tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post5783418988147426621..comments2024-03-28T14:52:13.218-05:00Comments on Stonekettle Station: Water Empires: Part IIJim Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11259550121437562338noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-29313814150370703992008-03-12T12:08:00.000-05:002008-03-12T12:08:00.000-05:00Do we have to let people keep their SUVs?The epide...Do we have to let people keep their SUVs?<BR/><BR/>The epidemic of SUVs is based on a number of market curiosities: the fact that auto manufacturers don't have to meet fuel standards for them (since, IIRC, they're "light trucks"), high profit margins for the manufacturers that has led to heavy marketing, and a resulting consumer demand that appears to be based on water-logged ground (consumers appear to believe SUVs are safer, despite contrary or ambiguous evidence; SUVs have mysteriously become a status symbol, etc.), combined with a decade of relatively low fuel prices... there may be other factors involved I'm leaving out.<BR/><BR/>The small point being that current SUV supply and demand is a kind of artificial creation. Legislation requiring SUVs to meet fuel-economy standards (which is on the table, if it hasn't been passed), high prices at the pump, and sexier fuel-efficient vehicles would all alter the current scene. Make SUVs less profitable, and the auto companies will look for an alternative. Make more alternative vehicles like the Tesla, consumers will look at the alternative. (Yes, I have a hard-on for the Tesla: it's an electric car in a Lotus body--it triggers every gene on the Y-chromosome from the gearhead gene to the computer nerd gene.)<BR/><BR/>The larger point being that there are ways to change habits that don't require everyone to go to sleep when the sun sets, recycle their poop, or even ride a bike. It isn't <I>that</I> hard to make light rail more attractive than sitting in six o'clock congestion, to make fuel-efficient vehicles palatable, or energy/eco-friendly architecture part of all new building. But it requires some effort to put the costs of the old ways up front and make them obvious, while making better choices cheaper and sexier at the outset.<BR/><BR/>One component of that is legislative: there has to be a willingness on the part of elected officials to stand up to existing lobbies, to spend tax revenues on infrastructure and to give up tax revenues for incentives. Do our elected officials have the guts? Do <I>we</I> have the guts to elect people who will do whatever has to be done?<BR/><BR/>Regrettably, the safe money is on cynicism.Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18275812152895151542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-36105483467039410492008-03-11T23:38:00.000-05:002008-03-11T23:38:00.000-05:00Conceptually, you are right on. Unfortunately, we ...Conceptually, you are right on. Unfortunately, we need more than concepts. Technically and economically you are in the ditch - at least on algae oil. Everyone wants to jump on the algae oil band wagon. Unfortunately, they haven't done the math and don't understand the total costs to produce usable fuel from algae. They just read the promotional press put out by the people looking for gov. grants, or selling stock - which lamely focuses on theoretical production per acre - none of which anyone has done at scale and not focusing on the cost of a storable and usable gallon of fuel. <BR/><BR/>The only alternative fuels that are viable alternative fuels are the ones that are cheaper than petroleum based fuels. Note: There aren't any yet. Yes, I know Brazil is using ethanol - but who do you know that will work for a $1.00 day chopping cane. Either petroleum has to continue to go way up, or alternative fuel cost have to come waaaayyyy down. When economic alternative fuel happens - the energy crisis will be over - not until then. So, hold on to your wallet and wear your hard hat because its likely to be a very uncomfortable ride - maybe for a couple of generations.dughttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11200303524211331915noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-70239735893488871622008-03-11T21:25:00.000-05:002008-03-11T21:25:00.000-05:00Yes, diverse, diverse, diverse. We need stop rely...Yes, diverse, diverse, diverse. We need stop relying on any single source of energy. It will breed competition too -- which is good.<BR/><BR/>I worry that it just won't happen. I picture Mad Max, without the camera crew. :(Shawn Powershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15186686711412505957noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-35934183402942040392008-03-11T17:03:00.000-05:002008-03-11T17:03:00.000-05:00When the government decides directly who gets acce...<EM>When the government decides directly who gets access to power, heat, sanitation, food, and etc based on available energy - well then you're living in a water monopoly.</EM><BR/><BR/>::Sings::<BR/><BR/>"You're at Urinetown!<BR/>Your ticket should say Urinetown!<BR/>No refunds, this is Urinetown!<BR/>We'll keep that dough!"<BR/><BR/>Sorry. You make some good points. <BR/><BR/>We now return to your regularly scheduled programing.<BR/><BR/>And, like Nathan, I think some level of sacrifice is required.Janiecehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14190655869710465713noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-7633578962796605882008-03-11T16:37:00.000-05:002008-03-11T16:37:00.000-05:00When the government decides directly who gets acce...<EM>When the <STRONG>government</STRONG> decides directly who gets access to power, heat, sanitation, food, and etc based on available energy - well then you're living in a water monopoly.</EM><BR/><BR/>I'll start by picking a nit with your premise. I don't think government is going to be making those decisions. The various fuel companies will decide that simply by pricing it beyond some people's means. Government will step in with some ineffectual but loudly proclaimed control measures.<BR/><BR/>That said, I'm pretty much in agreement on your conclusions. Yes, we need to diversify.<BR/><BR/>Yes, a "Moon-landing" style of effort probably would be the most effective. And it needs to be started yesterday (As if GWB has the cojones to ask people to sacrifice anything in the name of necessary action.) <BR/><BR/>And I do think some level of sacrifice does need to be involved as a matter of policy. People just don't take this stuff seriously if it doesn't hurt a little.<BR/><BR/>As for diversity. It really should be lots and lots and lots of little things that add up. NYC, for example has tax breaks for green construction (both final design and building process itself). There are thousands and thousands of waste-water treatment plants in America. Four of the ones in NYC now siphon off the CO2 and methane that is a natural byproduct of the treatment and then use it to power fuel cells. These four treatment plants produce all of their own energy and have enough steam and electricity left over to sell it back to Con Ed.<BR/><BR/>At the end of this month, the city and State will vote on a Congestion Pricing plan for NYC that would impose an $8.00 fee on all vehicles coming into Manhattan below (I think) 59th Street.<BR/><BR/>I'll shut up now.Nathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00648438549121320566noreply@blogger.com