RSS
Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
peak oil=lame gloom and doom dogma
Columbus Underground Messageboard » General Columbus Discussion » Everyday Chit Chat
Peak Oil
[254 posts] [47 contributors]
Topic Rating:
(Total Ratings: )
Rate this topic:
Rate this topic:
-
TomOver
herenowbeyond.org
Login to Send PM
rus wrote >>
TomOver wrote >>
Manatee wrote >>
There was lots of discussions about peak oil on here about two years ago, for some reason, if I can recall correctly...Yeah, point them out to me, if you could please. I am interested.
Let me guess... your google is broke?
The internet search function is fine, but what CU has to offer is the ability for people to not only talk about an issue. We can make contact and actually take action to address an issue.
Ideally, there'd be a Columbus site focused on civic engagement and activism, but so far my attempts to get Bob Fitrakis of the Columbus Free Press to use comment boxes has gotten no where.
Yeah, I know, a lot of CU'ers don't want that sort of thing. I mentioned to Walker having a section for, say, "local food" or "activism" or "environmentalism", so as to enable traffic to self-select in that direction, and reducing collisions with the more light-hearted crowd.
But, amidst the various criticism of me that people think of as "calling me out", there are a lot of substantive comments. I am flattered when someone is interested in my ideas. I'm not sure why some people are offended by my interest in their ideas.
I get a good laugh when I read comments about me being a "lazy reporter" out to "steal their ideas". If it were true, perhaps I'd be offended (and lash out with a personal attack, ha ha)
Like I have already said, anyone who wants to be quoted can be quoted using their screen name or their real name. If neither is the case, and I think the idea is good, I would simply say, for example, " a commenter on CU said Appalachians would be even poorer if not for mountain top removal mining, contrary to what many activists have said about creating jobs with the Coal River Mountain Wind Project..."
No offense against anyone, but my hunch is that what people have a problem with is that I am committing the taboo of taking myself and others seriously regarding our involvement in the community.
Posted 2 years ago # -
JedThorp
Merion Village
Login to Send PM
Here's my 'issue' with "Peak Oil:"
The Peak Oil-ists are where the global warming folks were 15 years ago...hollering about the PROBLEM with less focus on the SOLUTIONS or the STRATEGY to make those happen. The global warming movement woke up and realized that most people don't like to think about, or talk about science. When global warming activists talked about ozone layers, and temperature fluctuations (God forbid in centigrade!) - people said "oohhh...sounds like an issue for scientists, and that ain't me." Same thing with Peak Oil...the arguments ARE powerful, if you can get someone to sit through a 30 minute short film on the economics of oil. But, again, most people tune out.
The global warming activists finally got smart and said, "hey...what if we stop talking about ice caps and polar bears, and instead start focusing on the SOLUTIONS?" "What if we make climate change about wind turbines, and hybrid cars, and energy efficiency?" There you go. By focusing on solutions that make sense anyways, you don't need to get people to "believe" your prophecies.
So, if we're all supporting the right solutions, who cares what terminology we couch them in?
Posted 2 years ago # -
UncommonSense
Hilliard
Login to Send PM
ColumbusUnderground isn't a think tank. The purpose isn't addressing the world's problems. (As I see it, anyway) It is about finding a good bite to eat, a good place to live, a good bar to try, a good band to see, a good lolcat to laugh at, and a good place to wish for things we want Columbus to have, etc. Moreover, it will not be the echo chamber you wish it to be. Too many independent, thoughtful people post here. Think of it as a party. If you try too hard to steer the conversation, people will eventually tune you out. I do a lot more listening than talking here. Much of what you wrote could be worked into a conversation once somebody else joins in. Otherwise it just reads as a speech. What answer do you expect?
Posted 2 years ago # -
TomOver
herenowbeyond.org
Login to Send PM
JedThorp wrote >>
Here's my 'issue' with "Peak Oil:"
The Peak Oil-ists are where the global warming folks were 15 years ago...hollering about the PROBLEM with less focus on the SOLUTIONS or the STRATEGY to make those happen. The global warming movement woke up and realized that most people don't like to think about, or talk about science. When global warming activists talked about ozone layers, and temperature fluctuations (God forbid in centigrade!) - people said "oohhh...sounds like an issue for scientists, and that ain't me." Same thing with Peak Oil...the arguments ARE powerful, if you can get someone to sit through a 30 minute short film on the economics of oil. But, again, most people tune out.
The global warming activists finally got smart and said, "hey...what if we stop talking about ice caps and polar bears, and instead start focusing on the SOLUTIONS?" "What if we make climate change about wind turbines, and hybrid cars, and energy efficiency?" There you go. By focusing on solutions that make sense anyways, you don't need to get people to "believe" your prophecies.
So, if we're all supporting the right solutions, who cares what terminology we couch them in?As we balance the scales in our individual heads and in Columbus in general about whether, for example, the rail project is worth it, that process of weighing the pros and cons is significantly different if we exclude Peak Oil and Climate Change from our assessments.
Focusing on the solutions and the problems go together, don't they ?
Solutions to Peak Oil involve promoting such things as local, organic agriculture; electrified mass transit, greater residential-retail mix in our settlement patterns, and so on.
Sure people may do that for reasons other than Peak Oil. But (assuming that Peak Oil is real) isn't keeping it in mind a requirement for us, if we want to have the best sense of priorities ?
My impetus for this thread was that many people seem to be in favor of things that are a part of addressing Peak Oil, but do so without bearing Peak Oil in mind. Consequently, in my humble opinion, that skews public discourse such as the recent one about the 3-C Rail Project.
Posted 2 years ago # -
th0m
Beechwold
Login to Send PM
I would like to talk about the OP's issue, but one perhaps he is not aware that he is raising: brain crack.
A lot of things like Loose Change, and the career of Michael Moore posit that unanswered questions deserve more attention, but neglect to focus the attention on the fact: the questions are unanswered.
I could be helpful to look at the styles of arguments to see a lot of these things are straw man arguments:
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/Have we hit peak oil? I don't think we'll find out until long after. We unfortunately can't ask the earth, and things like the Canadian oil sands, and really just our current understanding of what oil is and where it may be really muddys up the debate pretty quick.
However, you know, you can say a lot of things, for instance in accepting all of the evidence around global warming, then there is a very strong case we should *immediately* ban *all* private combustion of any kind. But perhaps that's commie liberal socialist intellectual horseshit.
Posted 2 years ago # -
TomOver
herenowbeyond.org
Login to Send PM
Manatee wrote >>
There were lots of discussions about peak oil on here about two years ago, for some reason, if I can recall correctly...I didn't notice that search engine within the site. You're right. There are a lot of archived posts about Peak Oil, approximately 4 pages.
Now the question is: why so many posts and comments and so little action? Or am I not just not aware of the action, like I was not aware of the CU onsite search function ?
I am not going to stop asking questions unless Walker kicks me off the site. But I will admit to error and I never claim to have all the answers.
But, sincerely here, thanks for actually responding to my question.Posted 2 years ago # -
TomOver
herenowbeyond.org
Login to Send PM
th0m wrote >>
I would like to talk about the OP's issue, but one perhaps he is not aware that he is raising: brain crack.
A lot of things like Loose Change, and the career of Michael Moore posit that unanswered questions deserve more attention, but neglect to focus the attention on the fact: the questions are unanswered.
I could be helpful to look at the styles of arguments to see a lot of these things are straw man arguments:
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
Have we hit peak oil? I don't think we'll find out until long after. We unfortunately can't ask the earth, and things like the Canadian oil sands, and really just our current understanding of what oil is and where it may be really muddys up the debate pretty quick.
However, you know, you can say a lot of things, for instance in accepting all of the evidence around global warming, then there is a very strong case we should *immediately* ban *all* private combustion of any kind. But perhaps that's commie liberal socialist intellectual horseshit.Please filter out the ad hominem arguments, so that we can better assess the actual merit of your ideas---sincerely
Posted 2 years ago # -
alexs
Limestone bluffs of the Scioto
Login to Send PM
My impetus for this thread was that many people seem to be in favor of things that are a part of addressing Peak Oil, but do so without bearing Peak Oil in mind.
Maybe your problem is the way you are framing the question. Yes people are addressing and promoting various things that could be "part of peak oil" but peak oil isn't necessarily why they're doing it, it could just be plain common sense and efficiency.
Posted 2 years ago # -
roy
Downtown
Login to Send PM
Manatee wrote >>
There were lots of discussions about peak oil on here about two years ago, for some reason, if I can recall correctly...Yeah, remember when Maryellen O'Shaughnessy held a series of public forums on Peak Oil and related issues? She had an awesome guy from Battelle, and others from Simply Living and The Ohio State University made presentations. Citizens had ample time to speak as well. The televised sessions were broadcast for months on GTC-3. I bet TomOver didn't attend. :(
Posted 2 years ago # -
10sun
Columbus, OH
Login to Send PM
The content of your message is either "vegan" or something that has been run into the ground in the past; use the search function, read a thread, and bump it if you need to rather than preach in your new thread. You leave very little room for discussion and provide little actual content in addition to narrowing the scope of what YOU want to talk about. Not everybody wants to talk about the details you do.
In a recent thread there was a brief topic crossover on the current Federal budget; in particular the Depart of Energy & generalized "energy" budget items.
Do you know those numbers?
What the past changes have been in the Federal budget regarding energy?
Do you know how Ohio state's government is spending their money on energy?
Do you know where our oil is sourced from?
I know all of that and I will provide some insight into the current trends, but I will not do your research for you and provide that data.The problem with your posts is that you often start with a simple question and ramble on and on and on and then end with a different question that ends up sounding vaguely rhetorical which leaves no room for people to comment and voice their opinions.
TomOver espoused:
Is that because many of us assume we, as a nation, can get ourselves out of this problem (if we actually think there is one) with some combination of militarism and market-driven technological innovation?Looking at the simple data:
Our military funding has increased.
Our energy funding has decreased; interest in renewables is down; interest in fossil fuels is down; interest in nuclear is up.Two points
Energy:
As Americans, we should be concerned about our burgeoning energy needs, but we need to focus on our highest energy concerns: home & office usage. This is a combination of electricity and fossil fuels for heating, cooling, and appliance use. These are our highest environmental impacts; calculate your carbon footprint out and you'll see that. This is why we are spending more on the development of clean energy, but we have an immediate need, therefore we are spending less than if we were to start redesigning our utility grids to operate on higher amounts of renewable (look into what needs to be done in order to compensate for the chronal disparity between peak daily energy usage and peak production times with renewables). Taking a cue from the formerly divided WWII assholes, the Germans are breaking new ground every day in the research, development, and implementation of renewable energy sources. We can lease/steal/borrow that technology as it becomes easier for the consumer level in the USA to utilize; we do not need to invest in that development as it is being done better elsewhere. That is why funding for those are down and we are spending more on nuclear.Oil consumption:
The military presence in the Middle East is not for conquering, but for stabilization of a region in order to secure lasting contracts for oil and obtain future shares; however the majority of our oil does not come from destabilized regions of the world that have our military presence.
A 2008 breakdown goes as follows for raw oil sourcing:
USA: 43%
Canada: 20%
Saudi Arabia: 12%
Mexico: 10%
Venezuela: 9%
Nigeria: 8%
Our refined petroleum product export rates are going up.
Am I worried that we are going to run out of oil? It will probably not happen within my lifetime; however that is because of other reasons.1. Changes in freight & transport paradigms. We are slowly moving back towards the rail model rather than inter-modal transport designs; the comparison between rail fuel efficiency and semi-truck fuel efficiency is hilarious for freight transport. A diesel train operates well over 300 short ton mpg (AAR claims 400, but I am a skeptic). Traditional semi trucks operate around 150 short ton mpg (5mpg @ 30 ton common loads). The difficulty lies in areas of the country where train service isn't feasible due to limited population density and geography (think between the Pacific Coast & the Mississippi). These areas are best serviced with large scale DCs shipping out truck trailers.
We understand that.
For personal transit, it is harder to see the benefits at this very moment as we are as a nation rushing around trying to get places as fast as possible. High speed rail will change that. At first the mpg will be low as it will not be favored, but given time with the amenities that will suit the business & coach classes (privacy, free wifi, space, etc) we could see huge savings. 200 passenger miles per gallon are not unheard of in DMU trains; to reach that point will take a while though.2. Changing our utility grid/energy network.
a. Alternative energies are becoming more and more viable due to the research in other countries. However, the problem with many of these alternative energies is that we have no way of storing said energy that is produced during peak production periods. Solar is great during the day, but we need a LOT of deep cycle batteries to utilize it when we need it, at night. How do we capture that light in a jar to use it at night? Wind is great, but very limited due to location and transmission lines. It is true, you can fart into a jar and seal it to unleash on someone later on... fun summer camp experiment from decades ago.
b. We are refining technologies to power vehicles powered by electricity alone. The critical failure point is our current battery systems; they just aren't cutting it for long term usage. That leaves us with a shared component failure between the two systems for our lifestyles.
c. Battery development is being worked on. However in the end it will be a hydrogen fuel cell hybrid system which will save us. Make these battery powered cars plug in at home to power our homes at night. Make these battery powered cars plug in at the parking lots of our offices and connect all of this to a smart grid where we acknowledge our individual contributions and receive eqes merces commiserate with our input.
d. good luck getting all of those technologies and systems in place with our federal alternative energy & advanced transportation budgets being slashed. I'm banking on Haiti putting this together before the USA.Posted 2 years ago # -
TomOver
herenowbeyond.org
Login to Send PM
Walker wrote >>
Updated the topic title.
"Peak Oil" is a topic
"Why are so few Columbus Undergrounders talking about this?" is not a topic.Yeah, it was pointed out to me that there are many posts and comments about Peak Oil on your site, Walker. I hadn't seen that on-site search function.
So, in the sense that people HAVE been talking about Peak Oil on Columbus Underground, I understand why you would say it's a topic on a shaky platform.
"What, if anything, can we do to address Peak Oil?" would have been a better question for a thread, in hindsight.However, even that question would have brought some ridicule from people on your site who seem to have a problem with someone who takes seriously his own ideas and the ideas of others.
You and other members of this online community have created a civic treasure for Columbus. It'd be a shame to not make the most of its potential for helping people address issues vital to our city, and beyond.
But if someone wants to focus on a thread about where to go for the best happy hour or what toppings they like on their hot dogs, well, more power to them. I am not lashing out at them because of what they post.
But some of your members are doing that toward me, apparently because they don't like the fact that I am trying to address serious issues.
I simply limit my participation to threads relevant to my community involvement. I don't expect people to respond, and I don't try to stop them from doing what they are doing.
So, what's up with this ?
Posted 2 years ago # -
Brant
Gahanna
Login to Send PM
I remember seeing The End of Suburbia at the CIFF in 2006 (I think). Director Gregory Greene was there for a Q&A after the screening. As I recall, the audience was extremely enthusiastic and gave very positive feedback. There was a buzz in the room, and I got the sense that people were willing, in that moment, to start a movement.
But the moment evaporated once Greene revealed that he believed 9/11 was an inside job and he was investing his life savings in gold. You could almost feel the air in the room get sucked away in a collective gasp. I went from being a Peak Oil believer to a skeptic in about two seconds.
Posted 2 years ago #
You must log in to post.
Launched in August 2010, TheMetropreneur.com is a local online resource devoted to small business development and entrepreneurship. Its aim is to tell the stories of Central Ohio's business community, foster regional economic development and assist entrepreneurs with its resource-heavy focus.