Confronting America's Addiction to Oil

[chlamor]

Confronting America’s Addiction to Oil By Bob Burnett
Column: The Public Eye (04-19-05)

America is teetering on the edge of recession. We’ve run up a huge debt and, as a result, have developed startling vulnerabilities. While there are many explanations for our precarious situation—ill-advised tax cuts and wrong-headed administration priorities, for example—the root problem is our dependency on oil. Although we are barely 5 percent of the world’s population, we consume 25 percent of the annual oil production. We produce 6 million barrels of oil per day yet devour 20 million.

We are oil junkies, physically dependent upon our daily fix of petroleum. To wean ourselves from our slavish dependency on carbon-based fuels, we will have to go through a harrowing withdrawal process. The sooner we do this the better, as many experts are predicting that 2005 will be the peak oil production year for the planet.

<snip>

Many citizens deny that there is a problem at all. Business consultant Max de Pree observed, “The first responsibility of a leader is to define reality.” President George W. Bush has defined a Reaganesque reality where oil is not a problem. This deception has been aided by the fact that many Americans already have enough to worry about—terrorism and their jobs—and don’t want to hear any more bad news. Many conservative Christians—about 36 percent of Americans according to Bill Moyers—believe that America’s problems, such as petroleum depletion, are irrelevant, as we are in the final stages of the “end times;” they understand that the rapture will happen within the next forty years and, therefore, they don’t have to worry about mundane subjects like oil.

Another group is just angry. Dick Cheney is an example of an economic conservative who is infuriated by our petroleum shortages because he believes that “the market” would solve the problem if only environmentalists and other bleeding hearts would get out of the way. The administration’s energy plan is based upon supply-side economics, predicated on the notion that the U.S. has enough carbon-based fuels if only energy companies are permitted to dig wherever they choose, for example, in our national parks and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. While formulating this plan, Cheney famously observed that, “Conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it is not a sufficient basis for a sound, comprehensive energy policy,” thereby ignoring the obvious: Even if we used all possible sources, America does not have enough oil to satisfy our addiction.

http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/article.cfm?issue=04-19-05&storyID=21200

[The Straight Story]

1. How did we ever live without it? And what about the amish?

I was talking to my niece just last night about all this as we sat on the porch swing.

IMHO the government has made it hard for the avg joe to live without oil by passing laws (rightly or wrongly so) which make it harder to survive without dependency on oil. Like not being able to burn things on your property, no livestock allowed in your area, take your kids if you don't have electric/gas/utilities in your home, and so on and so forth.

I dunno, just a much broader discussion to be had on it all IMHO.

[mhr]

2. See The Latest Matthew Simmons Presentation Here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=103&topic_id=120471&mesg_id=120471

[LdyGuique]

3. Men are bigger junkies than women

Without turning this into a complete gender-based bash, my observation is based on "disposable income" based toys. Men who are the ones who collect gasoline engine-based toys, such as boats, motorcycles, 4-wheelers, snowmobiles, personal watercraft (jetskis)riding lawn mowers, snow-blowers, leaf blowers, chainsaws, etc. Now, it's true that some of those toys are work tools; however, there are smaller or less-labor saving versions of them and not all who own them "need" the type or size they have.

My grandson, not-yet 12, has been yammering for a motor scooter, and a 4-wheeler. He lives in an area where a bicycle does a pretty decent job.

We live in a society that has been becoming progressively obese. Many spend hours and hours either exercising at a club or running to try and forestall the bulge; yet, if they exercised with fewer automated tools and conveniences, it would also help.

Our junkiness has expanded far beyond the transportation vehicle(s) that are bigger and more gas-guzzling that is necessary for 90% of all use.

[chlamor]

4. Hey Now

As a male of the species I must say..............You are right.

I think you named some of the most loathesome gadgets of MANkind-Jet ski and weed whip are sinister.

Boys and their power toys.
Low tech over here-choppin' wood- plantin' seeds and ridin' bikes.

Oops but this computer-nobody's pure but haven't we overdone it?
:hi:

[LdyGuique]

7. LOL -- my computer???!!!!

You got the point, though. We have a society that has based a lot of its entertainment on either twin-cycle or internal combustion engines. We do use energy profligately.

I truly believe that if we cut back by half our use of gasoline, we'd be in a better position to make full decisions and plans to reorganize "the social order" to stave off disaster.

I still think that if metro areas insisted via laws to curtail single-driver commutes (though the use of multiple diamond lanes) and design city traffic so that some streets could be dedicated to low-power devices and bicycles, more buses, etc., that we could grab hold of petro use. Additionally, issue gas ration cards for all registered drivers (with a maximum of two per household) -- these could be used or sold to others.

Vehicle-Miles Traveled This is a comprehensive set of graphs and statistics about the amount of miles driven by the "average" household, comparing 1988, 1991, and 1994.

An average vehicle, therefore, traveled farther in 1994 than in 1988: 11,400 miles per year compared with 10,200 miles per year (Figure 3.2). Because the number of vehicles per household remained steady at about 1.8 from 1988 through 1994, per-vehicle and per-household mileage grew at about same rate. The per-household average rose from 18,600 miles in 1988 to 21,100 miles in 1994.

<snip>

Light trucks' share of total vehicle-miles traveled rose from one-fourth in 1988 to one-third in 1994. The increase was the result of two factors. Light trucks comprised a larger share of the residential fleet in 1994. In addition, two segments of the light truck fleet--minivans and sport utility-vehicles--were driven more miles per year per vehicle than were passenger cars.

<snip>

Teenagers in the Household Boosted Miles Traveled

In general, people in households with children drive more, and those with driving-age children traveled the most vehicle-miles of any category in 1994: 29,900 miles (Figure 3.7). First, the presence of children of driving age tends to increase the number of drivers in the household and, therefore, to increase the number of vehicle-miles traveled. Secondly, older children may create additional travel demands than do younger children. In households with younger children, the number of vehicle-miles driven is similar to the number of miles driven in households with two or more adults with no children and in which the householder is younger than 60. In fact, households with two adults or more registered the greatest 1988-to-1994 increase in the number of vehicle-miles traveled.

<snip>

Higher Income Correlates with More Driving

In general, higher income is correlated with more vehicle-miles traveled per household (Figure 3.9). Annual household income of $50,000 or higher, when coupled with the presence of teenagers of driving age in the household, boosted average vehicle-miles traveled per household to 40,200 miles in 1994. And in households with that income and with two or more adults and no children, vehicle-miles traveled averaged nearly 27,400. By comparison, in those households with annual income below $10,000, vehicle-miles traveled averaged only 13,200.

[barb162]

5. I think you're right

[barb162]

6. I think you're right