The best solution to a world oil crisis... [View All]

[Bru]

We have heard it all. There has been an "intricate clamor of tongues" (to use Stephen Crane's words) about how to best address peak oil and global energy shortages. With respect to cars, we have heard about hybrids, hydrogen engines, ethanol, biodiesel, and many other means of making them less dependent on oil. The intentions of all these possible solutions are noble, and we should continue to look for ways of improving technology that will enable us to guzzle less gas when we get in our cars.

But the absolute best solution to this whole problems of a global oil shortage, global warming, and air pollution, which hardly gets talked about compared to all the other "solutions" mentioned above, is not using a car at all.

The truth is that American cities have been designed so poorly since World War II that they are largely dependent on the car. The narrowminded way we suburbanized is perhaps the most blatant environmental disaster with respect to oil usage in our nation's history. If we had built our cities more compactly, and relied on the traditional town layout instead of sprawling suburbs (and later, exurbs), we would not at this time be having any discussions about an oil crisis, an oil shortage, or any such problems. Because the fact is that we live by the car, so we will die by the car.

We made the assumption in America that nearly every transportation need had to be met with a gas-powered automobile, thus using energy to carry around not only ourselves, but also one ton of steel wherever we went. Fading from our society are corner grocery stores to which we can walk, jobs to which we can bike, and social activities for which we can use mass transit.

Sure, cars are important. We depend on them, rightly, for many things. They are the most practical in traveling to remote locations, moving large loads around, and some vacations. We need police, ambulance, fire, and other emergency vehicles in every city. Some people need cars because their physical condition limits alternative mobility. There are many legitimate uses for personal, private automobiles. However, there are way more instances for which cars shouldn't be necessary, and if we all lived in more coherently planned communities, where the purpose of the planning was to have cars be only one of the main transportation alternatives, then we wouldn't need to be scrambling as a nation for merely different fuels for our cars.

Remember, a bike is one of the most efficient vehicles (if not THE most efficient) ever made in terms of work/joule. We have not even begun as a nation to scratch the surface of the full potential of bicycle infrastructure in our cities and towns. If one needs evidence of this, just look at our latest transportation bill, and how much highway spending there is compared to bike and mass transit spending.

Having more efficient cars is very important, but this is a mitigation, not the ultimate solution. Our sights should be set primarily on reducing the need to drive in the first place, and then, secondly, on making cars more efficient for when we DO need them (e.g. hybrids, biodiesel, etc.). The best way to achieve this goal is to stem the tide of suburban development as quickly as possible. This is the simplest solution, and it does not require any miracle of technology. On the contrary, it calls for using the wisdom of those who lived in a time when technology was not so advanced, namely before the post WWII suburban boom.

More of my thoughts on this subject can be found at my latest blog article:

http://brudaimonia.blogspot.com/2005/11/on-failing-to-see-forest-for-trees.html