[doodlebug2]

As you said JohnConnor, like all at once having to lose weight, get fit, stop smoking etc, I would ad cold turkey, liquor, pot, crack, cocaine, herion all at once with the above.
The american people, in my opinion will not be able to do it. Anarchy or not.
Just today, I heard two people at the grocery store saying that gas is going down ($) so everything will be ok soon, basically go back to 2002.
IMO, like a drug addict the US population will need to hit rock bottom to change. Politicians and pundits et. el can talk about change, but the citizens won't.

[JohnConnor]

Yeah - I heard some guys at work talking about the same thing, gas is dropping on the AF base I'm on to below $4.00 and people believe that it will be around $3.00 in a few months.

I just can't for the life of me understand why no one understands there is a finite amount of petroleum, as 99% of the type we use, I hold some hope for biologically produced petrol or other bio-fuels... but I gave the analogy of the Aral Sea to these guys, it has taken several decades for the absolutely crazy and stupid mistake of diverting rivers leading to the Aral Sea to cause it to shrink, most likely permanently but it happened and that if it were a sea of oil rather than water, it would take a long time but eventually it would all be gone if you keep using it...why this simple concept, that there is only so much is not widely accepted I'll never know...

[Novus]

The complete distruction of the Aral Sea is one of the worst environmental disasters ever recorded.

[doodlebug2]

I got into a discussion with a worker that says what 99% of the citizens think. He said if you drilled everywhere, I mean every where you would find enough oil. Like under all not used farmland and in the Chesapeake and DE bays. He figured (because he heard on the radio) that oil is basically everywhere for our picking, like fruit.
Not realizing that geology has anything to do with it.

[vilemerchant]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('doodlebug2', 'I') got into a discussion with a worker that says what 99% of the citizens think. He said if you drilled everywhere, I mean every where you would find enough oil. Like under all not used farmland and in the Chesapeake and DE bays. He figured (because he heard on the radio) that oil is basically everywhere for our picking, like fruit.
Not realizing that geology has anything to do with it.

[JohnConnor]

I originally got into this idea (Peak Oil) from doing research for a Master's class paper a year ago, as one of the long-term causes for a mass migration crisis from Mexico into the U.S. - reference this article from WorldPress :
World Press article on Mexican oil depletion with increased illegal immigration

I see this as the first (happening within 5 years) of the most serious consequences of the beginning of the Long Emergency (assuming no technical solution or intelligent societal planning comes about in the next 5 years or so) - our response has been some planning for something like this, I'll reference a National Response Plan called DISTANT SHORES
that proves that on some level, "they" are preparing for some of the first symptoms of the Long Emergency, basically they will build large internment camps in the Southwest on old military bases, KBR is the prime contractor, and repatriate illegal immigrants from there...

Ok, that is a short term solution, depending on whether or not they will be treated with any dignity, but once oil depletion in Mexico begins, with 1/3rd of their federal government's revenue coming from Pemex oil production, what is the long term solution?

Another question for the forum:
Where will the next resource war be? With Iraq currently being the first..

[patience]

JohnConnor,

I'd rather not tax square footage of homes, but rather tax the fuels. That would get away from unfairly taxing those who built very effiecient homes, and penalize those who did not.

I'd also like to see CAFE standards raised dramatically and permanently as they should have been 30+ years ago. I'm tired of seeing one overweight teenager driving an SUV.

Don't think fusion is going anywhere. Been hearing about that for 50 years, and it always seems to be a "future" thing. How about putting fuel taxes into more localized electrical generation, where it's feasible, and rebuilding the electrical grid?

I'm always suspicious of new taxes. They never seem to go away, and often get poured into the big govt money bucket for use on whatever, instead of where they were intended to go. It's a game they play, sell the tax on the basis of its' intended use, then figure out how to steal the money for something else. Changing the use of targetted taxes should be a referendum issue.

[JohnConnor]

I can agree with all of that - I am of the philosophy use methods (taxes and incentives) to let the private market determine the most efficient way to what we as a rational society should be doing, so I will change my proposals...

- Increase Fuel taxes on all liquid petroleum, non-renewable produced fuels, fuel home heating oil included

I think that CAFE standards are ok but the car companies will always use that as a red herring to whine about not being able to accurately forecast and plan for more efficient cars, just take that argument away from them and focus on increasing fuel taxes

If not fusion or some other advanced form of nuclear energy then what? I agree that "they" have been proposing that and promising it for decades but have not shown anything of real promise but I feel that we have to look at something that has that massive return on energy invested...

I agree with tax money being diverted by slimy short sighted pols, the federal gov needs to run more like a state gov, more transparently that is and except in times of declared war, never allowed to run budget deficits which just allows you to live beyond your means and encourages extremely poor decisions...

[patience]

JohnConnor,

Good points there. We probably need a propaganda campaign along with high CAFE standars, making it unpatriotic to waste fuel, and stifle the car Co's. nonsense. Force them to aim at efficiency and maybe luxury for those who can afford it, instead of oversize guzzlers and "performance".

I expect that we willl need something like breeder reactors to supply enough electrical power, but I also favor some really aggressive conservation, since you get a lot more bang for the buck there. Particularly, in home heating and cooling there are vast gains to be made, along with super-efficient appliances. We could do a lot with govt info campaigns to reduce use of clothes dryers (Federal law to get rid of restrictions on clothes lines in uppity residential areas), maybe subsidies for heat pumps, and big subsidies for passive solar home heating. (Boy would that give the industry a boost!) Passive solar home heating hits all the fuels used for heating, and has lower capital cost and less maintenance than the powered solar systems. (Powered solar system-is that an idiotic phrase, or what?)

Given the blows that our economies will take from depleting energy and the rising costs of it, I believe some serious measures are in order. I would favor measures to encourage short-line rail to get some trucks off the road. An ENFORCED 45mph speed limit is practically a no-brainer. Support at all levels for locallized food production. Bus and electric light rail mass transit. A licensing tax on gas guzzlers, with proceeds going to alternatives. End the ethanol subsidy, and let the chips fall where they will. Tax reform to encourage small farms. Tax incentives to companies for work-at-home so maybe I can get computer support personnel on the phone who have English as a first language, and repatriate some jobs. If we do any protectionist measures, stopping off-shoring of telecommute jobs would be a good place to start.

Public Education programs are comparatively cheap, and could foster home cooking, nutrition, energy coservation, gardening and food preservation, water conservation, even car-pooling to the grocery. Most of these things will happen as energy costs rise, so why not tell people how to do it and get it started?

I'm sure there are a host of unintended consequences to my ideas here, so critiques would be welcome. Shoot me down at will, and provide better ideas if you have them. What I seek is avoiding a lot of false starts in powering down that we can ill afford.

Afterthought from the powerdown thread: Shorter work week, wherever practical. Why didn't I think of that?

edit: My apologies for not reading the original intent of the thread, i.e., military use. Well, maybe it all applies, since we have to provide for civilians to support the military.

As for defense, all that takes has been covered here. "Guarding" our oil supply is another matter, beyond my ken, but my thought is that diplomacy is the first choice. If that doesn't get the job done, then home energy supplies are required. Failing both of those, then Houston, we have a problem.

[ROCKMAN]

John,

Iraq isn't the first resource war for us. You're probably not an old fart like me so history may not be as interesting to you. For the last 200+ years the US has been involved in one resource war after another. This country began as a result of the battle of new world resources between the colonialists and the Brits. The Civil War was as much about agricultural resources as it was slavery (unfortunate also viewed as another "resource" at the time). The list goes on and on. One of the last straws that helped push Japan towards 7 Dec was an embargo of oil against them. Regardless of how it ended, Vietnam began as a resource war between France and the locals (it was about metal ores). Russia may have pushed into Georgia to support some ethnic Russian living there but you have to believe the Caspian Sea oil potential is an additional factor.

I'm not a doomer but it's difficult to believe that human nature will suddenly evolve into a peaceful and sharing state of mind anytime soon. Unfortunately, swapping blood for oil (or any other resource) is a very old equation.

[evilgenius]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JohnConnor', 'I') originally got into this idea (Peak Oil) from doing research for a Master's class paper a year ago, as one of the long-term causes for a mass migration crisis from Mexico into the U.S. - reference this article from WorldPress :
World Press article on Mexican oil depletion with increased illegal immigration

I see this as the first (happening within 5 years) of the most serious consequences of the beginning of the Long Emergency (assuming no technical solution or intelligent societal planning comes about in the next 5 years or so) - our response has been some planning for something like this, I'll reference a National Response Plan called DISTANT SHORES
that proves that on some level, "they" are preparing for some of the first symptoms of the Long Emergency, basically they will build large internment camps in the Southwest on old military bases, KBR is the prime contractor, and repatriate illegal immigrants from there...

Ok, that is a short term solution, depending on whether or not they will be treated with any dignity, but once oil depletion in Mexico begins, with 1/3rd of their federal government's revenue coming from Pemex oil production, what is the long term solution?

Another question for the forum:
Where will the next resource war be? With Iraq currently being the first..

[JohnConnor]

ROCKMAN & EvilGenius:

Good point that all wars are ultimately about some sort of resource, as a Southerner who doesn't believe the Earth is 5000 years old and acknoledges the South shot first, that is excellent about the "resource" or one of them being fought over was the energy source, human slavery, being the primary method of agricultural production, there are instances where legitimate reasons for warfare happen but they are usually coincidental to some sort of economic/resouce struggle happening underneath, everytime I have a discussion with some about why it was really good that the South lost, not just freeing a huge amount of people from bondage and suffering, they just can't understand why when I try to explain that the society they (plantation landed gentry) would have build would have been them on top supported by slaves and virtual slaves (white sharecroppers) with no real possibility of every getting ahead or having any chance at a decent life, a feudal society in essesence with an oligarchy (even more explicitly than today's society) - basically Brazil until recently, a large primarily agricultural nation with huge distinctions of class based on race/caste and widely inequitable distributions of wealth and very but most of them are distracted by what is taught to them that it was only about economics but then only considering a small aspect of it...

A further war in the ME between the West and Russia is possible but I am still thinking about it, perhaps over whatever the Artic might yield...

[JohnConnor]

Further about the next resource war:

Oil will run out first, there will be more wars for it but I should have phrased my original question as what is the next resource the world will struggle for, my vote is access to fresh water, especially in the middle east, construction of the Atatruk Dam in Turkey which has lead to tension for some period of time, the only reason for a dam is to restrict at least some of the flow of a river and it has by cutting effectively the flow of the Euphrates by a 1/3 - causing extreme protests from Syria and Iraq, leading Syria to support the PKK and to some extent distabilize Turkey in retaliation, water effectively being used as a weapon and then causing another nation to act indirectly aggressively for a basic resource, with the US, we have ample water and food production but I could see fishing ground encrochment being a problem directly for us, at least the first one...

Ok, I concede that most wars are economic/resource based, what was the American involvement in Korea/Vietnam? I am merely curious for your opinion on this or were these quirks to the typical conflict we have engaged in? That is primarily ideological or not explicitly economically valuable opportunities for us?

[ROCKMAN]

John -- First, all wars have been fought for legitimate reasons. Just go read the history books written by the winners. (a bitter sweet grin induced).

Vietnam was a French colony. A left over from the pre WWII days. They wanted to control the rubber and tin (?) trade. Of course, after being relatively self governing during WWII they resisted the idea of being controled by the French. Unfortunately, such righteous nationalistic feels are easily taken advantage of by communist minded types. We went in originally to help our French allies. This led to more commies which led to more imperialist which led to even more commies which led to etc, etc.

If you read of the centuries old history of the Viet people you'll might see as I have: the Viets would have been our greatest allies in Asia. They are, if nothing else, tenaceous. Their sense of nationalism has always been very powerful. I've always contended we should have gone into Vietnam but to help the locals get rid of the French. But once the war turned to democracy vs. communism that possibility was lost.

[JohnConnor]

Interesting ROCKMAN...

I will have to research more into that...

Well, I just finished "The Party's Over..." by Heinberg... I think in my education on the subject of Peak Oil I am going thru a spectrum...

I started with this reading list...

"The Long Emergency"........."The Party's Over"........."Plan B 3.0"
Doom & Gloom --- to --- Objective Analysis -- to -- Rational Hope

I can't be all doom and gloom but I won't give in to childlike foolish hope...

Returning to the topic of National Security Preparation and expanding it to likely outcomes during the Long Emergency, if Kunstler is right and that the Southwest is largely abandonded due to the lack of fuel and cheap electricity to provide water/electricity and it is abandoned, will this invite it to become a lawless area of American & Mexican citizens-criminals-warlords-etc... or do you think we (US) would use it as our dumping ground for nuclear waste, massive amounts of industrial waste from non-conventional oil production (tar sands, oil shale, etc...) ? After reading Kunstler's book I will have to disagree with him that the SW would abandoned, the US would never cede any territory to another nation (Mexico) effectively by default and I could see it used as a huge repository while we desperately try to keep the lights on and cars running during the beginning of the Long Emergency - which of course we could avoid with rational intelligent actions but who has time for that?

Another cheery outcome of the Long Emergency I have considered after reading some of the above referenced books, posts, articles,etc... is the idea that slavery would be reinstituted, in the most extreme projections of the Long Emergency...I am not so sure I agree with this but it did give me pause, is our society or any other around the world capable of bringing this back? I thought about it and if it got really really really bad here, would we effectively do that to the prison population?

Just pondering what I hope doesn't happen...



Probably the method of procurring oil in the future by all nations...

[ROCKMAN]

One thing I can promise you John is that his statement regarding abandoning the SW might happen but only if you don't include Texas as part of the SW. The border is already a pretty rough place. A generality of course, but I can tell you that many here, in their hearts, see themselves as Texans first and Americans second. And any true threat to Texan society would greatly amplify those feelings. And that outcome may not be that far off. With Mexico's production falling so fast it will be just a few years before social upheaval hits that country with a vengeance. I see numbers between 40 to 60% of their gov't income is from oil. The Mexican people don't really get much from the gov't but it's that little bit that keeps them alive. If that social net fails them how could they be blamed for wanting to escape.

And there's only one direction to escape: north. When this happens I fear an extreme and potentially very violent reaction here. So far illegal immigration has been tolerated here because business has been able to exploit those folks. But have a massive new wave head this direction, as well as a possible economic downturn requiring less of this new age slave labor, and I promise you’ll see a statewide reaction that will shock much of the country. I’ve been here 30 years (a TBC…Texan by Choice) and I know the mentality here. That big Texas bravado image is not just a funny punch line. It is very real and potentially very deadly. And, like they say here, it ain’t bragging if it’s true: there are more guns in Texas then in the entire US or in the entire US military.

[wisconsin_cur]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', ' ')And, like they say here, it ain’t bragging if it’s true: there are more guns in Texas then in the entire US or in the entire US military.

[vtsnowedin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', 'O')ne thing I can promise you John is that his statement regarding abandoning the SW might happen but only if you don't include Texas as part of the SW. The border is already a pretty rough place. A generality of course, but I can tell you that many here, in their hearts, see themselves as Texans first and Americans second. And any true threat to Texan society would greatly amplify those feelings. And that outcome may not be that far off. With Mexico's production falling so fast it will be just a few years before social upheaval hits that country with a vengeance. I see numbers between 40 to 60% of their gov't income is from oil. The Mexican people don't really get much from the gov't but it's that little bit that keeps them alive. If that social net fails them how could they be blamed for wanting to escape.

And there's only one direction to escape: north. When this happens I fear an extreme and potentially very violent reaction here. So far illegal immigration has been tolerated here because business has been able to exploit those folks. But have a massive new wave head this direction, as well as a possible economic downturn requiring less of this new age slave labor, and I promise you’ll see a statewide reaction that will shock much of the country. I’ve been here 30 years (a TBC…Texan by Choice) and I know the mentality here. That big Texas bravado image is not just a funny punch line. It is very real and potentially very deadly. And, like they say here, it ain’t bragging if it’s true: there are more guns in Texas then in the entire US or in the entire US military.

[JohnConnor]

I would only include the extreme West of Texas as part of the SW, so I guess only part of that will be sparsely populated during the Long Emergency, my numbers are about 33% of the Mexican Federal government's revenues come from oil, almost all from Cantrerell, which is in serious decline, I definitely see things getting worse for Mexican immigrants before getting better, if 40-60% of the population does head North, as polling has indicated it has expressed interest in, then not only collapse there but then the inevitable conflict here, I am not sure what they would do, no longer would the jobs many have taken probably still exist, as we would surely be in decline...what I fear is that they will be encouraged to try some sort of neo Pancho Villa type action associated with the idea of "Reconquista" and then we will have to respond militarly, not good for everyone involved but especially them...as mentioned before, there is a national response plan called DISTANT SHORES for just this type of thing, mass migration crisis, so it has been thought out some, as for the individual state of Texas being more or less hospitable to a wave of Mexican immigrants, I don't think they would be any worse to them than anyone else, our generosity is directly related to our own material well being, if we can help without too much out of our pockets we will, if we are not adapting well to the Long Emergency, not good... I am a from the Old South so I think the God, Guns & Guts attitude might not be so accepting to a wave of humanity on its doorstep, not bad mouthing our country, I don't think any nation is that welcoming to immigrants, especially in trying times...

[ROCKMAN]

Well snow...I am in Texas and that can lead to a bit of exaggeration you know. But I have read that stat in the past. But with 24 million folks in TX that would be about 6 weapons each. And I know more than a few who each own 30 or more guns. Then add in the fact that we have more skilled marksmen (re: deer hunters) then the rest of the country combined. That does make for a very effective killing machine. Hell, we have more fatal hunting accidents (which are often preceded by the phrase “Hold my beer and watch this”) then the rest of the country so taking life with a gun isn't that uncommon here.

OK…I’ll stop teasing TX for the moment. But my real point was there is a prevailing attitude that is very common here. Texans, when confronted with a serious problem, look immediately for a home grown solution. And they don’t really care what the rest of the world thinks about it either (check out the latest tally board on executions.). If life ever became as bad as some of the worst doomers offer, TX won’t look to DC for help. They'll develop their own reaction. And no politician will ever go against a majority will of the people, even if it’s rather extreme and scary. Even the more sophisticated side of society does have a core sense of self reliance that can push in a radical direction. I’ve travel the world a good bit and when ever US citizens are asked where they are from they always say “America”. Everyone except those from Texas. Their answer is always, without exception, “Texas”. If you’re interested in learning more of our rather odd mentality compared to the rest of the states research how TX became part of the US. I slide a little humor into my thoughts because it’s a rather heavy topic. But I am serious about my concerns over how radically reactions might be if we do run into one of those worse case doomer visions. I personally don’t expect such a turn of events, but I’m also just as sure of reactions in the Lone Star state if they do manifest. It won't be pretty. It won't make me proud. But it will happen.