Re: Time to cut our dependence on and therefore our interest in the...


"Alan Lichtenstein" <arl@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ydGdnaoDpK8TlpTeRVn-gA@xxxxxxxxxx
> Jerry Okamura wrote:
>
>
> It certainly does matter, Jerry. You posted what will happen and I asked
> you if you thought that it was a good thing if people could not afford
> gas. Kindly answer the question.

And I said, it really does not matter, because if demand for oil outstirps
supply, then by definition the price of the oil will rise and you either
have to figure out a way to not have to buy the stuff, or you suffer the
consequences. I have also said that you first have to make the assumption
that manufacturers will not give consumers an alternative to using a product
that depends on oil...which it just seems to me is highly unlikely because
if they are not able to offer an alternative, then by definiton they will
not be able to sell the stuff that they do offer, and they will go belly up.
>
>>>>>>>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.
>>>
>>>What alternative, Jerry, what alternative? Jerry, you just don't wake up
>>>one day and say, "Oh, we need a new power source to replace the internal
>>>combustion engine, and then, poof, we have it by dinner time." It takes
>>>DECADES, Jerry, DECADES to develop a completely different power source in
>>>which oil is NOT in the food chain.
>>
>>
>> That depends on how serious a problem it presents it seems to me.
>
> No, Jerry. You clearly stated, a number of times that we could get some
> alternative. You seemed to allude that we could get this new alternative
> rather quickly, since you casually dismissed any lengthy research and
> development.

How "quicky" depends on how fast prices rise it seems to me. Are you
implying that the price will, say triple or quadruple in price in say a one
or two year period of time in the near future? If that should happen, I
would agree with you, there would be some pretty serious dislocations
happening.
>
> So I have a legitimate right to ask you what this alternative is.
> Kindly specify it, as it is a natural consequence of your position. If
> you aren't prepared to identify it, then your entire argument fails.

No it does not. It depends again on how fast the problem occurs. As I said
above, if the problem occurs in a relatively short period of time, before
anyone can react, then your scenario holds true. But I do not think that is
likely to happen.
>
> And it
>> also seems to me it also depends on how fast the shortage occurs.
>
> Well, kindly tell us when you think we should begin that R & D.

When it is necessary, not long before. Remember Carter's initiative? What
percentage of the money spent on that effort ever resulted in large scale
use of what was developed at the time? It takes a combination of things to
happen before a new technology is widely accepted and used. Solar power as
an example has been available for an awful long time. The problem with
solar power is, we are not willing to convert to the use of solar power,
either because of the fixed cost associated with making that transition, and
are not willing to put up with the simple fact that solar panels on top of
hourse look ugly. But, if the alternative is to pay considerably more for
our electricity because it is generated by oil burning facilities, then
people will make the necessary transition to solar power, and will decide
that the cost savings far outweighs the fact that these things make a house
look ugly. Hybrid cars are not widely used, because not enough people are
willing to buy them. But if the price of oil starts to skyrocket, then at
some point in that price spiral, people will decide that the cost of
operating a gasoline powered car in to worth it, and will start to buy
alternatives to gasoline powered cars, like hybrid...perhaps even cars
powered by electricity. And shoud that happen, then the price of those cars
will drop dramatically, and even more people will make the switch.
>
> If it
>> happens over a period of time, then prices will rise over a relatively
>> long time, which will give the auto manufacturers (as an example) time to
>> start making alternative modes of transporation.
>
> Jerry, given current estimates, we will have between 75-100 years, which
> may be reduced if we continue to build gas guzzling, and quite unneeded,
> SUV's. So, now, Jerry, kindly identify that alternative mode of
> transportation and tell us, by your detailed knowledge, what the proposed
> time of development will be.

If that is a good estimate, then I am even less concerned about the coming
shortage...if it occurs, because not one of use can say what will be
developed in that period of time. And I would argue that then there is no
need to "jump start" the R&D effort.
>
> They already sell hybrid
>> cars,and electric cars, just not a whole bunch of them. It may take four
>> or five years to ramp up to large scale production, but that it seems to
>> me, also depends on how big the demand is, and what happpens to the
>> demand for gasoline powered cars.
>
> Hybrid cars do not offer a solution. At best, they offer a small number
> of additional years. That has already been discussed in a thread between
> myself, Dr. Reactionary Bob and Alvin Toda.
>
They do not offer a long term solution, if the shortage occurs fast enough,
but it does offer an interim solution, which gives the manufacturers time to
find an even better alternative.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Time to cut our dependence on and therefore our interest in the...
    ... First people will stop buying those gasoline powered cars. ... It takes DECADES, Jerry, DECADES to develop a completely different power source in which oil is NOT in the food chain. ... solar power is, we are not willing to convert to the use of solar power, either because of the fixed cost associated with making that transition, and are not willing to put up with the simple fact that solar panels on top of hourse look ugly. ... absolutely no concept of the time for R & D of a totally new fuel source which doesn't even exist now. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Time to cut our dependence on and therefore our interest in the...
    ... >> If the predictions are correct, the price of the stuff will rise, so at ... >> those gasoline powered cars. ... > What alternative, Jerry, what alternative? ... happens over a period of time, then prices will rise over a relatively long ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Time to cut our dependence on and therefore our interest in the...
    ... >> Jerry and I are more closely aligned than you and Paul on this issue. ... >> price to cross some magical barrier. ... rationing we would run out overnight. ... Rationing using government fiat to ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Aluminium tube bending and resistance
    ... Ned Simmons wrote: ... Good question, Jerry. ... - pretty good price. ... Somehow those numbers never seemed to make it into press reports -- not ...
    (rec.crafts.metalworking)
  • Re: Hybrids recoup higher cost in less time
    ... That if the price of the stuff drops, auto companies who rushed to build ... cars, made the right decision, because more people will buy those cars. ... How much would the cost of gas have to drop to send consumers back to ... Jerry, time will tell, but I believe you are wrong. ...
    (soc.retirement)