I was intrigued coming across a book called $20 Per Gallon: How the Inevitable Rise in the Price of Gasoline Will Change Our Lives for the Better in one of the bargain price book catalogs I peruse, and I thought since it was especially cheap I would give it a read.
The idea of oil, beyond the woes at the pump, and how it underpins our lives is something that has interested me for about a year now since I read James Howard Kunstler's The Long Emergency. What I've been reading, even beyond Kunstler, showcases a planet that is reaching its natural resource limits, not just oil but also food, freshwater and energy in general. How we deal with this problem, that of increasing demand meeting natural resources that are most assuredly not increasing, will define how humanity persists into the future. Will we go forward with, as Kunstler calls it "the project of civilization" or will we fall back into some sort of dark age of unknown duration?
At first, it was almost refreshing to see someone talking about the future of oil who was not only not doom-and-gloom but positively optimistic about our future. Steiner is that person. The steady and sustained increase in oil prices will make us healthier, the skies cleaner as we all embrace living close together with many new mass transportation projects, like rail. The airline industries, Wal-Mart and other big-box retailers, and most car companies will be dead...but we'll come to love living a walkable distance from work, school and the grocery store, and our food will be grown close and healthier. Sounds great, right? However, as much as I wish that this quasi-utopian future were true, I think Steiner leaves a lot out and fails to connect several dots that would paint a picture far less rosy than he imagines it.
Oil is more than just transportation, it's the food we eat. Our pesticides, fertilizers and other agricultural chemicals are largely fossil fuel-based, whether oil or natural gas, and we farm on a massive scale with great combine tractors and all manner of assorted machines, all of which run on oil. In fairness, he does discuss at some length the fact that local farmers will have to rise up to meet food demand as rising gas prices deny major agricultural companies the advantage they once had. But even small farmers use machines, powered by gas or diesel, to operate. Those costs aren't going away just because they operate on a smaller scale. Certainly some small farmers, like Gene Logsdon, don't use large tractors for the simple reason that it isn't profitable to do so on a small scale. He prefers animal power (his book The Contrary Farmer is one that I recommend). I am hopeful that we can make a transition to better farming practices, and expensive gasoline might just be the thing to force it. But we need to start making that switch now.
Steiner's vision of what's ahead depends on a rise in prices that is sustained and, most importantly, gradual. This is not a sure bet. He notes that about 67% of our oil is imported. Canada and Mexico are our biggest suppliers, but Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and Russia are major players. The demand for oil from China borders our own, as does India. Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and China heavily subsidize oil for their own populace, in no small part to keep them complacent. Tell me then, which is more likely when their sources of oil start to run out; will they stop exporting to keep their populace happy with cheap oil or will they continue exporting just to make us happy and risk infuriating their own people?
The question for me is not whether gas prices will rise, but will we even have any at all. $20 Per Gallon assumes that, whatever the price, gas will still be available for purchase. I do not think that is a sure bet, based on the fact of our heavy dependence on foreign imports. When it comes right down to it, I prefer Kunstler's take on the future of oil than Steiner's just for the fact that the former is more realistic than the latter. I would hasten to add that Steiner's conclusions are probably right in general; we will live closer together with many fewer cars and locally grown food. But they aren't right for the reasons he thinks they'll be, and I certainly don't look for a renaissance in rail.
What both authors do agree on is that we won't be seeing cheap gas anymore, but high prices are here to stay and will only get more expensive. Our future in fifty years will be quite different, but just what that future will look like is up for debate.
The idea of oil, beyond the woes at the pump, and how it underpins our lives is something that has interested me for about a year now since I read James Howard Kunstler's The Long Emergency. What I've been reading, even beyond Kunstler, showcases a planet that is reaching its natural resource limits, not just oil but also food, freshwater and energy in general. How we deal with this problem, that of increasing demand meeting natural resources that are most assuredly not increasing, will define how humanity persists into the future. Will we go forward with, as Kunstler calls it "the project of civilization" or will we fall back into some sort of dark age of unknown duration?
At first, it was almost refreshing to see someone talking about the future of oil who was not only not doom-and-gloom but positively optimistic about our future. Steiner is that person. The steady and sustained increase in oil prices will make us healthier, the skies cleaner as we all embrace living close together with many new mass transportation projects, like rail. The airline industries, Wal-Mart and other big-box retailers, and most car companies will be dead...but we'll come to love living a walkable distance from work, school and the grocery store, and our food will be grown close and healthier. Sounds great, right? However, as much as I wish that this quasi-utopian future were true, I think Steiner leaves a lot out and fails to connect several dots that would paint a picture far less rosy than he imagines it.
Oil is more than just transportation, it's the food we eat. Our pesticides, fertilizers and other agricultural chemicals are largely fossil fuel-based, whether oil or natural gas, and we farm on a massive scale with great combine tractors and all manner of assorted machines, all of which run on oil. In fairness, he does discuss at some length the fact that local farmers will have to rise up to meet food demand as rising gas prices deny major agricultural companies the advantage they once had. But even small farmers use machines, powered by gas or diesel, to operate. Those costs aren't going away just because they operate on a smaller scale. Certainly some small farmers, like Gene Logsdon, don't use large tractors for the simple reason that it isn't profitable to do so on a small scale. He prefers animal power (his book The Contrary Farmer is one that I recommend). I am hopeful that we can make a transition to better farming practices, and expensive gasoline might just be the thing to force it. But we need to start making that switch now.
Steiner's vision of what's ahead depends on a rise in prices that is sustained and, most importantly, gradual. This is not a sure bet. He notes that about 67% of our oil is imported. Canada and Mexico are our biggest suppliers, but Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and Russia are major players. The demand for oil from China borders our own, as does India. Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and China heavily subsidize oil for their own populace, in no small part to keep them complacent. Tell me then, which is more likely when their sources of oil start to run out; will they stop exporting to keep their populace happy with cheap oil or will they continue exporting just to make us happy and risk infuriating their own people?
The question for me is not whether gas prices will rise, but will we even have any at all. $20 Per Gallon assumes that, whatever the price, gas will still be available for purchase. I do not think that is a sure bet, based on the fact of our heavy dependence on foreign imports. When it comes right down to it, I prefer Kunstler's take on the future of oil than Steiner's just for the fact that the former is more realistic than the latter. I would hasten to add that Steiner's conclusions are probably right in general; we will live closer together with many fewer cars and locally grown food. But they aren't right for the reasons he thinks they'll be, and I certainly don't look for a renaissance in rail.
What both authors do agree on is that we won't be seeing cheap gas anymore, but high prices are here to stay and will only get more expensive. Our future in fifty years will be quite different, but just what that future will look like is up for debate.
Comments
Post a Comment