[p2p-research] Scarcity mythology breaking down (was Re: Where Does The Oil Come From?)
Paul D. Fernhout
pdfernhout at kurtz-fernhout.com
Sun Nov 1 17:23:30 CET 2009
I mentioned abiotic oil here: :-)
"[p2p-research] Earth's carrying capacity and Catton"
But the reason this doesn't matter is that:
* we are polluting the biosphere in several ways using oil (both from big
disasters like the Exxon Valdez and continuing little ones of non-point
source pollution, especilly with gasoline containing additives like lead and
now MTBE) plus of course CO2;
* we are polluting the biosphere in several other ways using coal (mercury,
especially, but again, CO2 -- natural gas is cleaner, but also produces CO2);
* we would use less electricity if we switched to electric cars, because it
takes more electricity to produce a gallon of gas than an electric car would
use to go the same distance compared to most internal combustion engine cars;
* we have a centralized less-democratic economy which needs to be
extrinsically secured (oil pipelines, ships, ports, natural gas and LNG
facilities, are all very explosive and big and very hard to protect) because
we use oi produced in a very few locations and needs to be shipped and
stored; that "defense" expenditure in the USA is approaching a trillion US
dollars a year but is not factored into the price of oil and gasoline;
"The True Cost of Oil"
so our taxes would go *down* for that and other reasons if, as I proposed
here, everyone in the USA who wanted one was given a "free" safer luxury
"Why luxury safer electric cars should be free-to-the-user"
The stone age did not end because we ran out of stones, and the oil age will
not end because we run out of oil. (Not sure who said that first.)
All our scarcity assumptions are breaking down. :-)
Giving everyone universal health care is cheaper than rationing it.
Giving everyone luxury safe electric cars is cheaper than rationing them.
Giving everyone mutual security and an intrinsicly secure infrastructure is
cheaper than focusing on unilateral extrinsic security.
A basic income given to all would mean more things were produced, not less.
As I just wrote to someone, nuclear missiles are *ironic* because the same
technology could build a sustainable civilization on Earth or in space that
works for everyone with vast abundance for all.
The entire mythology of our civilization is being reinvented. :-)
As part of a bigger global mindshift and reimagining:
The problem being right now that a very few people get what they still think
are very big benefits by the current economic system, as long as they look
the other way about systemic risks of collapse (economic collapse, war,
unrest, plaque, and so on) that we *all* face together, even the wealthy.
And, it looks like even the children of the wealthy are worse off for it:
"Children of the Affluent: Challenges to Well-Being"
"The Culture of Affluence: Psychological Costs of Material Wealth"
"Why Affluent, High-Achieving Teens Are Often Depressed"
If even the children of the wealthy are being harmed by the current system,
then who is the current system really working for?
One possibility: Psychopaths? :-(
> What the anti-peak oil people are saying....
> Sent to you by Ryan via Google Reader: Where Does The Oil Come From?
> via Power and Control by M. Simon on 10/29/09
> There is some relatively new sciece out about the origins of oil and
> natural gas. ScienceDaily (Sep. 12, 2009) — Researchers at the Royal
> Institute of Technology (KTH) in Stockholm have managed to prove that
> fossils from animals and plants are not necessary for crude oil and
> natural gas to be generated. The findings are revolutionary since this
> means, on the one hand, that it will be much easier to find these
> sources of energy and, on the other hand, that they can be found all
> over the globe.
More information about the p2presearch