[richardmmm]

I think the problem is like the Titanic.

Everyone is so confident that things will be fine that it creates a huge complaceny.

The 1990s bred this into everyone's head more than ever.

We reach out for things everyday and assume that they will be ever present and readily available. Simple stuff like loaves of bread, a new pair of shoes, or a fresh steak. Water in the tap, electricity in the switch etc. We are so busy with our own tunnel vision lives that we don't consider the bigger picture.

Yet the problem is massvely amplified, not because oil is running out or even because the US lacks refinery capacity. Those are just oil company games designed to manipulate prices. (remember the Enron power black outs in CA - same story, make shortage scares, put up the price.)

No - the problem is massively amplified because the population is large and people are very busy with things day to day. Therefore the slightest disruption causes total havoc as all that cirulation of people and activity drops out of the system at once.

It's like a storm in a small remote airport verses a storm over Atlanta airport that blocks all domestic and international traffic for 2-3 days. Suddenly there are more passengers on the ground than there are hotels to accomodate them all. Planes are parked all over the place, things get messy. Simply beacuse there is so much traffic all clogged up at once with no where to go.

The way we live in such concentrated cities, everything has grown so large and complex that when a crisis comes no one has the means to cope. Just like the Titanic there are not enough lifeboats available because everyone was so certain that the thing could never sink. A large percentage of the people on the boat were passengers, only a small percentage of crew were actually vital to the ship.

We are so busy rushing around keeping the system functioning, and entertaining ourselves, that we never thought to consider what might happen if the system doesn't function at 80,90,100%. There is simply no room for society to take a hit or reduce capacity without hundreds of thousands of people dropping out of their activities and clogging up the whole system.

No offense to anyone, I am not exactly a productive member of socitey myself, but we have become so good at managing our basic day to day needs that most occupations are actually more involved with third tier activities, like entertainment, retail, clothing, gimicks etc.

Only a small percentage of the work force is acutally occupied with keeping the ship running so to speak.

I mean it's great that society has been able to achieve this level of development, but I fear the same thing that makes it so diverse is going to be it's down fall.

Oil supply is a small part of that, I don't think that alone will bring things down. It's more a question of the fact that the system is so paper thin and so many people are now involved in non vital though necessary functions because the society is so complicated now, that there is just no room for error.

And as we all know, mother nature is full of all kinds of unexpected mishaps and "acts of god".

it only takes a few of these in a row and you have total chaos.

add in another major hurriance, say houston or miami, a quick earthquake in California maybe a tidal wave on the east coast. everything will grind to a complete standstill. that's without somekind of epidemic - isn't birdflu becoming a problem again lately ??

even though we have seen these disasters come time and time again, we never considered that maybe two or three could hit in quick succession.

we are secure, we never considered the downside

[backstop]

Richard -

I wonder if you would you care to edit the final lines of your otherwise insightful post, or would you like me to explain both just how many countries' National Academies of Science made a joint warning before the recent G8 of the clear peril of Global Warming, and just how it relates to Katrina ?

The reason I ask is that as it stands, it appears to condradict your warning of the lethal danger of complacency. I refer in particular to the idea of the hurricane being unexpected or "an act of God". It was of course neither, in that its energy was lifted from the unprecedented temperature of the GOM.

Regards,

Backstop

[Raxozanne]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('richardmmm', '
')Yet the problem is massvely amplified, not because oil is running out or even because the US lacks refinery capacity.

[Sencha]

I just have to say I agree with Richard 100% about his main point. Also have to second what Backstop said as well though.

Its pretty frightening to note just how complacent we actually are. I feel like I'm living in an episode of the twilight zone. Its like, I know the world is ending (as we know it.) I see the flaws of our society leading to catastrophe and yet, almost everyone acts completely unaffected by it. I just want to wake their sheep brains up and say, "Look, look what's happening! We've got to do something, the government won't save us!"

It makes me wonder, how many of Katrina's victims realize that the hurricane was a by-product most likely, of global warming? Of course they know by now the economic aftermath of it, but do they know like a PO.com member knows it?

I've noticed the forums have been hot with posts, we could be using Katrina as an opportunity to spread the word about whats happening in the world. People are going to want answers, I did, and thats what lead me here.

[Nomoil]

Unfortunately, you can't make a case that there is a direct causal relationship between Katrina and global warming via fossil fuel use, even when we (and I mean we here in the PO message room and beyond) know that a connection exists. Similarly, this applies to the PO as well. It's not oil supply, they say, its refining capacity. Our "tunnel vision" is preventing us from looking beyond the specific cause to the general one: WE LIVE UNSUSTAINABLE LIVES. It's the economist’s fallacy. It’s always about the next quarter, next quarter, next quarter. Why not the next ten years? The fact is there are simply too many of us and we consume entirely way too much. We know, whether consciously or not, that our way of life must come to an end. We are committing mass suicide, slowly, but we're to complacent to realize it.

[backstop]

Nomoil -

I'm not going over the causal link that you dispute again so soon.

This post is to go after complacency, harder.


You asked, rhetorically I know, Why can't it be 10 years ? (as our period of concern).

There's a maxim seems worth putting here -

"Harvest for your children, plant for your grandchildren and build for their grandchildren."

My point is that we have to re-discover a culture based on inter-generational equity to even start heading towards sustainability.

Quite apart from the detrius of a mechano-culture around us (and to greater or lesser extent even within our minds) we face one huge difficulty, which is that in real terms we in the West are mostly very very poor.

Establishing sustainable production systems requires very heavy capital inputs in skills, time, intelligence, sensitivity, treasure, labour, and so on.

By contrast, as this incompetent system crumbles in the coming years, we're likely to find ourselves scrabbling just to get by.

This is not to depress anyone but rather to impress the point that complacency would have us wait, when in reality we should not lose a day in re-orienting our lives, that we may be better able to serve the growth of a sustainable society, rather than being merely a burden upon its prospects.

Regards,

Backstop

[snowhope]

I agree largely with the points Richard makes re Peak Complacency. But we have to take care with drawing conclusions that may not be correct.

Don't forget there was Hurricane Camille in 1969 - 35 years ago - was this also due to global warming?

If you look at the decadel history of hurricane stikes on the US and the number of strikes that were CAT 3, 4 or 5 then you can see that the 1950s was an intense period as well as the 1880s. http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pastdec.shtml
Were these periods due to global warming?

The oceans are massive storage tanks for heat and there are decadel trends in how this heat moves around in the currents of the oceans.

Global warming can be natural and of course in the last 10-15 years, many people have come to consider that mankind and our activities are causing global warming, but this is still a Theory not yet proven beyond reasonable doubt.

So we have to be careful in our analysis of this terrible tragedy as to the causes of such a catastrophe.

One issue that must be explored is why we build our cities in such dangerous places? I hope to goodness that some of the things Richard mention don't come to pass, but unfortunately that are quite likely.

[backstop]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('snowhope', 'I') agree largely with the points Richard makes re Peak Complacency.

Global warming can be natural and of course in the last 10-15 years, many people have come to consider that mankind and our activities are causing global warming, but this is still a Theory not yet proven beyond reasonable doubt.

[PhilBiker]

Richard I'll bet you'd love the whole "Fourth Turning" concept. Google it!

[Barbara]

Great posts.
Great thread.
Great people, as usual (see trespam? LOL).

[smiley]

Interesting view. It seems indeed that we are getting more dependent on various things without realising the risk of that dependence.

If I look at the institution where I work. Everything has been digitalised.

- I manage my projects with SAP
- I communicate via email
- I buy and sell via some electronic system
- My data, my reports, my addresses, my communications are stored digitally

I'm working from a terminal server, which is 100 miles away. So everything I do is stored on a terminal which I have never seen and of which I don't even know the exact location.

30 years back I could do my job with notepad, a pencil, and a telephone. Now my job is completely dependent on a thin string of glasfiber and a few kilograms of electronics (provided by the cheapest bidder). One glitch and a few thousand men (and women) are instantly thrown back in the stoneage.

I guess it is the same with our dependence on fossil fuels. The system either works or it doesn't, there is not much in between.