Re: Design of Cars: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (at Ohio State University,
are you here today, Yoshie, Young Communist League chapter at
OSU!) on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list, just said
that the East German cars were biodegradable! True? Michael Pugliese
>From: Michael Perelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Date: 7/10/01 12:47:58 PM
>
>Absolutely, the design of cars, the construction of housing,
the location of
>housing, and a multitude of other factors affect the rate of
depletion.
>
>I believe that the point that Mark is making is that even if
we were to make
>enormous improvements in such areas, even if we find a way to
drive down the
>marginal cost of extraction, shortages are looming in the long
run.
>
>I doubt that he or any of us here could actually pin point the
timing of this
>long run. To put it off requires an enormous massing of will
-- although price
>increases will increase conservation, conservation alone will
not suffice. It
>will require substantial changes in lifestyles, which brings
up the sort of
>point that Doug makes -- who decides, how do you get people
to comply ....?
>
>
>The problem is that the immediate decisions on such things have
important long
>run consequences.
>
>Stephen E Philion wrote:
>
>> Michael,
>> Here's another issue for possible consideration. Is the problem
one of
>> oil shortages given the stubborness of US car companies to
not design
>> autombiles that conserve greater amounts of gas? In fact,
perhaps the
>> argument could be made that we have way more than enough petrochemicals,
>> but the organization of key manufacturing sectors (i.e. auto)
around high
>> gas consuming commodities invariably creates the impression
of crisis in
>> terms of 'oil shortage.'
>> There is one thing rather apparent in this discussion, namely
that the
>> appeal to the existence of an 'oil shortage' is not necessarily
any less
>> potentially radical in content than the argument that there
is no shortage
>> aside from the one that has been socially constructed and
which could be
>> just as easily socially undone if profit weren't the #1 guidepost
for
>> energy policy.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, Michael Perelman wrote:
>>
>> > We have a few facts that we can agree upon. Despite Gold's
fantasies --
>> > after all he is promoted on the WSJ's editorial page, we
are running out
>> > of petrochemicals.
>> >
>> > New technologies allow for better extraction of deposits
that would
>> > otherwise be economical.
>> >
>> > Better technologies can economize on energy.
>> >
>> > I mention these obvious points because they have been repeated
many times
>> > here as if they were some sort of revelation.
>> >
>> > Nobody can quantify any of the above statements with precision.
We should
>> > not expect anyone here to be able to do so.
>> >
>> > Also, despite the fantasies of W. and his boss from Wyoming,
the
>> > extraction of fossil fuels is a messy process, threating
water supplies
>> > and other scarce resources.
>> >
>> > Nobody can say for sure if oil will be the first binding
point. It could
>> > be water, it could be public health -- although all the
looming problems
>> > are bound together.
>> >
>> > None of us has the expertise to speak with great authority
on the subject;
>> > nor can we demand others on the list to do so.
>> >
>> > The fact remains that looming petroleum shortages are a
serious problem
>> > that has many dimensions. Ask the people from Columbia
who are in the
>> > process of trading herbicides for oil.
>> >
>> > ---
>> > Michael Perelman
>> > Economics Department
>> > California State University
>> > Chico, CA 95929
>> >
>> > Tel. 530-898-5321
>> > E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >
>> >
>
>--
>
>Michael Perelman
>Economics Department
>California State University
>Chico, CA 95929
>
>Tel. 530-898-5321
>E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
