Re: Time to cut our dependence on and therefore our interest in the...
- From: "Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj005@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 00:01:32 GMT
"Alan Lichtenstein" <arl@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:mIOdnehPm9VzD5reRVn-1A@xxxxxxxxxx
> Jerry Okamura wrote:
>
Unless you are advocating allowing the price to
> rise so far that average people cannot afford it.
If the predictions are correct, the price of the stuff will rise, so at some
point in the future, the average person will not be able to afford the
gasoline they use...it is just a matter of time, unless we come up with an
alternative to oil.
>
>>>Fact remains, our society and lifestyles have been built around the
>>>personal transportation vehicle and unless we are going to make wholesale
>>>changes in those lifestyles, which I assert are highly undesirable, your
>>>solution is impractical. It is shortsighted to simply think of the issue
>>>a making choices in transportation. It isn't.
No it isn't. If people stop buying automobiles that use so much gasoline,
then industry will respond. First people will stop buying those gasoline
powered cars. Then the auto manufacturers will retool, and start selling
alternatives, or they will go broke.
>>>
>>> And since some are arguing
>>>
>>>>that we will run out of oil, then unless there is an alternative, the
>>>>whole economy collapses. But before that happens, the price of the
>>>>stuff will continue to rise, and more and more alternatives to using oil
>>>>will take its place.
>>>
>>>Jerry, as yet we have NO, repeat, NO alternative to the use of fossil
>>>fuels as a fuel for personal transportation vehicles, and for the
>>>generation of electricity to the degree that we require that.
>>
>>
That is right, because there is no economic incentive to make the changes.
>> The alternative will come when there is a need, not before.
>
> (sigh). You really have no concept of the time lag between research and
> development, do you?
yes, there is a lag time. But the auto manufacturers already have some
alternatives to a car that uses pure gasoline. The only reason they are not
selling them in large volumens is simply because the market for them is not
there in large enough quantities to lower the price. But, we are talking
about a situation where the price of oil is very high (much higher than it
is today), then people will stop buying gasoline powered cars, and if the
demand is there, the manufacturers will start selling these alternatives.
>
> I remember as a
>> young kid in Tokyo after the Second World War. The citizens of Japan had
>> no gasoline. Did transportation come to a complete stop? No it did not.
>> The people simply converted their internal combustion engines to run by
>> burning wood (don't ask me how that works, since I do not know....but
>> that was a pretty common sight, until they were able to use gasoline
>> again).
>
> Stanley Steamers were in use in this country and discarded as inefficient.
> What you describe is a return to that for the short term. We are not
> talking about emergency measures for the short term. We are talking about
> a long range solution. Please try to understand that.
That is why we are still buying gasoline powered cars...they are cheaper and
more efficient than any alternative. But I was simply pointing out that in
a crunch, there are ways around a real shortage of gasoline, if it happens
in a real short period of time, but at some point industry will be able to
catch up with alternative modes of transportation.
>
>>>>> For that matter, if there were not people who are
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>willing to buy that oil, then there would not be people who produce
>>>>>>and sell the oil. As for the SUV argument, that also seems to me to
>>>>>>apply to a whole bunch of things we use. For example, since all of us
>>>>>>are retired on this newsgroup, do we all really need to have spent our
>>>>>>earths valuable resources, using the very computer we are now using?
>>>>>>Think about what raw materials that were used in the construction of
>>>>>>this "toy"? How about the electericity that is consumed while we are
>>>>>>using this "toy"? And this toy only lasts a couple of years before it
>>>>>>is replaced, either because it does not work well anymore, or because
>>>>>>we want something that is a little faster....wasting valuable
>>>>>>resources perhaps? You should come to my house and take a look in my
>>>>>>garage....quite an accumulation of old computers, displays and other
>>>>>>computer stuff that no longer works. Do you travel? How much
>>>>>>"limited" resources does that require? If no one travelled for
>>>>>>pleasure, how much resources would we save?
>>>>>
>>>>>Your example is ill placed because there is not the waste of finite
>>>>>resources. An SUV uses far more gasoline than standard vehicles, and
>>>>>if the owner has no use for the characteristics of the vehicle which
>>>>>require that use, then the owner is a wasteful inconsiderate.
>>
>>
>> All resources that are no renewable are finite resources, and we use an
>> awful lot of finite resources besides oil.
>
> Not so. many are renewable as we are discovering. And while some
> resources are also finite, the only one of present concern is oil.
Yes, and there is alternatives in the oil business also, like shale oil and
coal tar.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Time to cut our dependence on and therefore our interest in the...
- From: Alan Lichtenstein
- Re: Time to cut our dependence on and therefore our interest in the...
- References:
- Re: Time to cut our dependence on and therefore our interest in the...
- From: bforester
- Re: Time to cut our dependence on and therefore our interest in the...
- From: Olly Mensch
- Re: Time to cut our dependence on and therefore our interest in the...
- From: Alan Lichtenstein
- Re: Time to cut our dependence on and therefore our interest in the...
- From: Jerry Okamura
- Re: Time to cut our dependence on and therefore our interest in the...
- From: Alan Lichtenstein
- Re: Time to cut our dependence on and therefore our interest in the...
- From: Jerry Okamura
- Re: Time to cut our dependence on and therefore our interest in the...
- From: Alan Lichtenstein
- Re: Time to cut our dependence on and therefore our interest in the...
- From: Jerry Okamura
- Re: Time to cut our dependence on and therefore our interest in the...
- From: Alan Lichtenstein
- Re: Time to cut our dependence on and therefore our interest in the...
- Prev by Date: Re: It is hard for us as democrats to let go of such an emotionally interesting character as Cindy Sheehan BUT: There are several thousand people who Bush owes a meeting. The fact is this woman should not be our poster child. Her husband is divorcing her b
- Next by Date: Re: Want a Wal-Mart job? Join the crowd
- Previous by thread: Re: Time to cut our dependence on and therefore our interest in the...
- Next by thread: Re: Time to cut our dependence on and therefore our interest in the...
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|