I have come to a conclusion. I need to move. Peak Oil planning is futile here and I am having serious doubts that even if I could get my work to seriously consider this issue (which makes sense, given my job in the LONG RANGE PLANNING DIVISION. As it is, energy is considered a non issue. But my decision was driven by more than just my backwards looking place of employment.
Here are the strikes against where I live (Central California, south of Fresno):
1. It is over populated and growing too fast. Plain and simple, the demographics of this area scare me. Even though I live in what is considered rural in california terms, by non-CA terms it is still crowded. My county, is home to nearly 400K people and growing rapidly. What's worse is the population distribution indicates that a sizable portion of the population has YET to enter the child bearing age. Plus due to our relative inexpensive cost of living, thousands more are flocking to us each year.
2. Despite this county being larger than the state of Connecticut, most people are jammed into the North-western 20% of the county. The bulk of the land is occupied by 10K foot mountains.
3. Water. It only rains on average 8 inches of rain a year. This year was exceptionally wet and we got 16. The only way we grow crops and can take showers is by pumped groundwater and winter runoff. Run off is unpredictable (great this year, lousy the next) while the aquifer is being drawn down by excessive pumping (which is of course electrically powered). The remaing water is pumped in from N. of Yosemite park via canals. Post peak the water delivery system is bleak. Already, water district operators are fretting over the increased electrical costs to pump an ever declining water table.
4. Socio economics. They suck. This area has been importing "migrant" workers for farm work ever since the turn of the twentieth century. First displaced blacks from the south, then poor white Okies during the 20s-40's and since then Mexicans. Guess what? Most never migrated away when they finished farm laboring. Each new resident has pushed this area away from it's theoretical carrying capacity. And since there always a surplus in labor (Farm owners INSIST on CHEAP farm help) wages are hideously low here as is educational attainment, and other socioeconomic standards. The best and brightest leave after highschools. The rest linger in poverty. Before anyone gets the bright idea to blame the Mexicans for this, remember, this area imported poor from the southern and other western states for decades. WHen the SHTF there will be alot of disgruntled POOR people with nothing to loose. Of the 400K that live here, close to 100K are desperately poor or close to that point. Not good at all.
5. Climate. It gets up to 100 each summer. Thats the average. 110 is not unheard of. Without AC or water that is dangerous. Most houses are not designed for passive cooling strategies.
6. Transportation. You need a car to get around. All construction is oriented towards vehicular transportation. The building lobby is against anything other than SF homes, cos they make more money off of them.
7. Food. You'd think in an area known for food production this wouldn't be a problem. But it is. Most crops grown are cash crops grown for export (domestic or internationally). THe farms are mostly corporate run affairs while the county leadership considering the passage of a PRO-GMO ordinance as a solution to our (perceived) agricultural problems. Only 1000 odd acres in this county are organic. Thats out of over 1 million acres in production. But it gets worse. Most food here is sent to Los Angeles or the Bay area for "processing" before being shipped back. Yikes.
8. Politics. This area is run by backwards looking conservative types. The average populace (that are not desperately poor) expect that the free market will solve all of the problems or that God will rapture them away, like the Left Behind novels. I am not kidding. I work with planners that have the same philosophy as James Watt (Regan's disgraced secratary of the Interior)
9. Policy. Build build build. Growth solves problems is too often the solution persued. Recently there was an isssue with a community that has significant sewer problems. As a way to solve this problem, consideration was given to allowing more residents "so that the new residents could provide extra income to pay for the improvements" Our largest city considers it good when it is growing by 4% a year and is forced to open a new school each year.
10. Leadership. Head firmly stuck in the sand. Can't say it enough. The elected officials do NOT want to consider limits to growth and the official planning department's position is NOT to plan for ENERGY as an issue until it is a crisis. As one planner said in a public forum today. "We're planners. We do not consider energy a limitation. When areas develop, the electricty and gas will always be provided by the utilities in cordination with the developers." Then to top it off, I have been instructed to stay quiet on the matter. Read more
here from my blog on this subject.
This place is fucked. Maybe not as badly as Los Angeles or Phoenix but fucked no less. I thought maybe advanced planning and activism could work, but the problems too fundemental (carrying capacity) or unmovable (leadership).
So that is why I have decided to pack it in. Time to find a cooler, wetter, less populated area with a more level-headed approach to these issues. Plus, my wife is a certified teacher and can teach in almost any location where there is an opening (secondary ed). My goal now is to relocate my family while I still can. I owe that to my kids. I didn't help bring them into the world only to die a miserable death in a hell hole destined for self-inflicted destruction.
So sorry folks, if you were hoping for some example of some jurisdiction discussing or planning for peak oil in a rational manner. It won't happen here and I will not be the instigator of this discussion.
I tried...
Now I gotta look out for those important to me.
I hope you understand