We are entering the stage where ideology and education about sustainability and living within carrying capacity will be augmented by the reality of identifiable consequences of our overshoot. External consequences like the peaking and decline of below ground energy and commodity resources, above ground environmental degradation of our climate, soils, fisheries and climate will have a profound effect on our culture.
2009 is the year when we start to feel it.
Joined: Dec 27, 2004 Posts: 13876 Location: naive idiot fantasy world
Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 12:13 pm Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
Our favorite restaurant in the town near here is operating at a loss because of food and fuel costs. I don't know how long they expect to be able to do this. The owner said they won't raise their prices because it costs $5000 to print new menus. _________________ "...powerdown so soft and fluffy you'll think you're living in a pillow." - jboogy
Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 12:15 pm Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
Byron100 wrote:
And Monte, you work in the construction field? Hope you have alternate plans to put into place, as you will likely not be doing contractor work for very much longer.
Which is why I do not build new houses. I only remodel existing homes with emphasis on sustainable, energy efficient building techniques. I have lots of work, but many contractors here are already *** up. _________________ A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
Live in Arizona? Check out: http://sustainablearizona.org and read my blog.
Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 12:18 pm Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
mos6507 wrote:
MonteQuest wrote:
Take my business as a "general contractor". I have already pared down my gasoline use to "core consumption."
It's not your job to hide your overhead from your clients. Raise your rates. Everyone's in the same boat. Same deal with truckers and the airlines.
Uhuh. The best strategy, if at all possible, is to absorb as much of the extra cost as possible. Those who have positioned themselves in this way, are the ones most likely to survive. The future will be hyper competetive, from a pricing stand point, as work of all types dries up.
Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 12:22 pm Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
MattS wrote:
As crude production declines, and if efficiencies and conservation drive the exact same amount of demand decline, effectively nothing has changed, years in ther future.
So, you posit that we can find enough energy in conservation and effcincy gains to not only offset decline, but to allow for growth?
At the current 5.2% existing field decline rate and the conservative 2% growth in demand, we need 7.2% gains each year forever. That's a 50% reduction in energy use in less than 10 years just to stay even.
Not going to happen by design.
Quote:
Its got precedent from the artificial drops in supplies a few decades ago which didn't trigger depopulation, war, pestilence or zombies, which strikes me as a good thing?
_________________ A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
Live in Arizona? Check out: http://sustainablearizona.org and read my blog.
Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 12:27 pm Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
MattS wrote:
If thats not true on an individual basis, why would it be true at any larger scale?
Think about it. Your conservation is someone elses's livelyhood. _________________ A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
Live in Arizona? Check out: http://sustainablearizona.org and read my blog.
Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 12:31 pm Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
threadbear wrote:
Uhuh. The best strategy, if at all possible, is to absorb as much of the extra cost as possible. Those who have positioned themselves in this way, are the ones most likely to survive. The future will be hyper competetive, from a pricing stand point, as work of all types dries up.
Exactly. I charge $40/hour which is $25/hr under most general contractors in my area.
I can do this because I am debt free and all my equipment is paid for.
Part of powering down is being willing to work for less wages. _________________ A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
Live in Arizona? Check out: http://sustainablearizona.org and read my blog.
Joined: Nov 25, 2006 Posts: 1616 Location: New Jersey
Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 12:52 pm Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
MonteQuest wrote:
Powering down = a reduction in the standard of living.
Which in many cases may well mean going from a culture of quantity to a culture of quality. It may end up a better world as we return to simpler, healthier and more community oriented lifestyles.
That sounds like an increase in quality of life. Though most won't see it as such.
Joined: Nov 25, 2006 Posts: 1616 Location: New Jersey
Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 12:57 pm Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
Ludi wrote:
Our favorite restaurant in the town near here is operating at a loss because of food and fuel costs. I don't know how long they expect to be able to do this. The owner said they won't raise their prices because it costs $5000 to print new menus.
Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 1:13 pm Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
MonteQuest wrote:
What did I cut out? Driving to lunch.
My business dictates how much gasoline I use, not me. While many people will cut "driving to lunch" uses from their gasoline budgets, I suspect "core consumption" to be most of their use.
I don't believe we're going to see or engage in doing what we do now, only less.
I believe that the changes we will undergo will be a paradigm shift.
So, it won't be simply less development, done more modestly. I think it's going to be NO development.
Same goes with most/all other industries which don't contribute to the ABC's of life and do so without requiring huge inputs of resources to do that.
And I agree with you, it won't take very much of that to knock the economic choo-choo right of its tracks.
There's going to be a LOT of crying going on...
especially since we whiffed right through any opportunity to start making changes decades ago.
if we had prioritized less consumption, more mass transit, a wholesale change in how cities are set up, how buildings are constructed, and on and on, we'd be in a much sweeter position with respect to stepping off oil and onto using current sunlight as a basis for what we do and how we do it.
What I envision is like that scene in Sid and Nancy, where they couldn't get a fix, and were in the phone booth screaming their brains out through withdrawal pains.
Joined: Nov 06, 2007 Posts: 857 Location: Illinois
Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 1:25 pm Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
MonteQuest wrote:
Without a major upheaval in society with regards to how we do things, just have far can we pare down and keep things a afloat?
Take my business as a "general contractor". I have already pared down my gasoline use to "core consumption."
What did I cut out? Driving to lunch.
My business dictates how much gasoline I use, not me. While many people will cut "driving to lunch" uses from their gasoline budgets, I suspect "core consumption" to be most of their use.
Say what? 90%
My point is, I don't think demand destruction is going to go very far without causing an economic implosion.
We are more dependent upon the car, A/C and toasty warm winter mornings than ever before.
And the Chinese have big round smiling faces at the mere thought of it.
Proportion of Trips by Purpose
Over 82% of household driving is non-work related. There appears to be a lot less "core consumption" in American driving habits than your post would suggest. _________________ The oil barrel is half-full.
Joined: Sep 08, 2005 Posts: 846 Location: Atlanta, GA
Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 2:07 pm Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
MonteQuest wrote:
Kingcoal wrote:
Powering down = employment down.
Powering down = a reduction in the standard of living.
Which in many cases may well mean going from a culture of quantity to a culture of quality. It may end up a better world as we return to simpler, healthier and more community oriented lifestyles.
And rather than lay people off, cut wages so everyone can stay working.
Get machine jobs back to people. The decades to come will see many things that are now done by machines handed back over to human beings, for the eminently pragmatic reason that it will again be cheaper to feed, house, clothe, and train a human being to do those things than it will be to make, fuel, and maintain a machine to do them.
+1 on this one.
This leads to the question of how to manage this sort of transition. How do you move millions of former service workers over to doing "machine" jobs? Is it possible to force the illegals out of the labor pool so our own unemployed can have at least some work available to them? So many questions, so little time left...
Then again, as most of us know, that things won't really change until the boom is lowered upon us. Just kinda how it is... _________________ Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide...
...and the meek shall inherit the Earth!
Joined: Sep 08, 2005 Posts: 846 Location: Atlanta, GA
Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 2:15 pm Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
MonteQuest wrote:
Byron100 wrote:
And Monte, you work in the construction field? Hope you have alternate plans to put into place, as you will likely not be doing contractor work for very much longer.
Which is why I do not build new houses. I only remodel existing homes with emphasis on sustainable, energy efficient building techniques. I have lots of work, but many contractors here are already *** up.
Good show. Looks like you'll have work longer than I may have thought.
Your strategy of working for lower wages is a good one, IMO. Last man standing sort of thing. Let's just hope that some ex-contractors don't get too desperate in the future, offering to work for a pittance, etc. _________________ Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide...
...and the meek shall inherit the Earth!
Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 2:25 pm Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
kublikhan wrote:
Over 82% of household driving is non-work related. There appears to be a lot less "core consumption" in American driving habits than your post would suggest.
I agree and still see many examples of "non-work" related consumption occurring.
Core consumption depends on the individual. Some people are already at core consumption levels, while others have a lot of spare capacity.
Take my neighbors for example. At least two of them drive one half block to a park where they sit on a bench and let their dog run around for a while. Then they get back in the car and drive one half block back home. Then there are the lead-footed SUV driving neighbors that drive as if oil were going out of style. This suggests to me that these people think fuel prices are still way too cheap.
One small bit of information I came across when researching Jevon's Paradox, et al, was that while the oil supply grew by a factor of 4, thermodynamic efficiency grew by a factor of 12. I will need to dig up this reference again, but it suggests that much of the economic growth we attribute to oil is largely due to increases in efficiency rather than supply.
Since this occurred during the era of cheap oil it also suggests that a significant margin may still exist for further increases in conservation and efficiency.
Not that I am suggesting that any of this is a solution.
Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 3:15 pm Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
kublikhan wrote:
Over 82% of household driving is non-work related. There appears to be a lot less "core consumption" in American driving habits than your post would suggest.
So? I never said core consumption was just work-related or car related for that matter. Not much we can't do about work-related consumption after the easy fruit is picked. The question is, how much of that 82% remaining is core consumption?
Especially, the 44.6% family/personal business.
Then on to the other uses of per capita energy that make up core consumption, heating oil, coal, NG, propane, wood, etc. _________________ A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
Live in Arizona? Check out: http://sustainablearizona.org and read my blog.
Last edited by MonteQuest on Thu Jul 10, 2008 3:24 pm; edited 1 time in total
Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 3:20 pm Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
tsakach wrote:
One small bit of information I came across when researching Jevon's Paradox, et al, was that while the oil supply grew by a factor of 4, thermodynamic efficiency grew by a factor of 12. I will need to dig up this reference again, but it suggests that much of the economic growth we attribute to oil is largely due to increases in efficiency rather than supply.
Post that in the Energy and the Mother of Invention thread. There is a heated debate about just that going on there. _________________ A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
Live in Arizona? Check out: http://sustainablearizona.org and read my blog.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
