Rethinking our oil-drenched lifestyles

[Javaman]

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2010/06/08/rethinking_our_oil_drenched_lifestyles/

LIKE MANY people, I spent a good portion of last week looking at pictures of oil-drenched birds and marveling at the chutzpah of BP. The company’s ads are contrite on the surface but brazen underneath, filled with images of pristine beaches and industrious volunteers, suggesting that soon, all will be well in the Gulf of Mexico so offshore drilling can start again. Just buck up, America, and have faith! Stiff upper lip and all that.

Pity the birds; hate the company. But I couldn’t help but wonder how much I should hate myself, too. My life, after all, is one giant petroleum glut, from the diapers and diaper rash ointment for my son to the toothpaste in my bathroom to the Lycra in my jeans. Oil gets me to work and back, puts food on my plate, gets pumped into the tank in my basement every winter. Imagining a world without it is next to impossible.

But there are some people who are trying.

Their work is based on the controversial concept of “peak oil,’’ the theory that US oil production reached its apex in the 1970s and global production will reach its high point by 2020. There will still be oil to be had, the theory goes, but less of it, harder to reach, requiring risky technology like BP’s deep underwater wells. The threat of ecological disasters and foreign encumbrances are nothing compared to the spectre of the spigot turning off. And the theory implicates us all; according to Richard Heinberg, senior fellow at the California-based Post Carbon Institute, half of the world’s non-renewable resources have been used up in the lifetime of the Boomer generation.

Even as a thought experiment, refuted by some scientists and futurists and optimists, “peak oil’’ is an opportunity to think past the relative placebo of renewable grocery bags and remember that our oil dependence wasn’t preordained. Early plastics were made from coal resin, says Brian Black, professor of history and environmental studies at Penn State Altoona. Petroleum just made them more malleable and cost-effective. Early car production was electric; Henry Ford even fiddled with an electric version of the Model T. But during World War I, we got hooked on the internal combustion engine, which fueled the suburbs and the road trip and the frequent flier and the culture of expansion we’re accustomed to now.

[Kolesar]

1. I drove at 58 mph on the way to work today

In a 65 mph zone. Got >35 mpg on my car's last four tankfuls.

[Javaman]

9. That's how it works.

It appears to me, sometimes, while driving on the highway, there there is only one speed for the other drivers: fast!

[Kolesar]

17. 10,600 miles/year => 300 gallons of gasoline => 3 Tons of CO2

My car has an instantaneous mpg display. By modulating the accelerator to keep mpg constant*, I get a definite fuel economy improvement. Read that on www.ecomodder.com

*more or less constant

[Javaman]

21. I wish more people thought like you.

Cheers!

[Scuba]

2. Don't hate yourself; it's not your fault....

...you didn't tell BP to bribe the regulator with whores and drugs so they would approve a plan to drill in an unsafe manner.

Besides politicking for better government and regulations, what do you think those of us who burn gas should be doing?

Moving near where we work? Unfortunately, the current employment culture in America means you'll likely be in a new job every few years. Are we supposed to move every time?

Bicycle to work? Same problem. Many of us commute thousands of miles to work, not because we want to, but because we have to. At one point in my career I had to fly 1,200 miles back and forth each week for two years, consuming vast quantities of jet fuel that wouldn't have been used had my seat on the plane been empty, like the one next to me sometimes was.

Change careers? Pretty hard to do without burning down everything you've worked for and starting over.

Change lifestyle? Do we live better than the average European? Some of us, a little, in terms of home and PERHAPS fuel-consumption history. But the graphs showing how Amerians use more than their fair share of fuels don't show splits between military, corporate and private gasoline consumption. (Can anyone provide this breakdown? Thanks.) I suspect the average consumer may look pretty innocent with that data at hand.

Retire? Hah. I'm not in the top 20% of Americans who own 93% of American wealth. Like most of us, I have just been scraping by, saving for retirement, and then seeing it vanish when the casino my 401K's played in turned out to be fixed.

Meanwhile, note this taken from http://www.observer.com/2009/o2/yacht-update regarding Paul Allen's fishing boat. "The yacht, which houses a crew of 60, two helicopters, seven boats, a submarine, and a remote controlled vehicle that crawls the ocean floor, costs the billionaire $20 million a year (or $384,000 a week) to keep up. Maybe he can cut his fuel consumption. Maybe he could scrape by with just one of his two helicoptors.


Anyway, I want to help. Please suggest some alternatives on how I can change the world by not buying $30 bucks worth of gas a week. Thanks

[End Of The Road]

4. Great post!

I'm weary of so many here that think we can shut off all the oil and survive.

And I'm also interested in finding out what the military's annual fuel consumption is. I suspect the military is the real reason we're still aggressively drilling.

[KamaAina]

25. If the Pentagon were a separate country, it would be among the top users of oil in the world

behind only the restof the U.S. and maybe two or three others. :eyes:

[Javaman]

6. There are many people such as you, but there are many that aren't...

the reality is this, those who can should, those who can't, help in other ways, like writing to congress to promote alt fuels.

In the mean time, maybe you can drive slower? make sure your tires are properly inflated? Try not to buy plastic product and get a wood or metal version of what you are buying? (clothes hangers, trash cans...things like that), I commute half way to work on my bike. I drive to a rec center, park my car there and bike the rest of the way. I do a 16 mile round trip on my bike.

As far as flying is concerned, later flights are better for the environment.

Just a few suggestions, every little bit helps.

[laughingliberal]

16. +1000 nt

[taterguy]

27. At least you saved energy by merely cutting and pasting this post:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8506332&mesg_id=8506907

[Scuba]

31. I'm a lazy dog. What can I say.

[taterguy]

32. Lazy and car addiction go hand in hand

Admitting you have a problem is the first step to recovery.

[FirstLight]

3. yet another great article about the need for us to change

what will it take, indeed?

I weep at the news, then drive to my grocery store... our lives of convenience are so enmeshed. It may take the loss of the resource and serious shortages so we can find our way without it...

thanks for posting, very important thoughts this morning, for sure. wish i could really take actions, but how? can i buy a new car? no. can I move off the grid? no...
we need some solutions so we can make the choices differently, that's for sure

[Javaman]

7. As I have written in past posts...

until the price at the pump hits $5, nothing will change.

The only way people change is when their wallet is effected. That's how we have been brain washed in this nation.

remember, we are no longer citizens, we are consumers!

[KansDem]

5. You're attacking the addict, not the supplier.

I agree with much of what you wrote, however, I tend to place responsibility on the "leaders," both political and corporate, who said one thing and did another.

Somone posted this on DU a week or so ago--
* In 1974 with 36.1% of oil from foreign sources, President Richard Nixon said, “At the end of this decade, in the year 1980, the United States will not be dependent on any other country for the energy we need.”

* In 1975 with 36.1% of oil from foreign sources, President Gerald Ford said, “We must reduce oil imports by one million barrels per day by the end of this year and by two million barrels per day by the end of 1977.”

* In 1979 with 40.5% of oil from foreign sources, President Jimmy Carter said, “Beginning this moment, this nation will never use more foreign oil than we did in 1977 – never.”

* In 1981 with 43.6% of oil from foreign sources, President Ronald Reagan said, “While conservation is worthy in itself, the best answer is to try to make us independent of outside sources to the greatest extent possible for our energy.”

* In 1992 with 47.2% of oil from foreign sources, President George Bush said, “When our administration developed our national energy strategy, three principles guided our policy: reducing our dependence on foreign oil…”

* In 1995 with 49.8% of oil from foreign sources, President Bill Clinton said, “The nation’s growing reliance on imports of oil…threatens the nation’s security… will continue efforts to…enhance domestic energy production.”

* In 2006 with 65.5% of oil from foreign sources, President George W. Bush said, “Breakthroughs…will help us reach another great goal: to replace more than 75 percent of our oil imports from the Middle East by 2025.”

* In 2009 with 66.2% of oil from foreign sources, President Barack Obama said, “It will be the policy of my administration to reverse our dependence on foreign oil while building a new energy economy that will create millions of jobs.”
The Christian Science Monitor

Each President, from Nixon to Obama has "pledged" to wean us off foreign oil, yet each administration saw an increase.

And how many times have we read something like "Corpo Motors sees development of 100mph car in 7 years" only to find no such thing seven years later. But the same story will run again. During the mid-1990s, GM developed an all-electric car that was immensely successful. So much so there was a waiting list to lease it. Yet, GM recalled all vehicles and destoyed them. Why? Was it "too successful?" (see "Who Killed the Electric Car?")

We have the capacity to harness energy from wind, solar, ocean currents, etc, but we keep dragging our feet and allowing the voices of more oil, more nuclear, more coal, dominate the national debate.

Frankly, I've had it with our "leaders." They are co-opted and corrupted, and nothing short of a clean-sweep of all political offices will provide the change we really need.

And we need desperately to dispel the notion that "capitalism works best for the country's interests." I believe we see how wrong that statement really is. Why ever did we come to believe that a small group of powerful individuals working in secret for a group of investors has the nation's best interests at heart?

[Javaman]

8. while that is true...

if there is less demand, then the need for it, diminishes.

Some addicts know how to quit. We haven't been taught how.

Supply and demand. Trying to put all the blame on the dealer is disingenuous. The dealer wouldn't deal unless there was a demand.

[XemaSab]

10. Bravo for this post

:thumbsup:

[Javaman]

12. Why bravo?

we are all part of this. We addicts need the supplier as much as the supplier needs us.

Until we stop using oil, the supplier will gladly keep us stocked up.

Going after the supplier before there is any alternative is like telling a heroine addict to quit but there will be no methadone.

We live in the chicken or the egg age of dependency.

We scream and yell about how bad BP is, but did you know that there are another 1500 oil platforms in the gulf chugging right along while we get all indigent over BP?

Prior to Katria, there was as many as 2000 platforms going strong.

We yell at BP the drug supplier while whole sections of this nation choose another dealer. "I'll show BP, I'll just feed my addiction by buying at Mobil! That'll show them!"

It's really bizarrely amusing.

[XemaSab]

15. Bravo because it's a well-written post

That clearly lays out some background information, a few interpretations of the information, some speculation about where the future is headed (given the past), and a call to arms based on everything that came before.

(I'm a technical editor, and you would be SHOCKED how few people can write something succinct and coherent. QV 90% of the stuff on the internet.)

[walldude]

24. Actually Carter implemented what he said he would and had we kept it up

25% of our energy would have been Solar by now. Reagan came in and killed Carters Solar plans.

[NYC_SKP]

11. Some will say that by taking on any personal responsibility, we let BP off the hook.

It astounds me that people cannot grasp two related but different valid concepts simultaneously.

Recommended.

:kick:

[Bluerthanblue]

20. Yes indeed-

we can try and excuse it all sorts of ways, but we are part of the problem.

[Catherina]

13. Thank you Javaman.

It's time to go back to the earth, to a simpler, less destructive way of live more in harmony with nature. Rec'd

[L0oniX]

14. In no way will we or anyone else make the great turn away from oil energy.

There is nothing else that will ever replace oil energy on the scale of use today not to mention the future with a continued growth in population and oil energy based food demand. Enjoy what you can now ...and keep the denial going.

[Scuba]

19. So you don't believe...

that electric, from tides, solar and wind can power us? That there's no hydrogen cell hope?

I believe if we had used the billions in tax breaks that Bush gave to Big Oil for a "Manhattan Project" on alternatives instead we'd be almost there already.

[L0oniX]

28. There'sno way any other kind of energy is going to replace what we get from oil.

Not only that but the increase in energy usage is not possible to stop just like the population growth will not stop. You don't have to believe any of that ...and the majority of people are in denial.

[Javaman]

22. So while we use 25% of the worlds fossil fuels but only have 5% of it's population

it's impossible for us to cut back?

I know full well of the energy carrying capacity of oil. There is nothing like it and there probably never will be again.

But until we step up to the plate with alt fuels we are in for a very dark future.

I wish I could find this report I read about 2 years ago that stated that we could easily cut back on 1/3 of our use just through conservation alone.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out this problem of our oil use. It just takes the will to make it happen.

Alas, we are a oil greedy bunch and as such have built our entire nation around it. So as a result, kicking the habit will a very painful process.

However, it could be less painful if the repukes and libertarians would help instead of being braying jackasses.

[L0oniX]

29. There will not be a great turn away from oil.

[Javaman]

30. of course not...

the only way it will happen is when gas goes up to 5+ at the pump.

However, by that point we well be already screwed because, no real alt will be in place.

[blindpig]

18. We have what we have, we do what we do, because it is profitable

to somebody. The 'why' and 'how' of what we do is largely conditioned by the organization of the means of production. Fossil fuel usage must be curtailed. A rationally organized economy is our only hope.

[Javaman]

23. I agree.

But what completely baffles me is; senators and moron tea baggers are arguing over whether or not this oil is actually polluting the gulf.

And because that argument is taking place, any hope of really fixing our problems is moot.

[blindpig]

26. The senators are just blowing smoke for their paymasters,

that is understandable enough. The TB's are deluded ideologues, to call Obama a socialists is an insult to socialists.

[mdmc]

33. ==