college prep work

Thursday, May 25, 2006

Demands for peak oil

We have been studying Peak oil for a while now, and read a researched about other countries such as Cuba and now Sweden. Even with seeing all these options that other countries have set out for the United States to do, and the little that has actually been done, it was difficult to set out demands for our government to follow.
My group consisting of Katrina, Mergim, and Kamara set these 5 points:
1) Removal of any and all U.S. politicians who have a conflict of interest with oil companies.
2) After all biased parties have been removed from office there must be a formal announcement to the people of the United States, and hopefully the world will listen, that the peak oil disaster is near.
3) To pull out all U.S. military presence from foreign countries. Although it is important to keep connections and ties to other countries and not be cut off from the world, the billions of dollars going to oversea operations could be invested towards finding new energy sources. The U.S. government has spent over $166 billion in Iraq. I find it impossible to believe that had that investment been put towards advancing solar, and Hydropower, and inventing now forms of power we would not be one of the most prepared countries for the coming crisis.
4) Redistribution of large land holdings to find new means of food, and how to produce materials without fossil fuels, as well as new laws to control the pollution.
5) Environmentally unstable areas need to be evacuated. While land such as Phoenix, and Nevada, as well as New York City, may be able to hold a certain number of people, they have amassed such a large population that to keep all the people in those locations without the help of new fuels would mean a mass die off would happen.
It was difficult to find specific things we wanted our federal government to do. While we know that there has to be more preparation for the coming disaster, whether it is researching new fuels, or teaching Americans how to live off their land, it was hard to come up with ways to do that. So the best way I could at least think of that is by taking funds that are going to unnecessary areas and having the government then fund massive research into how to do it. I guess I feel that if a government throws enough money towards an idea they should be able to get it done. In world war two the United States military put a large amount of funding towards a bat bomb that they actually made work very well, so we should be able to come up with certain ways to power our houses, that are both free of oil and safe for the environment.
Our last point I feel is very necessary. The evacuation of unsafe areas. It sounds harsh and like it will be discriminating against power people, but I feel like it has to be done. In areas like Phoenix where the sun can literally cook a person in the summer, without oil and support of water, there will be a huge amount of death. Katrina brought up the fact that they will be concentration camps. While there is no denying the fact that it will in fact be that, I feel it’s the only other option to those people. Either they die or go to more able areas to hold them. Unfortunately those will be people with less financial comfort, but once again I think it is better than what would happen if they stayed in their homes.
I believe Soloman’s group were the only people to talk about forcing people to stop using as many fossil fuels. I along with many people felt that if we told the American people about what was going to happen they would stop on their own. In reality I think they have to be stopped, because just like species that are hunted to extinction they will keep going until there is nothing left. So Soloman had some interesting ways to deal with it as well as being very practical. One is impounding of cars, so people have absolutely no way of driving. Another was something Sweden is already doing and something I think has to be done as well. Sweden puts huge taxes on fossil fuel energies. So this of course does two things. It limits how much people can buy, and with the extra money that can then be put into more investment in new technologies.


At 8:12 AM, Blogger Juggleandhope said...


It wouldn't be impossible to come up with a relocation program that didn't exacerbate existing inequalities of wealth and power. For instance relocators could be offered 3 acres of land per person, and help in figuring out how to grow food on it, in a small new "eco-town" in northern California. The rich and powerful of NYC and Phoenix wouldn't take it, because the offer is worse than what they currently enjoy. But the poor and middle class would.

SImilarly, the solution with the high taxes might exacerbate social injustice. That's fine with me, if it saves the planet. But higher taxes basically means the rich keep driving. If you explicitly paired that with spending the taxes on mass transit for the working class, it would create less resentment from everyone, maybe.

At 7:12 PM, Blogger Solomon said...

Hey Wusup Henry?

I'm really in love with the way you guys talked about the removal of all politicians who have a conflict in interests with us. It's just brilliant... It reminds me alot of V For Vendetta [If you saw that movie].

Also, your point about pulling out all the money used to fund our armies and such and putting into research in new sources of energy is smart. I was thinking about it right now though, and it just occured to me that if you did, however, put most of our money to research then we'd have no way of protecting that research. My theory on things is that we're going to eventually have a world wide energy war. Where everyone is trying to do what they can to survive. So if something like that were to happen, we'd need to have atleast some money invested in our armies to defend us and our research in new energy. What do you think?


Post a Comment

<< Home