pstarr wrote:To reiterate: it makes no sense to deliver gasoline so folks must continue to drive their automobiles to the gas station .
If people are commuting, of course they are shopping along the commute, in fact, because gas has been so cheap they've killed off the little stores and now must shop at the big store. But I don't commute, do you? Lots of people don't commute or they use transit, so a small local store with a wide/shallow selection, very high turnover, low overhead (and of course a location other than back of a 20 acre asphalt desert) is a great solution to high gasoline price. Dollar General is sorta the idea - their profit is way up btw..
To repeat myself pete, the gas station is 5 miles away, the big box store is 30. Obviously I live "out" but non-commuters in the suburbs 20 miles from the mall are in exactly the same situation.
While it makes sense to home deliver low-weight/high-value items like gold coins and Ipad's, lettuce and gasoline not so much.
I bought some drip line parts and screen print supplies and DW bought some party favors just this week online. Not expensive items but easier/cheaper to find the selection online than drive to and all around the big town.
Oh, and did I mention I didn't say anything about gasoline delivery? That's your strawman. So, not surprisingly, you win that argument hands down. The home gasoline delivery idea is a real stinker!
I don't see Armageddon, but I also don't see 'solutions.' Seven years here at PO.com, and a decade of escalating petroleum prices have yet to reveal evidence for meaningful implementation of any thing remotely like a 'solution'. No trends for electrification of transport, no large-scale conversion to alt. fuels (corn is an additive, not primary fuel).
You're talking about solutions as in
substitutes for oil-fired BAU - there is no
substitute for cheap oil but there are lots of replacements.
US miles per capita is down 8% since '06. Whatever those capitas are doing they haven't died off by driving 8% less.
Montequest used to rail about what he called 'solutions in isolation.'
And he meant the same thing as you,
substitutions in isolation. There is no substitute but that doesn't meant there is no alternative. Walking is a replacement for driving, though not a substitute, it is an replacement, an alternative. It achieves the roughly the same basic goal although obviously falls short in many side benefits but such is the situation.
Without an abundant supply of inexpensive, accessible, free-flowing, light, sweet crude the United States of Suburbia is in for a dilly of ride. down.
Yes, I agree. BAU won't continue beyond expensive oil, any attempt to substitute will fall short.
We have a 'whole-systems' predicament. There are no solutions because there are no problems. Mankind has developed its our own ecology around petroleum.
I understand that is your current talking point and to the extent that there is no equivalent substitute for cheap oil I agree. But again:
It's only a predicament if its predicated on BAU.
Walking to the local dollar store for a head of lettuce to eat in front of the work-screen at home is not a substitute for cheap oil, it's a replacement.
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)