The suburbs of 50 American cities will soon be bulldozed in order to let the remaining city cores run more efficiently. This will, of course, begin with the more distressed places, like Flint MI. James H Kunstler should be chuckling right now. First, these places get bulldozed. Then the streets get depaved and turned into gravel.

Then they disappear.

Then the nightmare of the North American suburban disaster unwinds and we get to go on to the next downshifting of civilisation from this decidedly UNcivilised disaster to something perhaps more civil. Perhaps.

I don’t know if I should be happy or not. I am happy to see worthless suburbs disappear. Every time I spend anytime in those environments I get really depressed and angry. Still, I am sad to see all that sunk cost go to waste – this more than half century of investment into an ill-conceived lifestyle. It’s just frustrating and sad to know it was all a big mistake. Oh well. It’s the first step in a long road down the back side of Hubbert’s Curve.

HW

OK, so I’m a typical guy who finds that when there’s a problem, I’m not interested in sharing, I’m interested in a solution. After some consideration, this is my solution to the present crisis in the USA:

1. Nationalise the banks, forthwith. They will no longer be “for profit” institutions. Since they don’t need fancy investment instrument designs, they don’t need hotdog CEOs etc. Therefore: they keep their jobs with a top salary of $300k p.a. They can’t make a living on that? Fine. Leave. In this model, they’re little more than managers anyway. We don’t need geniuses running banks, we just need people who are honest, ethical, and competent.

2. By nationalising the banks the USgov repudiates the bank debt. Life continues on, the Chinese still own huge amounts of American Paper, and they will get paid. Over Time. Like everyone else. Because this is money eating debt, it has no velocity in the economy and will not result in inflation. Allowing for low interest rates to boot.

3. And the money? Next step: disband the Federal Reserve. The USgov will be responsible for its money supply. My, just like an adult would do.

4. Nationalise USA Health Care. Face facts: This whole nonsense about “your health care decisions should be between you and your doctor” is total freaking bullcrap. You know who makes your health care decisions? The insurance company. I would absorb the health care industry directly (on the one end) and I would get really pretty damn stiff with Americans on the other end. But a lot of that will fall out naturally.

5. Gas will be USD$5 gallon. If gas is cheaper than that due to over production or demand destruction, then the remainder goes directly into alternative energy systems. No ifs and or buts. If it is over $5, then it rises to what ever price that is.

6. Car makers will do chap 11, and restructure under strict supervision. The focus will be: the development of hybrid trucking to last 10 years to be replaced by electric vehicles and electric trains. The largest private vehicle will be the equivalent of a minivan. Gas will be rationed, viz WW2. The auto industry will focus on making superlightweight electric vehicles. Electric Bicycles (viz Stokemonkey or Crystalite systems) will be subsidised and encouraged, as well as enclosed electric tadpole trikes.

7. The USA will abandon Empire. The Pentagon will cut its budget by 50% a year until it is the size of the Chinese rate of spending. American Troops will be brought home, decomissioned, and retrained for the powerdown.

#7 is actually #1, but the banks need attention.

8. Crash Infrastructure improvements geared around livable homes and communities worth caring about. LOTS of insulation. Lots of geothermal. Lots of all that joy. Not so much in the massive giant office box development.

The above should result in a vastly improved economy.

Jeavons is correct if prices are stable or supply meets demand, on demand. When that ceases to happen, conservation is the only path to economic growth: if demand falls below production consistently year over year, then conservation will result in “economic growth”. Such a curve is not sustainble due to granularities in energy requirements – i.e., you can only drive down the energy curve so far before people die of starvation. These inelasticities can be seen as “granularities”: things that don’t divide.

But we are FAR from there (yet) and once we get a new energy / economic regime into common practice, then substitution can come to the fore and the machines can run, albeit fewer of them, and on a tiny fraction of the energy they once used – it will never get to granularity.

What I described above can happen and work. I would expect countries with more centralised govts (China, Russia, etc.) would do the above by decree. Nations filled with citizens may also find the political will to co-operate and bring the system down to reality. (Denmark, EU, etc.) but nations composed of TAXPAYERS, are screwed, as they have replaced their social contract with an economic one: they buy gov’t services as consumers. And consumers want one thing: SOMETHING FOR NOTHING. Hence, countries with taxpayer mentalities will fail.

That’s my opinion and I’m stickin’ to it… for now…

in an already very disturbed world. On a scale, this isn’t a Super Biggie, but I consider it bleakly indicative.

The Times of London is reporting that Royal Dutch Shell oil company (Shell) is abandoning its alternative energy plans. This is not a good thing, IMHO, as they intend to focus on oil, gas and biofuels. Well – oil is at or just past peak, gas is not far behind and biofuels are not an optimal method of keeping things going. This refocusing really only means one thing as far as I can see – they have changed their vision of the likelihood of their scenarios.

Last year, a letter came out of Shell, (From: Jeroen van der Veer, Chief Executive, To: All Shell employees, 22 January 2008, Subject: Shell Energy Scenarios)

that said, and I quote:

The first, a scenario we call Scramble, resembles a race through a mountainous desert. Like an off-road rally, it promises excitement and fierce competition. However, the unintended consequence of “more haste” will often be “less speed” and many will crash along the way.

The alternative scenario, called Blueprints, has some false starts and develops like a cautious ride on a road that is still under construction. Whether we arrive safely at our destination depends on the discipline of the drivers and the ingenuity of all those involved in the construction effort. Technical innovation provides for excitement.

It goes on to discuss their preference for the Blueprints Scenario. And by investing in alternative energy systems, they were investing in the Blueprints Scenario. by abandoning their efforts in alternative energy, the obvious conclusion is they no longer believe the Blueprints Scenario is the likely one, and that the Scramble Scenario is the more likely, and they are positioning themselves for the grinding disaster of such a Scramble. This is NOT good, IMHO.

A Scramble scenario means drastically asymmetric production and distribution of resources – haves and have nots – and Shell is interested in being a “Have”. However, it is clear that as resources tighten and become increasingly difficult to obtain, the trend toward nationalisation of said resources will be necessary by the governments of the nations located on top of these resources, especially if the nation is small. This will only work to the disadvantage of “oil companies” as they are already minority stakeholders in the world oil market with only (IIRC) 17% ownership of energy resources. A Scramble Scenario will pit nation against nation for what lies beneath them, (per Klare) and the ongoing humanitarian disaster in the botched war in Iraq obviously does not serve as a desirable model.

In conclusion, Shell (a company with a long history of brutality) abandoning alternative energy development is a canary in a coal mine moment. These people spend a lot of money developing scenarios and models, and when they decide to shift billions of dollars of research, they don’t do it on a whim. Simply, they are expecting a deeply suboptimal future and are positioning themselves to profit from it. Nice.

22 JULY 03

I wrote the following letter to a fellow who runs a site on PNAC, the Republican/Fascist conspiracy that is dedicated to a ruinous unipolar geopolitic. My response to his site follows, and it outlines my ideas on the subject.

Interesting site on pnac.

What’s even more interesting is the link below. It was written during the
clinton era pre-9/11. I believe it still holds, as the real game in this
world is economic. I see the mid-east troubles as a side show to the real
issue: The madness of American Unipolarity, and the necessity of a
multipolar future.

The link below discusses issues inside the Chinese Military from the 1990s,
but, again, since the fundamental structures still stand, the problem hasn’t
changed – 9/11 and the idiotic war on terror I see as (murderous, stupid,
and tragic, of course) but basically a sideshow.

the biggest problem with multipolarity is the formation of superstates,
similar to, but not exactly congruent to those predicted by Orwell. Oceania
(NAFTA), EUrasia (esp. when the russians finally join), and EastAsia (esp.
when Japan, vietnam, Philipines etc. and China complete their own
semispheric trade accords. Look for that in the mid – late 20teens)
Look for proxy wars between India (Oceania / Eurasia client) and a Chinese
client.

I also think there is the possibility of the development of an Islamic pole
or pseudoPole. East Asia, it’s own trouble with Islamic fundies aside, would
be more happy with this than Oceania and Eurasia. Follow the guns – I think
you’ll find China pouring a lot of ordnance into Islamic states. The Islamic
Pole or pseudoPole would be enough to temporarily stagger Oceania and
Eurasia with proxy wars, and even strain any alliance they might have
against EastAsia. The goal being to buy time while EastAsia develops into an
equal pole.

The present administration is too stupid and reactionary to plan like this -
they see a unipolar situation and will simple seek to maintain that at all
costs. VERY short sighted, indeed.

The next empire will be the EU when Russia comes on board, and NATO is put
to pasture note – NEVER disbanded, just made irrelevant and more of a joint military
tool for “peace keeping” and other crypto-colonial efforts. I would expect
Russia to join later this decade or early next. With Russia on board, it
will be a unified economy from Portugal to Alaska. A massive consumer state
in the west, and vast resources in the east, including one of the largest
oil and gas reserves on the planet. Oceania won’t be able to compete, and
its power will fade.

If the present hegemons are running the show then, expect a great deal of
misery. If intelligent foresighted people are in power, expect Oceania to
actually prosper: with a reduced military budget, a progressive tax
structure, and a balanced federal budget, there will be plenty of capital
for expansion and innovation. With (as what presently obtains) a bloated
military and deficits, the USgov will suck up all available cash, driving up
real interest rates (even as the fed sinks to zero) and propel the US into a
depression.

that’s how I see it playing out. What do you think?

best,

HW

the link I discussed earlier – a real MUST READ for policy wonks:

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/china/doctrine/pills2/

Wednesday, November 08, 2006
87 and the election

So, for those who were opposed to 87, it seems you have won.

I voted for it, although I do agree that it was flawed. I felt that in this case, flawed is better than none, and that if it raised the price of gas, all for the better.

Well, it seems many other Californians did the same analysis, came to the same conclusion, and determined that it was a Bad Thing.

Oh well.

What this tells the rest of America is that even CA, the nominal leader in ecological legislation, is unwilling to bite the bullet.

And so it goes.

At this writing, (closing in on midnight) it seems that the Democrats have taken over the House of Representatives, and the Senate is very closely divided, with two races still too close to call.

What has happened is this: American democracy stopped bleeding profusely. It is still deeply and horribly wounded – the madness of the parasitic neocons thugs of the Bush junta has done an immense amount of damage. The parasites may yet kill the host – the junta has another two years to destroy the country before another election cycle.

The craziness may start very soon – even though the Dems have won, they don’t take office immediately. In the meantime, the Bush junta could easily do something completely retarded – like bomb Iran – and throw the entire Middle East into a complete maelstrom, which would only serve to dramatically scuttle any number of points of progressive legislation. Not from any lack of interest, but simply in terms of priority. Such an insane action would completely suck all the air out of the congressional chambers and they would have their hands full just trying to keep Western Civilisation (such as it is) from flying apart and preventing the rest of the planet from ganging up on the USA. Issues of health care, minimum wage, the environoment, energy independence, global warming, all of that would get punted to the back burner.

However, such a knuckleheaded action as bombing Iran could easily set the mainstream Republicans against the Bush Junta and set up not just an impeachment process, but a conviction in the Senate as well. Unfortunately, the delusional freaks who run the Junta are suffiently disconnected from reality that they may very well do something like bombing, or supporting a bombing, in Iran as they are answering not to the calculus of the realpolitik of international relations, but have their ears turned to the creepy voices in their heads that are urging them to kill, Kill, KILL, KILL!!!

If Bush is going to do something insane he will do it soon. Once the new Democratic Congress is sworn in, they will act quickly to stifle his abilities in that and other regards (such as restoring habeus corpus and posse comtatus). So, dramatic, poorly planned, rapid military action (a dunderheaded practice the junta excels at) if it is to happen, will happen soon.

American Democracy has stopped bleeding profusely. The maggots that were draining it have been partly defeated. But the patient is far from healed, and there is a very long way to go before America can say it is a leading republic. America dodged a bullet, but the assassin has cocked his pistol to take another shot. America should feel a little better for having gotten some sense in its head, but judging by the returns, it isn’t much, and is certainly nowhere near where it needs to be if the USA has any hope of transitioning to a sustainable future without something resembling utter calamity and disaster as it tumbles willy nilly over the cliff of Hubberts Peak.

Tonight was a small step in a vaguely better direction. There is far to go and much to do.

Professor Dumbledore warns Harry Potter:

“Soon we must face the choice between what is right and what is easy.”

Let us hope that we soon find the strength to do what is right.

Sunday, November 05, 2006
Interesting mileage data

On an energy list I subscribe to (sf-bay-oil) an fellown named Earl Killian did a bunch of research on the actual mpg of various forms of transportation. The data follows. Basically, trains, as they are presently implemented, are not as efficient as one might think.

From his post:

The good news is that I dug up yet more efficiency data, which shows that some mass transit can be pretty efficient. I found a reference which claims they measured BART energy use and passenger miles for two weeks and computed 136 MPG, which is pretty good (a fair bit better than a Prius, and a lot better than the Amtrak commuter rail numbers). Better numbers were claimed for BART rush hour use, but for the same reason as above, I think you need to look at the global picture. BART is of course electric, like the RAV4-EV (176 MPG at 1.57 load factor). Even better is SBB, the Swiss Rail system: 279 MPG. (It is also electric, and their electricity is primarily hydro, so little greenhouse gas emissions there.)

I am wondering where an ebike fits into all of this. when I find out I’ll post that. What is startling is how lousy the trains fair. It could be that they do poorly because they are so underutilised and have a great deal of embedded energy, but I could be wrong… More soon.

Saturday, July 29, 2006
Peak Oil at SF LAFCo

Such excitement!

A few days ago, the fine folks in the SF Energy Community

(Offnote: I am disabusing myself of the notion of Peak Oil. From what I can gather, it’s either upon us or will happen soon enough that the notion is absurd. It’s like “Modernism” or its stumpy halfwit encore, “PostModernism”. They are not the answers to the problem of contemporary history, and Peak Oil is not the correct understanding of the problem of contemporary civilisation. The problem is energy production and resource consumption combined with massive overpopulation and a rapacious political economy and attendant false consciousness. But – I digress. Suffice to say, Stuart Studebaker has had it up to his eyeballs with Peak Oil which now has become more of a gloomy subculture with pseudo-religious overtones – and that creeps me out. So, from here on, you may consider me an Energy Activist. Attach my name to peak oil, and expect to arrive home to a house with your garbage missing and the pets all pregnant. Or something really bad like that. I digress…)

were able to set up a meeting in front of the San Francisco Local Agency Formation Commission. This was held beforecity Supervisors Mirkarimi, McGoldrick, and government employees Schmeltzer and Sullivan. Mr Mirkarimi was Chair. First, there was a Media Advisory on the steps of City Hall.

I was starved, and went down the block to get a small sandwich, and arrived as the speeches were already in swing. first up at the podium was Mr Richard Heinberg. (Picture #1)

He gave a very nice verbal outline of the Obvious Situation, and was well recieved. I would estimate that there were at least 40 people standing and listening.

After Mr H, was was David Room who shared a few words as well. He was followed by Supervisor Mirkarimi, who was forceful in his views which seemed quite sympathetic with the audience at hand. He was followed by someone in a beige suit whose names escapes me.

(off note: if anyone can fill in the names I forget – and I forget often – please leave a comment and I’ll fix the post itself. I make no pretense to journalism – this is a blog of my bad attitudes and observations.)

Then we all filed into the meeting room. It quickly filled up to standing room only.

Another room was opened and a video feed was sent in and projected so people could at least see the proceedings. I sat up front so I could take pictures. The Supervisors McGoldrick, Mirkarimi and gov’t apparatchiks Schmeltzer and Sullivan filed in and took their seats.

After some pro forma agenda stuff regarding the minutes of the previous meeting and such like – all performed under Robot’s Rule’s of Order and other similar parliamentary hocus pocus – the first to present was Richard Heinberg.

It was a classic Heinberg tour de force of facts and figures that paint a very ugly picture for the 21st Century. If you’ve read Powerdown or The Party’s Over, you’re pretty much up on what he has to say. The benefit was that he had several pieces of recent data to support his ideas. Excellent presentation, in his classic low key demeanor.

The Next speaker was David Room.

David’s presentation was interesting but was about twice as long as it needed to be. I thought he had a number of good ideas, but didn’t seem to have any concrete proposals. The supervisors had to ask him to cut it short, so perhaps he would have gotten to more concrete policy suggestions and strategic proposals, but we didn’t get to find out.

The third person was a clear and articulate woman from the San Francisco Department of the Environment. (her name escapes me – anyone?)

Being the natural born clumsy doofball that I am, I accidentally stabbed myself in the hand with a ball point pen at that moment, and was in some pain and didn’t really get to concentrate on what she had to say. I do remember it was interesting when I wasn’t wincing in pain.

After she spoke, the citizens were allowed to come up and talk to the Supervisors. Most of the speeches were passionate and articulate. A few were off the point, but not absurdly so. One gentleman started railing on about how we don’t have a democracy, and seemed completely oblivious to the irony of his statement… But even he had good points about energy and politics. I even spoke – I said who I was and what I do, and that I knew politicians liked specific and useful ideas, so I chimed in with three.

1. Disallow the Registration of SUVs as private passenger vehicles in San Francisco.

2. Subsidise electric bikes.

3. The city should invest in a kind of polysilicate bank, and use these cheap rates of PV to develop its own electrical generation for City Government buildings and public housing. This would do two things – it would permit the City to get into the business of renewable electricity generation, and act as a first step int opublic ownership of city based wind and tide power generation. The localisation angle on this is obvious, as is the direct connection to Public Power, but leapfrogging the gooey disaster that is PG&E – rather than “get control” of PG&E, the city could get into renewable power generation directly, and bypass the whole mess – let PG&E die on the vine as the oil runs out…

Supervisor Mirkarimi was impressed and asked me to email him with my ideas – he’s a well known advocate of public power, so I am not surprised that he’d find my idea #3 to be interesting…

More people spoke, and with some more Parliamentary hocus pocus, the meeting was over. At that point I got to take a nice picture of Mr Heinberg.

At that point a bunch of us all wandered down to a vegetarian restaurant run by devotees of Sri Chimnoy. The food was very very good, and the conversation was great.

Mr Heinberg liked me bringing up electric bikes. He said that he thinks electric bikes were likely more efficient than regular bikes. Each calorie you burn pedaling represents 10x as many calories that you don’t get to expend, because it takes so much energy just to make food. From a total energy view, the electric bike is much more efficient. Personally, I’m not sure that’s all true, but I do find the idea rather exciting. I’d have to do some crazy Odum-like analysis to figure it out, but I wouldn’t be surprised if Heinberg is correct.

I made some points to the assembled dinner crowd that we need to get culture workers hip to and working to promote energy awareness – even if they are celebrities and make their living on the commodity culture, they are in positions of great value in our society, as people trust their culture heroes more than politicians. Celebrities sell soap and life insurance, cars and medication – why not energy awareness?

I pointed out Al Gore’s movie went ahead because of the entertainment industry, and that culture, as a lens AND mirror of society, will always be out ahead of the politicians. Whether its writers, filmmakers, musicians, actors, DJs – whatever – we need all hands on deck, and the biggest gains to be realised in the slackening of the depletion curve will come culturally.

After dinner, myself and two companions, Dennis and Chuck, wandered over to the Noc Noc club and hoisted a few foaming frosties to our health and did a post-mortem of the meeting. After much convivial and interesting conversation, I found my way to a bus and after a long walk up a hill, I went to bed.

Today, I sent some dead computer gear to be properly recycled, and then Beth, Elizabeth and I had lunch at Kan Zaman middle eastern restaurant. Then it was off to Amoeba, where I purchased some used CDs and then home to a yummy salad dinner.

Monday is my birthday. Yay.

Friday, June 30, 2006
ER/EI

Over the past several weeks I have been rather focussed on ideas regarding Energy Return On Energy Invested, aka EROEI. I prefer the math version, ER/EI, as it is more to the point – it’s a ratio created by a simple division – Take your energy return and divide it by the energy invested. ER divided by EI.

My posts have been sporadic lately as I have moved back across the country, and between the jetlag and exhaustion of re-fitting myself into a more domestic existence, I’ve been keeping a lower profile than usual.

In my thinking, I am wondering if the entire ER/EI question is itself something of a red herring, and that perhaps there needs to be a better understanding of how we use energy in total.

Example: Nuclear power. A limited analysis would say that nuclear power is an extremely energetic system, far in excess per pound of fuel than any other, as (X) tons of plutonium or uranium fuel = (P) watts of power, and that this ratio P/X is rather astounding, hence: Nuclear power is a good value from the understanding of that ratio.

However, as many are quick to point out, there’s a lot more to nuclear power than (X) tons of fuel making (P) watts of energy, as there is the mining and processing of uranium and plutonium – an extremely energetic process. Then there is the building of a nuclear power plant; again, an energetic process. Then there is the amount of energy needed to keep the plant itself running, and the amount of energy needed to remove the fuel and dispose of it, and then, eventually dismantle the radioactive bits of plant itself. This significantly pulls a lot of value out of the X side of the X/P equation…

Then, there is what I’ve been looking at, which significantly impacts that X value as well, and it is what I call “secondary energy costs”. What are these? In the case of Nuclear Power, there’s a bunch of them. Let’s look at a nuke plant in terms of: Construction, Fuel, Maintenance, Fuel Disposal, and Decomissioning. Each of these are fraught with secondary costs.

Construction
The concrete doesn’t appear from nowhere. It has to be mined. The mining equipment requires energy. There are people who need to do the mining, and they have homes and families and these also require energy. The school where the kids go requires energy. The clothing the miners wear is made in factories thatrun on energy, and are shipped to stores in trucks thatuse energy, and the truck itself is made from metals that are mined by other miners who also have energy requirements. And the mining machines are made in factories that use energy and by people who also have energy needs and schools and hospitals and TV sets. And then there is the construction itself – exotic metals, concrete, rebar, all of these things require energy in their mining, processing, and construction, and each step of the way is a factory using energy, and people using energy to go to work in and live near those factories.

Fuel
The development of nuclear fuels is a hazardous and toxic process, and one that is highly energetic. It takes thousands of tons of unranium, and thousands of centrifuges running flat out for days, and huge factories full of raw and waste materials to make, process, and form the fuel for a nuclear power plant. These factories have thousands of workers, and each of them has families and homes and towns and cars and TV sets all needing energy. Then there is the fuel needed to transport the fuel to the plant, and the energy needed to build the machines that transport and store the fuel.

Maintenance
The nuclear power plant has a crew of people – people who are engineers that keep the place running, grounds keepers keeping it nice looking, management personnel to keep things organised and running, and of course, Mr Burns who owns the plant must be kept in the lifestyle to which he has become eminently accustomed, a cleaning crew that takes out the trash and sweeps up, security personnel, and at least one guy named Homer to nap on the job as the core goes critical…

Still, all these people have homes – Homer has Marge, Lisa, Bart, and Maggie. Homer has to drive to work, and that takes energy. He sucks down a foaming frosty mug of Duff Beer at Moe’s Bar and the beer is transported to the bar, the bar requires energy to be built and maintained and power the neon lights, and Homer needs energy to get to Moe’s, wash his clothes, get his kids to school, perm Marge’s hair, etc.

This is all just part of Homer’s life as a worker at the nuke plant, and each plant has many many Homers, and they all need energy as do all of Homer’s friend’s and acquaintances.

Fuel Disposal
Once the fuel is used up, it must be removed and disposed of, requiring no small amount of energy and effort by Homers who are hired to do this sort of thing, and who also have families and homes and cars.

Decomissioning
When the plant is done, it needs to be dismantled and disposed of, and that is also a highly energetic effort…

This deeper analysis points to an odd conclusion – that ER/EI is a relevant equation, but in a mixed fuel economy, it is functionally impossible to tease out accurate numbers, and even when these numbers are teased out, they may be of limited use. Hence ER/EI may not be the important question.

No matter what we do, we use all the energy we’ve got.

(Just as I typed that line, “Corsair” by Boards of Canada came on the random choice of iTunes… man is that creepy…)

I am not certain, but I am fairly well convinced that true ER/EI is not as crazy as an NP-hard problem, but due to the total inter-relatedness and dynamics of society and energy, I am fairly well convinced that an accurate ER/EI analysis is not practically possible.

This is a BIG problem. Pimentel et al have staked their authority on such analysis, and while my extension of the ER/EI analysis only serves their points that alternative energy systems sch as ethanol have very low ER/EI (and my view punches it well below 1:1) it also points out the deep and impenetrable fog at the edges of such analysis, which can be used by all sorts of people to both credit and discredit any given technology.

While symbolic system can be developed to represent these analyses (Odum et al) even these symbolic systems cave under the complexity of dynamic energy allocations and sourcings.

Example: let’s say Homer drives a 1988 Chrysler Imperial to work, and it gets 15 mpg. Sure, his energy source for driving doesn’t require energy from the nuclear plant, and so that energy input is not counted against X, but the pumping of the gas is, as is the electricity the gas station uses. The food may be delivered to the Springfield Safeway by truck, but the Safeway runs on electricity, and Marge’s time spent shopping there uses some portion of that, and that does count against X, as the food she bys there mostly goes into Homer’s gut. And the Dunkin Donuts cooks its donuts using natgas, but the rest of it operates on electricity, and Homer’s donut consumption is some part of that, and that also counts against X. And then, one day, Homer replaces his gas guzzling Imperial with a plug in Hybrid, and now THAT cuts into X.

I don’t see how these dynamic fluctuations can be properly accounted for in any symbolic quantitative system, especially as these dynamic systems influence each other’s behaviour and output. So, Homer and a jillion other Homers get plug in hybrids. These hybrids are more efficient per watt per mile than a gas engine, so it uses fewer watts per mile travelled. Then one day, Homer figures out that he can lose some weight by riding a bike, but he’s too old and fat to get over some of the hills, so he opts for an electric assist bike, which is even MORE efficient with watts per mile travelled, but is slower.

One plug-in Prius equals dozens, if not hundreds, of electric bikes, so the energy embodied and used by one plug-in Prius is radically less than the energy and material that went into building a 1986 Imperial, and the electric bikes (or even trikes) are even more radically efficient, and embody and use even less than a Prius. However, if Homer sells his Imperial and buys a 1996 Geo Metro, he will double (if not triple) his fuel mileage and rather than demand more minerals from the earth to build a new Prius, he will be re-using the minerals someone else demanded from the earth ten years previously, and, in so doing, will be doubling the use of those materials, rather than have them go to the crusher and be recycled at some future date.

The Metro aside, all these electric bikes being pedalled by the Homers at the Burns Nuclear Power Plant and all the electric bikes pedalled by the friends of all the Homers, and all the electric bikes that get the service employees for all the Homers (Moe at the bar, Apu at the QuickieMart, etc.) are powered by the nuke plant, so it affects the ER/EI of the nuke plant, but certainly less than if they had plug-in Priuses.

You get the picture – calculating the ER/EI of a given energy technology is not an exact science, and that is why I wonder if it isn’t something of a red herring.

Basically, I think the question of ER/EI is critical in a general sense, but I do not believe ER/EI can ever get beyond a general or vague number, due to the dynamism and vagaries of its component structures and subsystems.

I may be an artist, and I may be insane, but I am enough of a scientist to appreciate being wrong. Please prove me so.

Friday, April 21, 2006
Karsner’s Speech

Assistant Secretary of Energy A. Karsner gave a speech that, in my humble estimation, shows just how lost the Bush Administration is – they’re talking out both sides of their mouths and have no credibility. This fellow was sent to talk to Powergen about renewable energy, something (with the exception of wind power) the Bush Admin has repeated cut funding for.

Arghh.

So, I respond to his speech point by point.

Keynote Address by Hon. Alexander Karsner, Asst. Secretary of Energy to Powergen Renewables

[snip quip and warm fuzzies]

It’s wonderful to be here with you in Las Vegas. My wife and I love Las Vegas, which is actually somewhat strange, because neither of us actually gamble, nor do we drink much. Still, it is unique in so many ways and uniquely American by birthright. Carved out of the waterless desert, it has evolved to become a neon, energy-intensive oasis tailored to leisure and whimsy and on-call, 24-7.

And it is one of the single least sustainable cities in the world. Las Vegas is a blight upon the planet.

(snip description of Death Valley and Las Vegas)

We are fortunate to have a very diverse group of friends who enjoy both environs. Yet, from time to time, we hear folks speak disdainfully of those who prefer the great outdoors to the urban nightlife or vice versa. Our view is that we cherish the very coexistence and diversity that this spectacular city and region represent–where some of the most creative works of man are married together with some of the grandest work of creation, because it is emblematic of Enjoying Life, thriving upon Liberty, and the opportunity to Pursue Happiness as one sees fit.

The problem is, Mr Karsner, the friends you know who enjoy the great outdoors and a night under the Milky Way aren’t squandering the resources of the greater southwest region. I do not see replicas of New York and Paris as spectacular or as one of the most creative works of man except in the most depraved way imaginable such a vision of
Las Vegas As Public Art makes the charlatanism of Jeff Koons look like the genius of Leonardo Da Vinci.

I have only held this post for a couple of weeks, and so mercifully, I am happy to report that I have yet to become a bureaucrat!

You can’t become what you already are.

Many of you know me and you know my background and my ambitions; it is similar to your own. My purpose today is to give voice to our mutual aspirations, to share some early perspective on the task ahead, and to explore how we might together make an impact on preserving for future generations those things we hold dearest; those things that are our birthright as Americans: Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

Sorry – that’s not in the constitution. The Constitution lists Life, Liberty, and Property. I learned that in 8th grade Civics. The pursuit of happiness is in the Declaration of Independence, which is not a legally binding document.

Perhaps we take these things for granted, perhaps we do not reflect on them enough.

I think about them daily, and I find them under assault NOT from without, but from within by the Bush Administration itself.

But as I parse the magnitude of our challenge, I am motivated by these principles and the bigger picture.

We are a nation at war.

The war on terror is, by definition, bogus. It’s like a war on Daylight Strategic Bombing. Terror is a method of practicing
aggression. You can’t win a war on terror any more than you can win a war on kindergartners “hitting” each other, and, that said, the war on terror is one the Bush Administration has pretty much given up on prosecuting some time ago, Bush himself has said that he doesn’t put that much energy into trying to find and bring to justice Osama Bin Laden. So, your entire angle on “security” rings false and has no credibility.

We ARE at war, but it is in Iraq, and it was a war of choice – the Bush Administration, of which you are a part, LIED to everyone about the reasons for going to war, and then had the unmitigated temerity to bungle the whole job. Therefore, no quarter is granted to the Bush Administration for this. And for you, as a representative of this administration, to bleat “We’re at War”, is inadmissable, and doesn’t really carry any water any more. At all.

Our earth is warming.

Correct, for once. And that is a fact the Bush Administration has resisted coming around to facing FOR YEARS, wasting precious time. The Bush Administration continues to try to muzzle voices in the government who are trying to warn the public about this looming crisis. And it is also a fact that to end the human contribution to global warming, global agreements and co-ordination will be required, and it is precisely JUST SUCH agreements the Bush Junta has cheerfully ignored, defied, and circumvented since its installation by the Supreme Court in 2001. Again, the President and his circle of lackies, incompetents, cronies, and neocon fascists, have Zero Credibility in this regard, and you, as a representative of said Administration will have to do a LOT more than simply state the obvious to even hope to have a prayer of a chance of acquiring any credibility on the subject.

Carbon emissions and greenhouse gases are impacting air quality and the environment.

And AGAIN, the Bush Administration has continually resisted any legislation to up the mileage requirements on vehicles or reduce pollution at source. Again, you and the Administration you work for, have Zero Credibility.

America is addicted to oil.

And it is an addiction that the Bush Administration has continually exacerbated with idiotic regulations like subsidies for gas guzzling Hummers, and a continued antipathy toward extending and intensifying the CAFE standards.

And so, ironically, even as we find ourselves at the dawn of a new millennium, with numerous indicators of extraordinary economic growth,

Which is part of the problem, not the solution.

record low unemployment,

but with reduced income and wages for those Americans that are not part of the uppermost income brackets.

record home ownership,

combined with record debt and record low savings.

and record rates of productivity,

in a nation with no national health care, and with the least amount of vacation time in the industrialized world.

there remains a seething sense of anxiety in the land.

Geeee, I wonder WHY?

Personally, the unusually heightened sense of concern I felt when I watched those towers fall on that balmy day nearly five years ago has never fully gone away, and I see no sense in suppressing it now.

WTF does 9/11 have to do with any of this?

We are at war.

No, “We” are not. The Bush Administration invaded a comparatively defenceless dictatorship. This was a “war” of choice. The Bush Administration gave up hunting down Osama Bin Laden years ago, and he was the one who attacked us. There should have been a “war” against Al Qaeda, similar to the “war” against the Barbary Coast pirates. Instead, Bush et al invaded Afghanistan but failed to get bin Laden and then committed the USA to a bungled war in Iraq.

Fortunate though we are to live in a nation that can protect and insulate itself from the harshest realities of the battle,
it is not possible for me to grow up in a military family and not be constantly cognizant of our countrymen in harm’s way.

The Moroccan and Pakistani and Muslim people I have known from all parts of the world are amongst the kindest and most hospitable people on earth. They too dream of peace and happiness for their families. But they live daily in apprehension and fear from well-funded, militant, and ignorant fundamentalism that dwells like a cancer in their midst.

WHAT? The Pakistani people labour under a fake republic that is run by a network of strongmen propped up by the government and security apparatus of the United States of America. Pakistan is the nation most responsible for the distribution of nuclear technology to countries least interested in using it in a responsible manner. In fact, A. Khan, the man RESPONSIBLE for selling nuclear technology was PARDONED by the very strongmen that the Bush Administration is backing.

Morroco? Morocco is a de jure constitutional monarchy, with a popularly-elected parliament. The King of Morocco, with vast executive powers, can dissolve government and deploy the military at will, among other amusing responsibilities. Opposition political parties are legal and several have arisen in recent years, but are largely ineffective against the rule of an autocratic KING. Illiteracy sits at 50% and among women it is closer to 90%. I hardly see Morocco as some paragon of democratic virtue or enlightened culture.

No one lives with these realities daily nor understands them more intimately than the President of the United States.

I sincerely doubt George Bush could find Morocco on a MAP with both hands, a flashlight, and a page full of hints and brightly coloured circles in North Africa, much less understand the realities of life as an illiterate testosterone poisoned meatheaded thug. On second thought, maybe he could…

It is of course a great personal honor for me and my family that he chose to select a renewable energy developer for this post, but have no doubt – it is a tribute to this great community of risk-takers, doers and dreamers, of which I am proud to be a member.

DUDE: face facts – you are window-dressing. You’re a distraction – you’re the waving hand of the prestidigitator keeping the air occupied while the other hand of the administration continues its insane and criminal behaviour of imperialism and kleptocracy.

Both the President and Secretary Bodman recognize that we cannot afford to divorce science from commerce; innovation from entrepreneurship.

But he has proven time and time again that he IS willing to divorce science from public policy, education, and common sense if it wins him political points with the delusional morons that constitute his base as “the religious right”.

Neither carefully crafted mandates, regulatory inducements, nor research alone can deliver to us the goals for which the Department of Energy was originally established.

But carefully crafted mandates, regulatory inducements, AND research CAN deliver the following:

1. An automobile fleet that gets, AT A MINIMUM, 60 miles per gallon, with existing technology.
2. Vast subsidies for the adoption of solar panels on private homes and wind turbines on farms.
3. Decentralization of energy production (see #2)
4. Develop an American designed/based/manufactured sustainable energy industry
5. Deincentivise reproduction – i.e., make it expensive to have children
6. Develop IFR nuclear reactors to rid the planet of nuclear power and nuclear fuel while generating electricity.
7. Make it illegal to drive a gas guzzling tank as a private passenger vehicle – there is no excuse for the Hummer.
8. Subsidise the hyperinsulation of homes.
9. Incentivise local organic agriculture and permaculture.

The list of what carefully crafted mandates, regulatory inducements, and research can deliver is long and intense. This kind of “Government Can’t Work” Attitude is typical of the Bush Administration who have done their very best to prove their point that government can’t work, by making sure it doesn’t. The depressing madness and disaster that surrounded the response to Hurricane Katrina and the ongoing fiasco in Iraq are just two of the more obvious proofs of my point.

As the legacy of great American energy pioneers like Franklin and Edison and Einstein would dictate, “Necessity is the Mother of Invention.” Combining scientific inquiry with commercial creativity remains the most powerful force for transformational change available to address the substantial needs with which we are confronted.

Ummmm, Einstein did all his important work in Germany. Otherwise, the point is a Cliché, followed by a recognition of the obvious.

The brilliant people with whom I am privileged to work beside at the Department of Energy know these urgent needs inspire my rallying cry to unite folks inside Washington and around the country; inside America, and around the world.

More flag waving balderdash.

We must take our clean energy technologies and replicate, proliferate, and accelerate. There is no time to waste and no time for small thinking. We know where these train tracks are heading and we know the destination we must reach. The only question is the rate of speed we are moving and what will be the ultimate cost of the ticket?

No, the question is MONEY. Who’s getting it, and how much.

According to here:

http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=23074

The FY06 budget request for the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) energy efficiency and renewable energy (EE/RE) programs envisions reductions totaling nearly $50 million – an overall cut of roughly 4 percent. This includes a 6 percent cut in Distributed Energy programs ($60,416 to $56,629); an 8 percent cut in the Geothermal Energy program ($25,270 to $23,299); an 18 percent cut in the Biomass/Biofuels program ($88,099 to $72,164); and a 90 percent cut in the Hydropower program ($4,862 to $500).

In fact, the Bush budget proposes to phase out DOE’s hydropower program altogether and all support for the Advanced Hydropower Turbine, a joint program between DOE and the hydropower industry exploring fish-friendlier turbines, just at the time when full scale testing is about to begin at multiple locales.

Adding insult to injury for at least some of these programs, the cuts come on top of earlier reductions. The geothermal program, for example, had been funded at $28.4 million in FY03 and steadily reduced since then.

Less severely impacted is DOE’s solar R&D budget which faces a reduction of only 1.3 percent, from $85.07 million in FY 05 to $83.95 million in FY 06. The solar industry has sought to put a positive spin on its reduction calling the budget request “essentially status quo funding” while applauding a “promising new initiative to advance the development of crystalline silicon solar power.”

Overall, among DOE’s core renewable energy programs, only wind energy is proposed for an increase – 3.4 million (from $40.8 million to $44.2 million), a relatively large expansion of nearly 9 percent.

Which only goes to prove that in point of fact, the only renewable sector that saw improved funding was Wind, and this only serves to further demonstrate just how antipathic and hostile the Bush Junta is to Renewable Energy.

The way I see it, the people in this Hall are the locomotives of change and the role of government is to clear the way, get the rocks off the rails, and ensure maximum velocity. We have an obligation to steward both hardware AND policy.

And you’re NOT going to even be able to do THAT if you

A: continue to cut funding to renewable energy
B: spend hundreds of billions of dollars a year on a pointless war in Iraq
C: spend even more hundreds of billions of dollars propping up a global empire of military bases, CIA gulags, and client thug governments.
D: consistently and continuously reduce the tax burden of the wealthy.

Policy with predictability, transparency, longevity; policy conducive to capital formation that continuously cultivates market expansion of clean, green, domestic sources of power generation and fuels for transportation. All the while we must be relentless in attacking inefficiency and waste for its insidious and undermining impact on our national aspirations.

Inefficiency and WASTE? Coming from an administration that VOLUTARILY invaded Iraq and is now pissing away hundreds of billions of dollars on a nonsensical imperialist occupation? The Bush Administration is a complete disaster, and it has no credibility whatsoever. For the administration (and the Republican Party it runs) to prattle on about ineffiency and waste, all while building multimillion dollar bridges to nowhere and wasting billions of dollars a day on a foolish and horrible war in Iraq is the epitome of duplicitous double-dealing and hypocrisy.

We must do these things and more, at the fastest possible rate of market penetration, and government must be both realistic and relevant in it role. In short, we owe it to you, the leaders in the private markets, to update and redefine ourselves. We cannot perpetuate the delusion that government is leading the markets; nor should we distract ourselves with the unrealistic and ineffective ambitions of a command and control economy.

Government MUST lead the markets, because the markets are not structured to do the job. And while I am not a fan of Command/Control economy, during WW2 it DID propel the USA and the Soviet Unions into being the most powerful military nations ever seen. The USA abandoned direct command and control after WW2, and replaced it with a rapacious imperialist military/industrial complex, which was clearly such a vast improvement…

(snip rhetorical question)

It is our objective at the Department of Energy that we should increasingly become more agile, more attuned, more iterative and catalytic. In doing so, we can exert leadership that clearly seeks achievable goals, is unafraid to enter the fray, and continuously “moves the scrum” down the field.

Fine, then legalise and subsidise abortion everywhere for everyone. Subsidise birth control. Tax families with more than 2 children. Reduce or even ration consumption of energy and resources. Energy is’t “just Energy”. Energy consumption is part of the broader problem of overpopulation.

That is why I am proud to embrace Phase II, not merely as a milestone, but as a battle plan by which we can achieve great things together.

Again, not as long as the Bush Junta remains in power.

Maximizing energy efficiency and renewable energy IS the domestic epicenter in the War on Terror and it is imperative that we maximize the partnerships between the public and private sectors in new and creative ways with a sense of seriousness, national purpose and the urgency the situation merits.

Which means MONEY. Spending MONEY on the RIGHT STUFF. Spending money on an idiotic war in the middle east is spending money on the WRONG STUFF. Spending money on subsidizing rooftop solar panels and farm fields of wind turbines is spending money on the RIGHT STUFF.

The president and his cronies would rather line their pockets, and the pockets of their shareholders, by pissing away billions of borrowed dollars in Iraq. Your entire budget is a tiny fraction of what this war costs. In this world, importance is measured by dollars. Where the money goes is what is important. Your programs are not important to the Bush Administration. They do not feel you urgency, and never will.

(snip something not directed to me)

That is why last week, when I was in Detroit with the Secretary, he told the auto industry in no uncertain terms, “More needs to be done.” We need to have more flex fuel vehicles on the market of ALL vehicle types and classes and we need to have them available from all manufacturers who serve the US market. “We must continue to encourage the exponential expansion in the supply of ethanol available.”

Ethanol? WTF? How about 60 mpg diesel cars? How about an outright ban on private passenger vehicles over 4000lbs? Electric commuter vehicles? Expansion of telecommuting? Increased funding for public transport? Ethanol isn’t going to save us, or the car industry. Eliminating the need to drive is more important than what you drive, and what you drive is more important (for now) than what fuel it uses.

When the President of the United States personally visits a solar manufacturing facility to announce millions of dollars in increased funding aimed at changing “the way we power homes and lead our lives” you can be assured he understands you.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! See the quote above which shows that he actually has REDUCED funding for critical research, and has only increased funding for wind power. If it wasn’t for the Danes and the Germans shaming him, he probably would have cut that too… And the energy that is produced in our petroleum society is being wasted on a pointless cycle of consumption – it’s Cheney’s “non-negotiable” American Lifestyle ITSELF that’s destroying the planet. And no amount of handwaving is going to change that.

When the President personally takes interest in the development cycle of battery storage for plug-in hybrids and electric vehicles, he clearly seeks to inspire a bigger picture.

Then why does he CUT THE FUNDING for alternative energy research? HMMMM?

When President Bush declares that wind power could provide up to 20% of our national generation capacity, you can be certain his vision is both exciting and real.

We need it to do better than 20%. WAY better than 20%.

(snip blather and flag waving nonsense)

All this speech demonstrated is the delusional state of mind that inhabits the powers that be. NOTHING will get done in the USA until the Bush Junta is removed from office. Period.

We’re in a scary holding pattern. Much of the rest of the world is far ahead of us on all of these points – from localized farming to high technology wind power. The Bush Administration continues to fund military adventures over everything else, and if continued unabated, will only serve to bankrupt the US Treasury and scuttle the hopes and dreams of a nation.

Wednesday, February 01, 2006
Eating, Pooping, Fighting and Fucking

A few nights ago, I met some very nice people at an art opening, and we got to talking about energy, culture, etc. I wrote an email to a few of them, and I thought it was interesting and would make a good Early-Warning post.

So, I edited out the personal chunks and re-wrote other sections, and came up with the following. Lately I’ve been sick with the Devil Bug, and my head is full of snot. As a consequence, I’ve been sleeping a lot and taking it easy.

First, I should point out there is a HUGE debate raging in the energy community between the Nihilists and the Cornicopians. The Nihilists are of the opinion that

“We’re all fucking doomed – try what you will you foolish mortals!!! IT WILL BE FOR NAUGHT AND YOU WILL ALL DIE!!!!”

This is occasionally followed by the cynical chuckle of true despair that sounds something like “Muuuwahahahahaaaa…”

Then there are the Cornucopians. They are often referred to as “idiots”. They actually aren’t idiots – they just have greater levels of confidence in certain factors and data than the Nihilist think is rational and many of the rest of us think is justified.

Then there’s the “rest of us”. A diverse mix of people, of course, and rather than try to distill such a crowd into components, I’ll describe my own position, which runs like this:

The Nihilists are correct in one sense. We are all completely doomed *IF WE DO NOTHING*. If we do a little, it will postpone the disaster, but won’t avert it. If we do a lot we can cushion the downslope and evolve our society into a depopulated and sustainable system. If we do everything we can, we can not only evolve into that “good place” we can do it with relatively little loss of life.

The Cornucopians do have a few good points – mostly centered around technology. The Cornucopian technology fixes can certainly help avert a die off.

The problem boils down to one of population. If we don’t reduce our birth rate immediately, we are looking at an uncontrolled and violent die off, and possible extinction. I’m not saying “No More Babies, period” but that they need to be fewer in number, and much better cared for when they appear. With reduced population, there will be reduced pressure on the planet’s resources. Combined with sustainable practices (recycling technologies, permaculture farming, etc.) the future of the species is much brighter than the dark night envisioned by the Nihilists. But if we continue to crowd the planet with more and more people, the resources will give out, and result in massive warfare over the scraps. Not one, but several (small) nuclear wars would easily result.

Personally, I don’t want to see the world go down the path of trading nuclear tipped insults, massive starvation, or freezing to death in the winter on a ruined deforested planet.

The long term key is demographic. The short term key is culture and technology.

We can do this, but it will take enormous effort. I have come to the conclusion that the people who will matter the most to the species will prove to be those people born between 1945 and 2010. It is up to the older boomers (1945 – 55) to set the course as they settle into positions of power. It is up to the younger boomers (1955 – 1965) to agitate and do the planning and innovating. They are young enough and smart enough to realise it, and have sufficient numbers to make movements in the markets – their children are older and can focus on these issues with the clarity borne of experience. The generations of 1965 – 75 and 75 – 85 will end up doing the heavy lifting. They will get it in the neck, as they will be in the prime of their lives as the oil system peaks out in the 2010’s. The children of the 1990s will be crucial as they will be the parents of the first post-petroleum generation. This is a position of such crucial importance, I can’t emphasize it enough – their victories and failures will loom large on their children and grandchildren. Also, the children of the 1990s will have the greatest pressure on them to innovate and organise the new society. By their adulthood in the 2020s, the first wave of boomers will begin dying in great numbers, soon followed by the late boomers. The Children born in the 2000s (children of people born in the 70s and 80s) will be the last petroleum generation and will be pivotal in the transition. It is of extra-ordinary importance that they be raised with the knowledge and impetus to continue building the new sustainable civilisation.

People born after 2010 will simply have to cope with what I call the “Peak Generations” deal them. If the Peak Generations can come through and do the right thing, step up to the plate and set civilisation along a path of permacultural sustainability and graceful depopulation, then those born at and after the oil peak will will not curse their memory for having squandered the world, but will revere the Peak Generations for having had the wisdom and intelligence to look forward and help rather than stand around, do nothing, and hinder the human project.

Many Nihilists feel we are slaves to our basest natures. They are probably right, but I would submit that we are not chattel slaves – we are wage slaves! And as wage slaves to our basest natures, we have the ability in our leisure time to do something other than eat, poop, fight and fuck. It is this time we spend not exercising our base instincts that allows us to plan and culturally blunt our base instincts.

There is distinct pleasures to be had from our base instincts and processes: food is a delight when well prepared and shared with love. And after a big meal, a good healthy crap is a distinct (if smelly) pleasure. Fighting can be good, especially when the fight is one of principle and wisdom against ignorance and stupidity, and is fought on the battlefield of ideas. Nothing can oppose the force of millions of people peacefully united behind the ideas of justice and freedom. And the extra-ordinary pleasures of good sex is not to be underestimated, especially, if not most of all, when it is in the context of a deep, loving, and caring relationship.

However: each of these pleasures comes with a series responsibilities. The food comes with the responsibility to not waste the food left over, and for food to be produced in a sustainable and healthy manner for not only the people eating it, but for the soil and environment that produced it.

And the good healthy crap that follows a good meal, we must realise that our bodily waste is a very valuable resource. Which is why we must reduce our consumption of hormones, chemicals, and medicines – it all comes out in our wastes to poison the earth and it endangers other creatures. We will need our (“clean”) waste in order to fertilise our fields.

The fighting must continue as long as there is injustice and exploitation in this world, as long as people are denied the simplest freedoms, the fight must continue. However, the fight must be along the lines envisioned by Ghandi and Martin Luther King: it must be a fight of peaceful masses of people moving and demanding justice and freedom. This requires the same level of solidarity one would find in any military unit – the forces of hate and violence will seek to divide and conquer the forces of good and progress and provoke them into violent confrontation. The movements must maintain solidarity and peace, but must also not compromise either their ideals or integrity, even as their comrades are blown to bits or beaten to bloody pulps. It is from this solidarity that the communities of the sustainable future will evolve.

And the fucking must continue, for reasons too obvious to mention. However, as sex is the source of the demographic problem that is essential to our predicament, on the socio-political front, we need to greatly expand birth control and voluntary sterilisation programs. I would recommend that birth control methods be heavily subsidised by the .gov and sterilisation procedures (vasectomies and tubal ligations) be free of charge. This would reduce pregnancy and the transmission of diseases – a net gain in both directions. But beyond the policy wonkery: sex is a good thing, and I recommend it…

So, in each case, we can see how even our “basest instincts” can be routed into constructive and positive directions that will lead to the development of the civilisation we need: a non-petroleum based sustainable, permacultural depopulated world civilisation of 500 million souls living full, rich, and colourful lives slowly evolving into homo futuris – the human of the future.