Archives

Peakoil and Global Warming are both significant political topics. They are hot topics that unfortunately some use to incite controversey, but I'll gloss over that.

Since I'm in a group that discusses - not argues, I'll put down my two cents on the environment:

It's nice to have a car that gets very good FE since my work commutes have been from 15 to 25 miles.
Running out of oil (Peakoil) is probably my greatest envirnomental concern. It's the most certain. There is very little reserve capacity, making disruptions significant. China is quietly getting the rights to oil reserves anywhere they can, meaning an end to business as usual in regards to energy - we must develop alternative sources.
Global Warming also concerns me. The movie An Inconvienent Truth simply presents numerous recent articles I've seen in recent years. I'm well aware that there are numerious links that are by political hacks or unresearched articles. Just the same, I've read so many artices to conclude it's a valid concern that is partially man-made. Need to add projection of the future are very unreliable, particulary climate forecasts. As iffy as forecasts may be, I'm concerned by numerious stories of declining moutian glaciers, the Artic icecap and permafrost, the European heat wave of 2003 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_heat_wave_of_2003), my personal observation of milder winters in Dallas. This is not a Global Warming topic, but more Ozone Alert Days concern me too.Economy, Conservation, Envirnoment.

These are plenty of reasons to wean our dependance on fossil fuels and develop alternative energies, even if you dismiss some of them.

Chuck,
IMHO, (and nothing more :) ), I think the earth is well past the point of no return with global warming whether its cause is natural, manmade or a little of both. Whatever we do today to try and reduce mankind's effect, will have absolutely no noticeable effect for many many many generations to come. Once we do find a solution, if one exists, the other side of the curve will be an extremely long slow decline back to pre-industrial revolution greenhouse gas levels, (if in fact we can ever achieve those levels again, which is highly unlikely). This in part, is due to the earth's natural ability to cope with many inputs at the same time and also to cope with any improvements we try and make to the environment. I can't imagine a guess or, let alone try and calculate, the actual hysterisis time period of the planet's many climatic checks and balances. Maybe somebody out there will have the answer. Anyone have a desktop Cray??

In the mean time, its nice to have a car that gets good FE given the fact that with current technology and consumption, we have about a 40 yr supply of crude left.:)

Ralph,

We could be facing a period of very unpleasant changes, regardless. :(

Last night a BBC broadcast had a debate. One said the world's maximum sustainable population is 2-3 billion - the other said humans are very flexible and can find a way to sustain a higher population, citing Japan (most densely populated nation).

The population of the industrialized world (North America, Europe, Japan) is leveling off or even dropping, while the rest of the world will increase until about 2050 at around 9-10 billion.

In the developed world, increasing population is not the problem, but a big ecological foot print - much larger than someone in Africa. Of couse, China and India are making an increasing environmental impact.

I'm just presenting both sides on the sustainable Earth arguement without getting too personally involved in the the issue.

I just hope America takes the issue seriously before too many more years go by....

What is the solution?

Using less fossil fuels.

That can't be done overnight obviously, but a more spirited effort could be made on alternative fuels. I'd include nuclear energy (Realize that's controversal. I don't trust Iran with it for instance...)

We are using oil nearly as fast as it's being pumped. I see energy conservation and alternative energy as ways to mitigate PeakOil.

It will not be an easy transition and would likely take decades. My guess is a hydrogen economy is fifty years away at best (not against it, but it can't help us now...)

This is how vunerable America is now. This article (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13328098/) states Hugo Chavez could easily send our gas prices to $4-$6 a barrel more.