Stop paying lip service to energy problems.

I read a letter to the editor in Wapo. (link)

I commented (also repeated below … well, it’s probably more of a rant, I have a habit of commenting more on other comments than the articles/letters)

The letter is a bit short on details, and could be categorized as a general vague plea, but it’s hard not to sound like that when you’re constricted to 300 words. It’s a drop in the bucket compared to the torrent of information needed when we talk about such issues. One snide commenter framed the letter as such, short on details/solutions (while providing none of his own) so what is this ?

We have a well meaning letter written by the head of the NRDC no less ! that is so easy to brush off because it is so short and vague, providing no concrete solutions, only hints of them. And I agree we should GUT the CAFE bullshit and replace it with fuel efficiency standards with teeth. It’s nice to say that, but the details are the hard part.

You know why ? because the details say; We should drive less. We should drive smaller if possible. We should not base an entire economy on the price of a single commodity. We should not expect economic growth to continue onwards and upwards, we should expect that it might go sideways, or even in reverse and we should prepare for such. We should expect non-conventional sources of oil to really shit all over our environment.

Those are the hard, really jagged, no sugar coating realizations that the letter doesn’t touch on in great detail, and that the commenter doesn’t really want to hear about. QOTD by me: Nobody want’s to put the pieces of this puzzle together because at the end you don’t get a pretty picture.

Both sides of the isle are paying lip service. The greeny liberals and the hard line business conservatives. Both groups have members that really don’t get it, or can’t express it in a way that will get read by a vast number of people.

The problem is word logistics. Getting the right words into an audience’s head’s at the right pace, in the right form and at the right time is incredibly tricky.  Having said that I still want to have a crack at it; I really want to write an op ed for my local paper on energy. But alas, getting a letter published was hard as nails.

Maybe some more coherent thoughts than these below might have a chance, but hey, do you want that turd sugar coated or not ?

—-  —-  —-  —-  —-  —-  —-  —-  —-  —-  —-  —-  —-  —-  —-  —-  —-  —-  —-  —-  —-  —-  —-  —-  —-

I’m not sure “sparking global warming” could be a comment attributed to the KXL, warming will occour with or without it, but with it, it could be several degrees worse in the next hundred years.

Eric, back up your statements with scientific opinion, links / literature and I’ll happily read them, I welcome a good learning experience.

In the meantime I’ll introduce you to our energy reality in the coming decades; The opening up of Iraqi oil beyond its borders, the instability in Libya, and the Keystone XL have one thing in common: The low hanging fruit in the oil game is GONE. Energy costs will increase whether they are conventional, unconventional or “green”. Leaving oil isn’t a choice that greenies will push upon you; it’s going to happen regardless.

The same people that will tell you the Keystone XL is good for America will in the same breath tell you Peak Oil theory is nothing but. In the same vein the war in Iraq is good for America, a future, happily “growing” America. We are still attempting to ensure a supply of cheap oil to a addicted populace.

When the Saudi wells run dry, or they hit an export peak, we’ll be all right, we have the KXL ! wooh !
Except that tarsands aren’t like sweet light crude pumped from the Saudi’s, Iraqi’s or Libyans. Your beloved elixir of growth will be a shadow of it’s former self, requiring millions more BTU’s to extract and refine. The ONLY thing that tarsands actually bring is more addiction at a higher cost.

While conservatives bleat on about jobs and fiscal conservatism they’ll happily let us continue the most unhealthy habit which will most likely lead to collapse from a greater height (delay a transition, and we only hurt ourselves) while energy costs will increase anyway; while the fat cats get fatter.

And Liberals will bleat at the president and sec. clinton, still believing that they are A. on their side and B. could make a blind bit of difference. We need some guts in this area to say the least. We should be knocking down Charlie and Dave Koch’s door and asking for our country back.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s