Page added on September 10, 2012
In fact, we will become more vulnerable over the long run, because the renewed embrace of fossil fuels will induce us to postpone the inevitable transition to a postcarbon economy. Sooner or later, the economic, environmental and climate consequences of intensive fossil fuel use will force everyone on the planet to abandon reliance on these fuels in favor of climate-friendly renewables. This is not a matter of if but of when. The longer we wait, the more costly and traumatic the transition will be, and the greater the likelihood that our economy will fall behind those of other countries that undertake the transition sooner. [1]
In its continuing quest to fashion a vision for a great future (assuming your present is … say, 1831, and the “future” is an eleven-day period), the GOP platform is now calling for an end to funding for Amtrak and a renewed focus on highway spending at the expense of public transportation (and of course also at the expense of biking and pedestrian programs.) Who knew that narrow-mindedness was a virtue?
If that isn’t enough to convince one that the GOP’s pandering to right-wing nonsense is not a complete relinquishment of integrity and reason, the platform also asserts the Republican Party’s opposition to Agenda 21. That is a twenty-year old United Nations resolution encouraging sustainable development. (We cannot have intelligent planning with due consideration for the future. That would be … uh, I’ll get back to you on the rationale.)
Apparently, the fact that Agenda 21 is nonbinding, with no force of law here in America (as is repeated endlessly by those who enjoy facts, logic, reason, and reality) nonetheless both puzzles the Right and raises their Paranoid Meter to orange status. Would it not be cheaper to guarantee the wingnuts a lifetime supply of tin foil hats? True patriots, it seems, would at least offer a few hints to the rest of us about the Anti-Consequence Bubble they will apparently be occupying as Peak Oil, climate change, and various Screw-Everyone-But-The-1%ers economic policies gain a firm grip on our future. (Then again, outright lying as a strategy may continue to be “useful,” as does maintaining residence in a fact-free present.)
The snarky jabs are fun to toss about, but the reality (for those of us who think that matters) is that these incredibly short-sighted ideological positions actually affect us all. As purely academic discourse they may serve a purpose, but when those philosophies are turned into policies with present and long-lasting impacts, the snarky jabs take on more ominous shadings when reality starts poking holes in narrow-minded bubbles. Maybe the Right’s leaders don’t care about you (obviously) and surely they do not care about me and my family and my friends and my community … but I do!
At what point does a modicum of intelligence, integrity, and common sense start to factor into the Right’s expectations, hopes, and plans for America beyond a week from next Friday? The GOP’s transportation objectives and opposition to even consider some thoughtful guidelines to prepare us for a future with less energy sources at the ready is guaranteed to create only more problems for all of us in the years to come. But hey … if it gets votes today and protects the wealthy, who cares about the future, because … because, uh, why is that good?
4 Comments on "Peak Oil: The GOP’s Eleven-Day Future"
Kenz300 on Mon, 10th Sep 2012 3:01 pm
The fossil fuel industry has a hold on energy policy and the Republican party.
They do not want to see any competition to their monopolies.
http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/energy-futurist/energy-policy-follow-the-money/547?tag=nl.e660
SOS on Mon, 10th Sep 2012 5:01 pm
in fact its just the opposite. There are all kinds of alliances, all driven by common interest in the energy sector.
Instead of a link from a partisan politics group how about going outside and looking around. None of the windmill, solar panels, “electric” cars, etc would be there without the support of the fuel industry and both political parties. They are making money with these projects and if they arent your prices just went up to cover the loss.
I would go further to say if the government had conducted itself in a business like way, instead of an extremist partisan way, we would all have a cleaner environment, more economic security, cheaper and more plentiful energy, far less war and a more balanced and healthful spirit.
MrEnergyCzar on Mon, 10th Sep 2012 6:02 pm
The oil protection military costs to keep the illusion of cheap gas should end. It should be $14 per gallon in the states. Then people will see the true oil subsidy everyone’s been paying for years…
MrEnergyCzar
SOS on Mon, 10th Sep 2012 8:00 pm
If there is a dependance on foriegn oil supplies that does require a military presence its a legitimate purpose because those oil supplies are a vital american interest.
$14/gallon for gas does not represent the true cost even if you did allocate the military budget to oil protection, ignoring the obvious political and defense issues.
The true cost is the cost today plus the portion of the military budget you want to allocate to oil protection divided by the number of gallons of gas sold in the USA.
We wouldnt even need those resources if the American government hadnt stopped all development of our own resources back under Jimmy Carter. After 20 years of legal battles the courts are finally starting to allow some development in the arctic.
If we follow the plan for North American Energy Independance by 2020 we wont need the Middle east either and according to your reasoning we should be able to bring all the military home.
Support Energy Independance for North America by 2020!!! Its the conservative thing to do, just like generating solar power. Its what world peace is all about.