Paige

They don't mention bicycles, unfortunately.......

https://www.economist.com/opinion/dis...ory_id=2155717

chip

Oh I believe that were going to pay dearly for gas prices those days may not be far away neither?

shokhead

Oil need wont end in our lifetime.Too much money at stake for the richest and money talks.

John E

1970s oil company advertising slogan: "A nation that runs on oil cannot afford to run short."

Delete the last word to convert this into a true statement.

Chris L

Unfortunately these things often don't mention bicycles, which is a shame because there are many problems that can be solved, or at least alleviated by making a reasonable effort to promote bicycle use. For the last five years my own little corner of the world has tried to sell the idea of a population cap because they fear that traffic congestion is going to drive tourists away. Of course, nobody ever thinks about ways that population growth could actually be managed do they?

On the original topic, I think Shokead is probably right about this one. I notice one particular quote in the article:

It's all too easy for corporations to pay big money to fund political campaigns these days -- and the oil companies have made a hell of a lot of money out of the addiction over the past umpteen years. Herein lay the problem.

shokhead

Political BS,the downfall of all of us.Vote'em,pay'em,get whats best for them and their party while we bend over,and over,and over.Its getting so bad that you vote something in,they find a way to stop it.It sucks but sometimes i think i would be better to go to another county,come back as an immigrant and go from there.Very dissapointed in the political game.Isnt it whats best for us,not the party?

jacob

" So why is Sheikh Yamani predicting the end of the Oil Age? Because he believes that something fundamental has shifted since that first oil shock—and, sadly for countries like Saudi Arabia, he is quite right."


I don't see why it is sad for a country like Saudi Arabia for Sheikh Yamani to be right. Is the writer trying to say Sheikh Yamani is bad for countries like Saudi Arabia?

Jacob

Chris L

The writer is pointing out that, at present, the economies of many of these countries is entirely dependent on their oil resources. If/when alternative fuels become more popular in western nations, these countries are going to lose a major source of revenue.

Dahon.Steve

All this concern about oil and when it's going to run out is silly. Those of us on the forum who are "car free" could care less about the situation since there is nothing we can do about it. We all know our governments are doing nothing to change the current situation so why should you worry?

The other day, the radio stated that gasoline in New York City was going to cost 20 percent more next year as a clean additive will be added to the fuel raising it's price. As I said before, those of us who are care free could care less. The motorist are the ones who are going to be directly affected by these spikes in oil changes. Sure we're going to feel indirectly in terms of food and utility price increase but life's too short to spend your days worrying about such matters.

Just ride your bikes folks.

Poguemahone

Well, it's an interesting point of view. I've not heard the suggestion that higher gas taxes be used to reduce other taxes before. Usually when a higher gas tax is proposed on this board, the proceeds from such taxes are imagined as going to bike lanes, mass transit, etc.

The problem with such use-based taxes is that they are inherently regressive in nature, taxing the poorest citizens disproportantely. A lower income individual, filling up his/her Geo metro, will pay a higher percentage of their income in gas taxes than a higher income individual filling up their eight mile a gallon Tahoe or Hummer or Valdez or whatever. Ideally, a gas tax of this nature would go towards eliminating other regressive taxes, such as the sales tax on food many states charge. This would instill some balance in the tax system; with the current administration, burdened as they are by a faith-based belief in trickle-down economics, any benefit would likely go to the richest Americans.

Chris L. is correct; the economies of countries like Saudi Arabia are monoconomies, entirely dependent upon one sector (in this case, oil). Monoconomies lend themselves to state control, and often result in repressive/authoritarian regimes-- such as the one currently in place in Saudi Arabia. All the more reason for the developed world to wean themselves from their oil addiction. Saudi Arabia is, in fact, over ripe for a regime change of it's own-- and it may very well become a fundamentalist state, given the prevelance of Wahabism in S.A. education. Wait 'till you hear the howl at the pumps if that happens.

Paige

I have been car free since 10/01 but I do care simply for the fact a significant portion of our "defense" spending is for the acquisition of oil and safe oil shipping routes from foreign countries. People whine when gas goes to $2/gallon, they would literally have a crapping hemorrhage if the true cost of oil were known. Still don't care? Let me put it like this; The oil industry is being subsidized with "our" tax dollars while private corporations reap profits from this subsidization. Perhaps for many this arrangement is fine but to me there is something blatantly dishonest about a subsidy that is provided under the aegis of national defense.

mike

In today's world, the energy value of oil is only one of it's many uses.

Even if EVERYBODY abandoned petrolium based fuel transportation and switched to, say bicycling and sailing, the need for crude would continue.

Look around you and ask how many items in your life are made of petrolium. The computer you are using right now is almost entirely made of petrolium based synthethic material, so is the elastic in your underwear, and the plastic in your contact lenses.

There are no natural subsitutes for the petrolium base synthetics used so widely today.

The need and want for petrolium is here until the last drop is sucked from the planet.

Chris L

Again, there are different degrees to every situation. I don't think anybody ever suggested that oil use would become nil, in much the same way that people who advocate cycling for environmental reasons (for example) don't seriously suggest pollution will become nil. It's an issue of reducing something to what is perceived to be a more desirable level.

Jupe

Isn't it possible to make some kinds of plastics from oil derived from hemp? I think I read that somewhere.

mike

It is possible to make some kinds of plastics from vegetable oils. Presently, the types of plastics are limited and typically are not as durable as those made from petrolium.

Today, it is comparitively more expensive to make plastics from vegetable oil than it is from petrolium oil and petrolium based fuels are used for the conversion.

I question the wisdom of using new vegetables to produce plastics and fuel over using old vegetables (crude oil). Time and pressure have already converted ancient forests to a readily useable form. Why take a new vegetable and try to recreate what nature has already supplied in huge quantities?

Jupe

Because they are renewable. Of course that doesn't address the other limitations you mentioned: durability, expense, and the fact that petrolium based fules are used for the conversion. But maybe these are limitations that can be overcome. Anyway, thanks for the response.