts" does nothing to make your arguments ring true.
Natural disasters pollute.
earthquakes pollute , if we allow them to. oil rigs floating out at sea will need a bloody big tether to keep connected after a tsunami.
So DC how are you going to guarentee those rigs will not leak in the event of a tsunami .
It's bad enough that all american economy is ready to slide into the sea lets put some crap in the way so more damage can be done.
Bring on 2012
Complain about this comment
#143/4. Ed: "I live in expectation of the day (and may it come soon!) when Scotland shall once more be a sovereign nation." Since you're not a British citizen, why would it matter to you? In any case, it's just not going to happen - as the present (Scottish) Prime Minister has repeatedly stated. Alex Salmond doesn't stand a hope.
"Natural gas, whether compressed or not is still a very finite fossil fuel " For the moment it's step in the right direction since there's nothing better available - give credit where it's due.
#145. jacksforge - "I lived in England most of my life. I studied architecture at the oxford school of architecture." There is no "Oxford School of Architecture", although there is the 'School of the Built Environment' with a Department of Architecture. (I used to live in Headington) If you're going to trot out your CV/resume, you may as well get it right - and learn what the big words like 'sanctimonious' actually mean. I don't see anything vaguely sanctimonious or hypocritical about referring to high-rise blocks of flats - and where would all the residents do their gardening as you have suggested? It's no good pointing to the problems unless you have a solution. The 'crap housing schemes' have been around since the end of WW II, vast "council estates", the houses of which could later be purchased at knock-down prices during the Thatcher years. The experiment in high density housing has not worked well. At least in America there is a chance of owning one's own house - the 1944 GI Bill made it possible for huge numbers of families to buy their homes, whereas in the UK the Labour government built subsidised housing which tied people to renting rather than ownership. But perhaps you don't approve of the latter?
It's a pity that you have such an ageist outlook - it's not only the young who have ideas and solutions. McCain is not "too old for this world" but you may be too young and inexperienced to appreciate the lessons older people have learnt. Despite their different politics, was John Kennedy really better than Ronald Reagan?
Complain about this comment
David,
Ah! If Gordon Brown says it, it must be true! Why does it matter to me? Because then I would become a proud citizen of a Sovereign ScotlandThere is also no Oxford Polytechnic, because it's been re-named Oxford Brookes University, but it still does architecture.YES!Saaaaalmond, etc.
ed
Complain about this comment
Webb backs East Coast offshore gas exploration
Well, he's another 'maverick', and quite capable of being his own man.;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
mods send me that letter to change if I have to or print it.
Screw dc sensibilities. if he wants to accuse me of lying then he can get an answer and live with it.
Complain about this comment
Dc DIDUMS DID I HURT YOUR FEELINGS>AWWWW
well shove this in your knowledge store
OXFORD SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE existed when I studied and only in sept 2002 did it become the built enviroment crap.
Get your "facts" right .If you can.
Which I doubt.
Complain about this comment
reagan ? was he that addled old guy who though it smart to tell gorby to go to hell when the guy came to beg for help in order to have a smooth transition in the USSR.
G7 conference or g6 whatever.
wow and now everyone can buy a nuke and many are not accounted for.
ussr arms went anywhere.
great one ronny.
He was as big a moron as bush. WHAT did he get right?
what did he do so good.
oh start the war on drugs.
yea that worked out good too.
He was as big a fool as you
Complain about this comment
Ed: Why should you long for Scotland to become a sovereign nation when your adopted country is enjoying the largesse of the English taxpayer under the no doubt not-so-gentle prodding of your men in Westminster - Prime Minister Gordon Brown, Chancellor of the Exchequer Alistair Darling, and Speaker of the Commons Michael Martin?
Apart from English taxpayers having to fork out millions of pounds each year for free local services in Scotland they were stuck with a bill for 431 million pounds for a posh Parliament building in Holyrood (it ran ten times over budget and one has to wonder what happened to the overage).
I really don't think you want to govern yourselves with this kind of beneficence from across the border, do you?
Complain about this comment
Noble,
They took rather more beneficence in the form of the oil revenues...;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
Ed. # 154
I think if you asked just about everybody down south they would say that you got away with it very cheaply.
If the rest of the UK could turn the clock back and send you all the Scottish politicians who came to the Houses of Parliament and have left their imprint , [or should I revise that to a great pile of works] on the country and world these last 30 years, we will be happy to return the monies.
Check out Gorbals Mick today as the referee for politicians expenses. It is somewhat like Attilla the Hun being judge at the Hague with Bush etc on trial.
Jobs for the boys!
Complain about this comment
Waterman,
They would, wouldn't they, having fed the myth so long. But y'all can keep the politicians - we're well rid of them.The best thing about Devolution is that all the most ambitious, venal lot in the 'major' parties have been drawn off to the 'main event' in Westminster, and left us with jumped-up councillors, but the Nationalists and others who are serious about local improvement have provided some quality folk.
There are even a few good Tories, my own MSP among them, and he's had to ditch his party affiliation to become Presiding Officer. I hope he'll have the cojones to stand for re-election as an independent, and I have reason to believe he might (if he can be bothered to serve another term).
I hope we have seen the end of 'majority' government forever in Scotland.
Slainte!
ed
Complain about this comment
Waterman: Don't you have anyone you can recruit to blog about the welfare being sucked out of England by those Scots who are so grateful for the handout, but are so reluctant to swear allegiance to Britain? Don't leave it to this expatriate to state your case - get those as like-minded as you and me on this issue to counter the likes of Ed who, although not a Scot, appears to have been given the privilege of voting, given his statement that there are "even a few good Tories, my own MSP amongst them".
Complain about this comment
At 00:38am on 19 Jun 2008, wesside01 wrote:
Having a position on drilling when oil is $45/barrel vs. having a new position is $140/barrel is only"flip flopping" if you live in a binary world of black and white.
.get real."
a bit like , two wrongs don't make a right.
is it not time for america to GET REAL.
to say that because the price has gone up we should throw caution to the wind and drill off the whole west coast is a bit of binary thinking in it's own right.
A bit black and white.
gas prices up only thing to do is drill.
"how about solar?"
shut up NO we drill.
"how about wind?"
shut up the solution is to drill!
"how about using less"
Will you hippies shut up ,WE DRILL!
It is as much binary thinking as thinking McCrime is t a flip flopper.
Complain about this comment
Noble,
As I said before, I'm not franchised, but he's still my MSP. Most of the politicians I know personally don't mind I'm not a voter, but still a constituent. Some may even be glad I don't have a vote ;-) but nobody's said so.
I am promised Scottish citizenship following independence, and I'll certainly vote then.
Salaaaaam,
ed
Complain about this comment
nobleFloridian.
Unfortunately in many respects I am in the same boat as Ed. He is ex USA living in the UK , albeit Scotland, whereas I am ex Brit living on the continent of Europe.
Ed is busy seeking "roots" to secure his hold on a very pretty piece of the world where he lives. I am busy digging roots up [ 99.9% weeds ] and planting trees to make my little piece of heaven where I now reside. Together we are lovers of nature.
It is difficult to upset our master blogger on this site because I must give credit where it is due in that Ed links us to interesting sites and is broadening my obvious lack of knowledge.
Accept the fact that like Justin in America, Ed too is absorbing the local atmosphere and shows it by promoting a Scottish dislike of anything south of the border.
Blowing a gust of wind under Eds' kilt now and again usually cools him down. He is harmless. When he suggests home rule for Tipiglen I will start to worry.
Complain about this comment
I already rule Tipiglen!
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
Ed and Water: After browsing Ed's colorful site for the second time and reading about your chosen habitats I hope all your dreams are realised. Ed surely is a fortunate man to have such a nice family, and to be living in his version of Paradise. Now I am waiting to see a picture of him wearing a kilt and blowing bagpipes!
Ed, it might be of interest to you that in my city we have a drum and pipe band which performs at various events like Veterans Day and Memorial Day. The leader is a Scot who, like you, sports a luxurious beard. I doubt though that he is a more colorful character than our champion blogger.
And Water, I have found that Roundup does a pretty good job on my weeds, which ALWAYS grow much faster than my flowers!
Complain about this comment
Noble.
Thanks for the suggestion about the "roundup" but I dont have enough hands here to do the work and with the weeds running in every direction, one falls off the horse. John Wayne I am not.
Seriously, one trys to avoid the chemical solution as much as poss, bad for the planet, and the borehole water might suffer as well. A little hard planned work at a restful tempo is my motto.
On a totally different point- Just watched an interview with Ms Huffington on TV about internet blogging v medianews. [ Sky Technology} Nice lady- Can anybody help me with her accent? One of us{ Europe} or from an USA melting pot family? Any answers tucked inside your sporran Ed?
Complain about this comment
Waterman,
She's furrin, (Greek) - married a rich Republican, and then jumped ship. Obviously she took a wee bit of the treasure with her, and has used it well, IMO.
Salaam, etc.
ed
Noble,
Scots abroad, like Jews, have a tendency to rise to the top of most fields of endeavour. There are more Scots in Canada (and probably in USA) than in Scotland. More Jews in New York than in Tel Aviv, etc. And you've already noted the preponderance in the London government. There are also, somewhere, embarrassing pictures of me in a kilt, but more recently, this
;-)
Complain about this comment
Ed: Very impressive! I can safely say that that beard makes the pipe band Sergt. Major's growth appear somewhat lacking in density. Is that your everyday wear? Now I know why you are always signing off with "Salaam"!
I guess you are a fan of the strident Madame Huffington, who moved so far to the left that she is in danger of dropping off the edge. I still don't know why she changed course so abruptly after espousing conservatism for so long. Maybe you can, in your infinite wisdom, enlighten me.
My birthday, usually a day to rejoice in the fact that I have surived yet another year on this mortal coil, is going to be besmirched due to the fact that Barack and Hillary are going to campaign TOGETHER on that day. Talk about hypocrisy! I wonder if Bill will be along for the ride.
Complain about this comment
Noble,
Actually, it's a Japanese kimono, but proved an effective costume...as to HRC, WJC and BHO together raining on your birthday parade,
LET THEM EAT CAKE!
Advanced greetings in case I forget on the day!
Salaaaaaam1 and cheese.
ed
Complain about this comment
Noble,
I don't know, but, as I've said before, left and right is a pretty one-dimensional way to look at something as complex as political philosophy.I'm surely regarded as "left" to folk such as yourself, but in many ways I'm very 'conservative'. I believe in spending less than one's income, in "family values", in conserving natural resources (including humanity), and that usury is at the root of much that troubles the world. Surely these are 'conservative' sentiments, if not "right wing".
Perhaps this from one of my mentors (certainly no "leftist"! will clarify.
And, as linked before, some related thoughts from the same source.
And, if this isn't 'conservative', I don't know what is!
;-)
ed
"...our country is not being destroyed by
bad politics, it is being destroyed by a bad way
of life. Bad politics is merely another result."
-- Wendell Berry
Complain about this comment
Ed: A wise man indeed is your Wendell Berry - I can see his influence in many of your always erudite utterances.
And if your birthday wish cheese was Stilton - I guess it was a wish! - I slaver over the thought of such a majestic foodstuff, which costs a fortune for a very small slice over here. And you could also have wished me a Melton Mowbray pork pie, which may not exactly be your kettle of fish, given your spartan lifestyle, but which also makes me drool. Many have tried to emulate them over here, but have failed miserably. Import restrictions keep them out of the U.S.
And listen up, fellow Justin bloggers, from here on we should address Ed as His Hirsute Highness!
Complain about this comment
It is "addiction to credit" that is the problem.
it has encouraged americans to live well beyond their means. the oil they expect to get cheap is used to transfer several tons of metal around with 1 person in it.
the market punishes inefficiency. this is the market in action.
Complain about this comment
Contrary to what US Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman says I don't think supply and demand are really causing the problem. There are to many other factors at play here. Too many middle men skimming profits. Too much manipulation of supplies and inventories. The price of oil nearly doubled and gas went up a third in just one year and yet figures are coming out that indicate we are using less gas, not more, probably because people are cutting back on gas. That clearly means supply and demand have nothing to do with these prices. Speculation is driving prices !!! Lawmakers blame loopholes in commodities trading like the Swaps loophole or Enron Loophole. Whatever you want to call it, It's a get rich quick scheme and not much less obvious than a pyramid scheme. There is no way supply is causing this gas crisis. I put the full blame on speculators and commodities traders and I am sick of the smoke and mirrors. The meeting in Saudi Arabia hasn't achieved any substantial results from what I can see. The price of oil is still going up. There must be something else that's driving prices up and I think I know what it is. Although il appears to be a good hedge against inflation, a lower dollar and a low oil supply, in reality nothing could be farther from the truth. The main thing driving inflation is oil prices and as inflation goes higher investors buy more oil driving inflation higher again. Some experts predict this will trigger the worldwide recession. This will result in lower gas consumption and it will free up more gas supplies.. I am no expert but even I can see the writing on the wall. Investors are going to loose their shirts on oil. We may be looking at another ENRON. Hedge funds will topple leaving old age pensioners with nothing. The government won't be able to bail them out this time because the cost would be far to great. The CFTC and ICE will be too slow to react to the cracks forming in commodities trading so the govenment will finally step in. By that time it will probably be too late. www.nbtv.ca
Complain about this comment
I believe the event that will make oil prices rise through the roof (143$ is nothing compared to this) will be an attack on Iran. Mc.Cain is for the attack. clearly he is the one that will rise our prices at the pump.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS