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

Jerry Okamura wrote:

"Alan Lichtenstein" <arl@xxxxxxx> wrote in message news:xdqdne9-z7pO7ZXeRVn-3A@xxxxxxxxxx

Jerry Okamura wrote:




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.

And you think that's a good thing?


It does not matter if it is a good thing or not does it, it will happen if we run out of enough oil to meet demand. The same question can be reversed, i.e. is it a good thing to "force" us to pay for any government initiative which we do not approve of. Is it a good thing to "force" us to pay more for a car, in order to "conserve" gasoline. It would seem to me, whether it is "good" or not, depends on whether we as individuals approve of the money we are "forced" to pay.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

			Alan

.

Relevant Pages