Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

If We All Started Driving Priuses, We'd Consume More Energy Than Ever Before

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
marmar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 08:47 AM
Original message
If We All Started Driving Priuses, We'd Consume More Energy Than Ever Before
from Public Affairs Books, via AlterNet:




If We All Started Driving Priuses, We'd Consume More Energy Than Ever Before

By Robert Bryce, Public Affairs Books. Posted May 10, 2008.

While energy efficiency is laudable, history shows that it leads to people consuming more energy.



The following is an excerpt from Robert Bryce's new book "Gusher of Lies" (Public Affairs Books, 2008). It first appeared in the Texas Observer.


From 1859, when Colonel Drake discovered oil in Pennsylvania, through 1973, the U.S. was the dominant player in the global energy business. For much of that time, America was both the dominant producer and dominant consumer of oil and gas on the planet.

That dominance extended into technology, finance, transportation, and refining. When it came to developing oil reserves and getting those reserves into the marketplace, the U.S. had no serious rivals. American drill bits, like those made by Hughes Tool Co., bored the holes. American companies, like Gulf Oil, or Standard Oil of New Jersey, did the seismic work, managed the production, built the pipelines, and did the refining. The drilling work was done by companies like Sedco. The drilling technology was developed by outfits like Halliburton. The bridges, or dams, or cities needed to support the cities that were created by the new oil wealth were built by Halliburton's subsidiary Brown & Root, or by American engineering giants like Bechtel. Texas-based law firms like Baker Botts or Vinson & Elkins handled much of the legal work. And all the while, the prolific oil fields in Texas, Oklahoma, and other states allowed the U.S. to effectively set the global price of crude.

Those days are gone.

A half century ago, American-based energy companies pumped about 45 percent of all the oil produced overseas. Today, that percentage is about 10 percent. Out of the top 20 oil-producing companies on the planet, 14 are national oil companies like Saudi Aramco or the National Iranian Oil Company. Furthermore, the national oil companies now control about 77 percent of the world's proven oil reserves. The international oil companies control less than 10 percent.

American energy companies are still big players in the global market, but they are no longer the dominant players. Instead of dictating terms, American energy companies and other international energy companies must now court the national oil companies who sit atop the vast majority of the world's remaining oil and gas deposits. That means that state-controlled outfits like Saudi Aramco, Russia's Gazprom and Venezuela's Petrleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), are, in many cases, able to dictate the rules by which the major oil companies must play.

At the same time that the big oil companies are losing their negotiating strength, rising demand from China, India, and other developing countries is allowing the national oil companies to change their focus. Instead of looking first to export their products to Western consumers, they are looking east.

Long before the rise of OPEC, and years before Saudi Arabia became the key player in the global oil business, the world's most important oil cartel was based in downtown Austin, Texas. .....(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.alternet.org/environment/84982/




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 08:57 AM
Response to Original message
1. Comparing apples to oranges
But efficiency alone won't deliver energy salvation. Proof of that can be had by looking at other technological innovations. In the early days of the personal computer, there were claims that the computer would result in the advent of the paperless office. That didn't happen. Instead, whole new industries, like desktop publishing, were born, resulting in ever greater amounts of paper consumption. Likewise, predictions that greater efficiency would result in lower energy consumption have proven utterly and completely wrong.


It's similar to comparing the price of a gallon of gasoline to a gallon of milk.

SPIN CITY!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whistle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 09:09 AM
Response to Original message
2. Reverse logic of a Malthusian fatalist Robert Bryce has no feasible alternative
...to offer. The super battery Bryce proposes does not exist and won't for decades, if ever (*see 1st and 2nd Laws of Thermodynamics below). The better plan would be a National Energy policy set up and regulated by the Federal Government

<see NYT book review of March 7, 2008>

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/07/books/07book.html


* 1st: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/firlaw.html#c1

* 2nd: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/seclaw.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
predfan Donating Member (769 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 09:16 AM
Response to Original message
3. I don't understand the premise either..............
certainly the individual driver is going to have to make some decisions about whether to drive more miles now that his per mile cost has gone down (by driving the Prius) but a blanket statement seems dumb. I wouldn't drive any more miles and so I'd use less energy. Period.

Strange reasoning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. I drive my Prius less.
We wait until there are several errands to run before heading into town.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
predfan Donating Member (769 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 09:23 AM
Response to Original message
4. I really think the oil cartels are going top suffer unintended consequences over
these prices, as attitudes change and people learn they can use less energy easier than they think. At least I hope so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Why do you think that is an unintended consequence?
Oil is a finite resource. When the US controlled the production of oil owned by other people, it caused the producers to be price takers - they had to accept the price that we dictated and produce as much as we wanted regardless of whether it was good management of the owner's diminishing resource. Before if they tried to raise the price, we'd get the oil somewhere else. But with increased demand due to globalization, it has become the consumers that are price takers - if we don't want to buy the oil for higher prices, they can sell it to someone else.

Now that we have lost control of both production and consumption the logical thing producers would do is to maximize the *long term value* of their assets. That isn't done by over-production just to maintain the lifestyle that American's like.

This situation will persist until decline in demand occurs.

They expect that.

How long do you think it will take?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rzemanfl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 09:31 AM
Response to Original message
5. An automobile is still an automobile and there are still 24 hours
in a day. The availability of motorized transportation to the average person in the early 1900's and the improvements to the highway system post World War II were huge cultural changes, a car that gets better mileage isn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-12-08 12:56 PM
Response to Original message
8. Regardless what kind of car you drive, hybrid or ICE...
it takes between 20 and 50 barrels of oil to make a single car.

by and old car and convert it to electric.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 14th 2024, 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC