Peak oil is here. How would YOU resolve short- and long-term issues?

Peak oil is here. The early 2000s already showed signs we were using more than what was available.

It is here.

How would YOU resolve peak oil in the most compassionate way possible? To appease a population that is 45% angry, 35% dim, 20% greedy.

Especially when the greedy got you into power? And of that 20%, how much is it true greed and how much of it was genuine hard work that the person involved felt he deserved every damn penny? (e.g. competent doctors, they exist too.)

Let's face it. With economic devestation around the corner, there will be considerable change. The clock is counting. What is happening is real. No presaident since 1979 has bothered to deal with the issue, and at least two of them (e.g. the president in 2002, and the president in 1996) reduced standards to allow the wasting of more oil.

borrow more and ignore it's happening.

Sorry, I want this to be a serious discussion. I'm sorry you can't handle that.

Electricity production.. we need more wind and solar farms.. those are huge and I assume fairly large users of oil. (perhaps it isn't, in which case it wouldn't help with peak oil, but would with other things)

We need more techonology to get automobiles off gasoline.. so we'd need to give tax credits to any car manufacturer that produces cars and depending on how mush less fuel they use than if they used standard internal compubustion.. and perhaps a tax credit for the puchaser of the car. because the economy of scale is making it so they don't make the cars because they can't sell them and because there are no cards, they won't make them. (a circular problem)

how's that?

other than conserving as much as we can and trying like hell as fast as we can to develop and get into production all alternate energy sources, like solar, wind, etc. Oh and uh, control our population. More mouths= more oil use in this country. None of these will happen IMHO, until people in this country start realizing and feeling this oil shock isn't just temporary.

decentralize food production using organic techniques.

Great answers so far; but I'd say concentrating on the critical ones (heating, food) be top priority.

If people moved closer to work and dumped this dumb idea of suburban life and big mansions far away from real life then we would extend ourselves for that much longer.

soon enough to do any good. We're standing on the edge and the guy's behind us are shoving. It's a bad time to consider cutting steps into the face of the cliff.

However, Americans have done startling things in the past, and a massive effort, driven by social engineering rather than economic incentives might actually have a discernible effect, even if it isn't possible to avert the disaster. I just don't see how it could happen short of a plague that wiped out our current government/media complex. We need a visionary to lead the way, and I don't see one around anywhere.

If people moved closer to work and dumped this dumb idea of suburban life and big mansions far away from real life then we would extend ourselves for that much longer.

And how would propose to house the millions of people who have chosen to, as you so quaintly put it, live away from "real life"? Even if all those people wanted to move to the urban cores, there isn't enough housing for them. There isn't enough now as it is.

any diesel car can be made to run on vegetable oil that some restaurants are only too happy to get rid of because they don't have to dispose of it.

Yep, starting with the coast of Cape Cod. Our party "leaders" need to set a good example instead of engaging in NIMBY tantrums.

(a decade or less) Massive funding for local manufacture and local full-spectrum farming (todays farmers, even the few family farms, are far too specialized). Massive efforts toward energy efficient homes built to limit commuting, along with renewable energy supplemental features (corn furnaces, solar panel roofing, etc.). Social engineering to support renewables to cut our dependence on disposables. The whole thing is pretty obvious and intuitive, and would kick off an economic boom in new technologies / procedures, but it would endanger the corporate structure, so no go.

conservation, alternate substances and methods- there are going to be many many parts to the answer.

Their total fuel consumption is trivial. It makes as much sense as banning Baseball, and all other major sporting events.

but also as a symbolic gesture-
recreational use of the stuff should be discouraged.

that you will be banning all motor sports. They all use, you know, oil.

But something tells me that no, you won't, this is just another shot at those damn evil bigot rednecks. Since we all know that's what all NASCAR fans are.

i won't miss any of 'em.

Lets ban that as well. They waste fuel flying teams all across the country. Then there is all the fuel used by fans crowding into the stadiums.

i've long felt that professional sports of any kind add absolutely zero to the quality of life, and the energy is better spent elsewhere.

Natural gas is a problem too. Lots of people have natural gas burning on their stoves for pilot lights for automatic lighting. I would Ban that fast.

they have electric igniters.

i've always had gas stoves, and wouldn't want to switch to electric.

outside lights burning ALL DAY and night ...these were natural gas flames/ lights. I couldn't believe it, natural gas is going to get scarce in a very few years. It was pure waste of a natural resource but I guess the homeowners thought it looked cool.

they'll have to start thinking instead of conniving, and we democrats are so much better at that.

far less attention than I should. However I do think some solutions could be the building of nation wide Amtrak, requiring every vehicle made to get at least 40 miles per gallon,and a massive scientific project to come up with a new type of fuel, something akin to the Manhattan project of WWII. This is all I could think of right now but this is a very important subject to pursue to ensure the survival of the human race.

1. How I would resolve it--

Down size our personal transportation to live within a "hydrogen economy" (where the hydrogen is obtained by electrolytically decomposing water). I would get the electricity by photovoltaic (for individual homes) and by wind turbines.

It would involve a scaling back of lots of things.

And I would reserve our limited supply of crude oil for chemical feedstocks, and agricultural chemicals.

2. How will Bush - Cheny solve it---

Live within a larger "hydrogen economy" (where the hydrogen is obtained by electrolytically decomposing water). They would get the electricity by going on a nuclear power plant building binge.

"Power Producers Seek Latest Models of Nuclear Reactors" NY Times 3/15/05

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/15/science/15nucl.html

cotton is one of the worst crops going- as far as chemical use is concerned- hemp can be grown much better, and without the use of agricultural chemicals, and produce a more durable product.

why not try to wean agriculture off the chemicals?

are under 15% of our crude comsumption, and are sufficiently high "value add" by products that even at $100/bbl, they will be viable.

using industrial hemp as part of a proper crop rotation results in a greatly reduced need for chemical fertilizers, and saves fuel by requiring less deep tilling.

but, if you like the idea of crude oil being a part of your food chain, more power to you...

I would get the electricity by photovoltaic (for individual homes)
Not very practical -- where are you going to put all those collectors? (If you say "rooftops", where are you going to get all the ER staff you're going to need to treat the resulting falls when leaves and snow need to be cleaned off?)

For that matter, where are you going to put all the nasty chemicals used to make solar cells?

How will Bush - Cheney solve it ... going on a nuclear power plant building binge

That's what we should do, which is why I don't expect it from Chimp & Crook.

Same chemicals used in making wafers, LCD displays -- my condo now is within walking distance of two semiconductor fabs.

I worked in a photovoltaic fab.

As to "I would get the electricity by photovoltaic (for individual homes) Not very practical -- where are you going to put all those collectors? (If you say "rooftops", where are you going to get all the ER staff you're going to need to treat the resulting falls when leaves and snow need to be cleaned off?)" -- UV gets though low amounts of snow -- having lived in the Lake Ontario Snow Belt --

Nuclear is a political hot potato in the US --- Clinton's Ass't Secy of Energy on Nuclear Waste (Ivan Itkin, PhD is a long time personal friend and before I went into "Alternative Renewable, Green Energy" I was a Nuke Power Engineer. So I am not as hysterical as most Progressives (I guess I'm a Squirrel Hill - Churchill Boro "Progressive" when it comes to Nuke Power)

In the short time high oil prices are our best friend. Switch to NG and Coal where practical, like electricity generation. Streamline the process to bring non fossil fueled energy sources on line.

Note: Re your Sig line. Current consumption is
est. at 84 million bbl/day

Each person gets their half gallon of fossil fuel/day. But the limit for items like BioDiesel could be 100 gallons per day. So Arnold can drive his Hummers. But he has to spend the cash on Green Fuel for it. Which will help develop this technology for everyone else.

.....and then put 100% of the funds collected into research on such issues as alternative energy sources and more fuel-effecient means of transportation.

I'd also dramatically increase the availability and quality of public transportation, both in areas where it exists today and in those areas where it doesn't. I'd also use a portion of the taxes collected to heavily subsidize the operating expenses of such transportation to encourage its use.

Eventually, those who got accustomed to using this form of transportation would be weaned from their autos.

than it is now. The poor people who need to drive to work will get "killed" if they have to pay, let's say 5 bucks taxes on a gallon of gas. SO will the truck drivers who deliver groceries to stores, etc. The food and all other prices will rise dramatically because of the transportation costs. It mneeds to be done but it will throw the country into depression fast I think. Public transport will be hurt too by a large tax increase, the buses, trains, etc. No good solution.

....over the last 20 years or so, we'd not be where we are today...including Iraq.

We wouldn't be having this discussion for another one or two years, when consumption hit 84 Million BBL/day.

This is a pattern of human nature. To not seriously deal with a problem until it is critical and in your face constantly.

We need to overcome peasant superstitions about "nucular" power.

has tremendous security and storage issues, and would take DECADES to develop to anywhere near the levels we would require. Furthermore, that would take a tremendous amount of energy for a very short term solution. Not to mention, while nuclear has potential for reducing some short term energy needs, it does nothing to replace the products that are produced from oil (platics, rubber, fertilizers, pesticides, medicines, etc.)

Olaf

during WWII. Institute public programs to help people relocate as necessary, and to help reshape our society and economy.

So am I when I say it may be too late. When we had that huge surplus we could have invested it in technology and encouraged conservation. As you know, the Bush people discourage conservation and blew the surplus.

The past two days, as the price of oil and our huge defecits have been i the news, the Bushies have revealed how they intend to deal with this bad news: spin. They're saying the defecit and the price of oil is an indicator of the fantastic, booming economy--we're just doing so well, it's natual we consume a lot.

Enough people worship these guys, that I doubt they can be stopped. I believe we should concentrate on what to do as individuals and as a group. Spend as close to nothing as possible. Keep away from credit cards. Lock into a fixed-rate mortgage. Separate needs from wants and invest in needs, like food. And so on. . .

we've ever seen before. It's true that anything you can do to prepare yourself will help. But I think the only real solution will have to be collective, at least at the community level. A crisis of this magnatude will completely alter the political mood and landscape. When people are facing starvation they'll go with whatever works. What I fear, though, is that what will work for many is full-fledged fascism.

People who are beaten can be very unpredictable so instead of turning from--and blaming--those in power they may turn on someone else, someone the powerful say are to blame for all their problems; people like the Jews, or now the Muslims and Liberals.

I've read some books on survival and I'd just like to say it may pay to keep your preparations to yourself. If others know what you have, they may try to take it and justify it by saying, Well, it's their fault; I saw that Kerry sign in their yard. Or, Damn hoarders! How dare they?

Most people still think the idea of Peak Oil is nuts, and the corporations aren't going to devote serious money to r&r unless the gov't bribes them. Which of course isn't going to happen because our current gov't is peopled by idiots who couldn't care less about what happens to the country or world after they die. I'd much rather see a thread on what people are doing individually and in their neighborhoods/communities.

to find the 'next great energy inventor', and i would have it on all the cable news programs 24/7. Sorry Michael.

Transportation
1) Begin to immediately increase the gas mileage requirements for trucks and cars.
2) Remove tax breaks for purchases of large, low mileage vehicles.
3) Offer tax breaks for the purchase of small, high mileage vehicles.
4) Increase funding for public transportation.
5) Tax breaks for people that do not own a car?

The transportation thing is going to be a long term problem. I believe we need to focus again on local economies and work to eliminate suburbia as it exists today. I see many localized communites and economies that produce alot of their own goods using more physically labor intensive, or simple machinery practices. Localizing economies like this will reduce transportation and will bring craftmanship back to the people. Transform the people from being consumers back to being producers.

Ok, I got way off topic, but the reality is that mopst of these things all tie together one way or another. Human populations will by necessity needto be reduced. It can happen a nice way, or a not so nice way...either way, it WILL happen. Without oil, we do not have the energy to maintain current population levels.

We need to immediately begin investing and researching SUSTAINABLE energy sources, not like HYDROGEN which is simply and energy transport mechanism. While costs are still relatively low we need to invest in photovoltaics, wind energy, hydropower, and I am sure much more. As these systems come online they can aid in the downsizing.

Packaging and processed goods will by default become virtually non-existent due to cost. Again, people will be forced back to locally produced goods made with natural, low energy requiring raw materials. Hemp could make a strong come back here.

I would stop wasting reamaining energy making war against everybody. We will find that the Amercian way of life IS negotiable. Hell, Bush has already negotiated the hell out of it.

Plant more trees. Lots more.

Adjust planning and zoning regulations to encourage eco-community type living environments (such as this one here: http://www.dancingrabbit.org/)

Educate, Educate, Educate!!!!

Train, train, train!!!!

Ok, just the tip of the iceberg obviously, but some initial ideas.

Olaf

lower the speed limits and push electric vehicles, public transportation, car pooling.

I guess I'm a radical, huh?

Typo: s/b devastation

I would be heavily investing and subsidizing alternative energy sources but, as far as people who want to ration oil and gas, I don't see the use of it. You'd be rationing and hurting the economy here at home just so China could get a bigger cut of the remaining oil. A strong economy with plenty of investment in a variety of alternatives would probably be the way to go. Without new ideas, in the end, we'll go toward coal, methane, and maybe nuclear and we'll have a world where average age of death is around 40 thanks to the poison air.

The conservation movement is a breeding ground of communists
and other subversives. We intend to clean them out,
even if it means rounding up every birdwatcher in the country.
--John Mitchell, US Attorney General 1969-72

Save it for a rainy day.

Not only with the petro-based fertilizers/chemicals etc., but simply transporting it, especially in the winter. Think about most agriculture in this country: it's mainly things like corn and soybeans, and not for food. Most of our fresh fruits and veggies come from either the southern edges of our country or from other countries entirely (I noted recently that my Trader Joe's brand broccoli came from China). It takes a lot of energy to get this food to the places where they don't grow food--transporting it and keeping it fresh while in transport. Even our meat (or "your" meat, since I'm a vegetarian) is raised, usually, far from cities.

We are going to have to change the way we farm and zone land, that's for sure, to more raising food and less raising food for other food (cows), and doing it much closer to population centers. It'll have to be more diverse farming, too, and I'd think lots of greenhouse farming to feed the northern folks in the winter.

I'd offer HUGE tax breaks and other incentives to plan cities around farming communities and to begin organic vegetable farms and food co-ops.

Now that I think about it, I foresee a return to America being an essentially agrarian economy.