NationStates Jolt Archive


How to solve the Oil Crises.

Blood Moon Goblins
08-05-2005, 03:20
A bit of long term thinking is involved here...

1. Shoot every house cat in the world.
(The reason is that house cats are basicaly useless and serve no practical purpose except to destroy the local ecosystem...listen to me, I sound like a guy from Greenpeace ^_^)
2. Bury them all in a few swamps at key points around the world.
3. Wait 50 million years
4. Boom! Oil!

And even better, by the time we get all that oil the nuclear waste from the power plants and such will be harmless, and we can use the resulting lead to build orphanages.
Ice Hockey Players
08-05-2005, 03:30
Ummm...and what's in it for me? I won't be alive in 50 million years, and you are not getting your grubby hands on my cat. I would rather simply make my car run on alcohol, since we all know how much trouble alcohol causes and how it should be banned.

I imagine that not too many people are giving up their liquor, just as not too many people are giving up their cats. But any volunteers are welcome...for liquor, not cats. If you don't want your cat, I will take him/her and hopefully he/she will get along with Cruiser.
BerkylvaniaII
08-05-2005, 03:34
My housecat was soooooooooooooooooooooooooo pissed when he read this. Expect a phone call from his lawyers forthwith! Also, I predict a Million Tabby March on your front door step sometime within the next year.
Afghregastan
08-05-2005, 03:35
Here's my modest proposal.

Destroy all cars and provide everyone with a bike manufactured from the recovered materials. Benefits: 1) No more fat asses, vastly improving public health. 2) No more suburbs will be built, in fact most will decline. 3) No more wasted tax dollars on roads.
BerkylvaniaII
08-05-2005, 03:36
Here's my modest proposal.

Destroy all cars and provide everyone with a bike manufactured from the recovered materials. Benefits: 1) No more fat asses, vastly improving public health. 2) No more suburbs will be built, in fact most will decline. 3) No more wasted tax dollars on roads.

What about people who don't have legs?
Patra Caesar
08-05-2005, 03:41
No more suburbs will be built, in fact most will decline.

So if the population continues to grow no new suburbs will be built and most will decline? Is this because most people will starve to death when they have to get their food bought in on bikes? Or will banning cars make people live in houses with others?
The Motor City Madmen
08-05-2005, 03:41
Here's my modest proposal.

Destroy all cars and provide everyone with a bike manufactured from the recovered materials. Benefits: 1) No more fat asses, vastly improving public health. 2) No more suburbs will be built, in fact most will decline. 3) No more wasted tax dollars on roads.

I think Johnny Wadd and Hannibal Smith wouldn't like it, as I think they said they didn't have legs.
Nimzonia
08-05-2005, 03:44
I would rather simply make my car run on alcohol, since we all know how much trouble alcohol causes and how it should be banned.

It'd be cool if I could make my car run on Jack Daniels. People keep buying me vodka and whiskey, but I don't drink them.
Perezuela
08-05-2005, 03:44
My housecat was soooooooooooooooooooooooooo pissed when he read this. Expect a phone call from his lawyers forthwith! Also, I predict a Million Tabby March on your front door step sometime within the next year.
I let out a very ugly and embarassing laugh when I read this.. thanks.
You're lucky no one was around... otherwise I would've had to kill you.
Vanhalenburgh
08-05-2005, 03:48
Hummmm.......think of the troubles......

Drinking and driving would take on a whole new meaning.

Drunks would have even hard decisions to make, drink or drive, could not do both anymore....might be a good thing.

Think of how the hops and barley industries would take off....heck I'm buying stock!
Cadillac-Gage
08-05-2005, 03:50
Here's my modest proposal.

Destroy all cars and provide everyone with a bike manufactured from the recovered materials. Benefits: 1) No more fat asses, vastly improving public health. 2) No more suburbs will be built, in fact most will decline. 3) No more wasted tax dollars on roads.

Fine, you first.
I'd really like to see how you handle a 4'x8' sheet of three-quarter inch plywood on your schwinn, or how about just a twin-size mattress and box-spring? or better yet, a couch... or how'bout your computer? In the WEATHER.
Not everyone wants to live in a fiftieth floor walk-up with paper thin walls (so they can hear the neighbours getting it on at four in the morning) and rusty pipes in a human-hive where everyone is so closely packed they can't avoid knowing each other's business... nor can everyone afford to pay the kind of rents that are commonly encountered in such hell-hole pits.

You don't like the suburbs? Great, go live in the Inner City, you're free to do so, nobody will stop you, or try to confiscate your property, nobody is forcing you to live anywhere. (Unless you're in prison or hte military)

Leave those of us who don't want to live like an ant alone.
Zabarkarna
08-05-2005, 03:55
The Empire of Zabarkarna is searching alternative methods to solve the demands for energy. In terms of automobiles, we plan to switch over to Hybrid, electric, or hydrogen powered cars. Wind energy windmills will be set up on our coasts, and we intend to use our sunny weather to harness solar energy. :)
Afghregastan
08-05-2005, 03:55
What about people who don't have legs?

They already got wheelchairs.

I've always assumed that throwing the words "Modest Proposal" was a clear enough hint that any following statements weren't to be taken seriously. Either I was mislead or people who are getting in a huff are extremely ignorant.
Wild Savages
08-05-2005, 03:57
What about people who don't have legs?

They already have wheelchairs, which get very good gas mileage. They're all set.
Cadillac-Gage
08-05-2005, 04:05
They already got wheelchairs.

I've always assumed that throwing the words "Modest Proposal" was a clear enough hint that any following statements weren't to be taken seriously. Either I was mislead or people who are getting in a huff are extremely ignorant.

Just grumpy today. sorry if I jumped down anyone's throat, but there are a shocking number of people in my neck of the woods (Western Washington State) that actually think that way and want to impose it for real on the rest of us.

Sadly, through the use of ballot-stuffers in the King County Elections office, one of them is sitting in the Governor's chair in Olympia, and wants to increase gas-taxes Even More, which tends to only injure those of us who aren't either Bill Gates, or keen on paying 80% plus of our income for rent to be able to get to work and home again.

Let me put this into perspective for you:

At the current rates here in Washington state, a production worker averaging nine dollars an hour has to work five hours to fill his fuel tank. Now, nine-bucks an hour isn't enough to buy a new, fuel-efficient car that gets fifty miles per gallon. Rents here average between $475 to over $1200 per month, depending on whether you want a studio (475 to 500 bucks), One Bedroom (Five fifty to eight) or Two bedrooms (Twelve hundered or more)-that's for apartments. Working ten hours a day, six days a week, it takes two paychecks to pay rent for a two-person household. (With overtime adjustments!)
That means that one partner is paying nothing but rent, and gasoline.

Go out of town fifty miles, and you're paying about two hundered less-but you're buying gas more often-however, you're a lot more likely to be able to afford to eat, and the chances of getting into something with some (a) Open Space, and (B) Privacy, are much, much higher.

You can double those initial figures (the Average) for anyone that wants to live in SEATTLE, near Down town TACOMA, or anywhere else that would be considered a Major city.

This is why low-income people commute, folks. this is also why increasing taxes on Gasoline to "Promote alternatives" doesn't work. Rents near public-transit hubs in the U.S. tend to be higher. Wages in those same areas don't.
Afghregastan
08-05-2005, 04:10
Fine, you first.
I'd really like to see how you handle a 4'x8' sheet of three-quarter inch plywood on your schwinn, or how about just a twin-size mattress and box-spring? or better yet, a couch... or how'bout your computer? In the WEATHER. I already do live in the city and cycle everywhere. Even in the winter, in Canada. Pretty good really. All my other friends who are 30 have guts. I don't. As far as shipping all that stuff, I usually pay to have it shipped to me. You'll notice that I didn't propose eliminating all transport.
Not everyone wants to live in a fiftieth floor walk-up with paper thin walls (so they can hear the neighbours getting it on at four in the morning) and rusty pipes in a human-hive where everyone is so closely packed they can't avoid knowing each other's business... nor can everyone afford to pay the kind of rents that are commonly encountered in such hell-hole pits. High rise slums? Interesting concept. I'm a little shocked that you conflate high rent with poor living conditions. But more on that in a bit.You don't like the suburbs? Great, go live in the Inner City, you're free to do so, nobody will stop you, or try to confiscate your property, nobody is forcing you to live anywhere. (Unless you're in prison or hte military) Like I said, it's pretty kewl. If it's longer than a 20 minute walk, I ride. Leave those of us who don't want to live like an ant alone. Well you reactionary twit. I was leaving idiots like yourself alone. Here let me correct some of your ignorance (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modest_Proposal).
Liberal Technology
08-05-2005, 04:10
heh...if you think that's crazy, you should read some of the posts here:
www.peakoil.com

Some of it may be correct, but they neglect to factor in the fact the capitalism will probably save our rears. (That is people won't want to pay $200 to fill up their hummers, and then we'll start with hybrids, and hopefully alternative sources).
Constitutionals
08-05-2005, 04:16
A bit of long term thinking is involved here...

1. Shoot every house cat in the world.
(The reason is that house cats are basicaly useless and serve no practical purpose except to destroy the local ecosystem...listen to me, I sound like a guy from Greenpeace ^_^)
2. Bury them all in a few swamps at key points around the world.
3. Wait 50 million years
4. Boom! Oil!

And even better, by the time we get all that oil the nuclear waste from the power plants and such will be harmless, and we can use the resulting lead to build orphanages.


I don't plan on living 50 million years.

Besides, civilization will collapse, and humanity will have nuked ourselves off the face of the earth.
Afghregastan
08-05-2005, 04:17
heh...if you think that's crazy, you should read some of the posts here:
www.peakoil.com

Some of it may be correct, but they neglect to factor in the fact the capitalism will probably save our rears. (That is people won't want to pay $200 to fill up their hummers, and then we'll start with hybrids, and hopefully alternative sources).

What's the lead time on converting the economy over do you think? Oh, and what happens if we hit the peak before the conversion is made?
Liberal Technology
08-05-2005, 04:19
What's the lead time on converting the economy over do you think? Oh, and what happens if we hit the peak before the conversion is made?

A lot of doo-doo hits the global fan my friend. According to the "doomists" worse case is 5 billion people croak.
Greedy Pig
08-05-2005, 04:20
Why haven't anybody said it yet?

Improve technology, to be more fuel-effecient, or probably alternative energies. Ta-da.
BerkylvaniaII
08-05-2005, 04:24
They already got wheelchairs.

Yes, but are all areas equally accessable to both wheelchairs and bikes, hmmmmmm?


I've always assumed that throwing the words "Modest Proposal" was a clear enough hint that any following statements weren't to be taken seriously. Either I was mislead or people who are getting in a huff are extremely ignorant.

Dear God, now you're suggesting that we EAT the crippled...er, differently mobile? Someone hold my keyboard while I storm out of this thread in a huff!
Afghregastan
08-05-2005, 04:25
A lot of doo-doo hits the global fan my friend. According to the "doomists" worse case is 5 billion people croak.

Which is why I'm curious about your assertion that capitalism will save our asses. The peak oil issue is a forseeable, predictable problem and yet little or nothing has been done to ameliorate the effect of it occuring. For instance, the hydrogen fuel cell was invented close to 200 years ago by Maxwell and yet development languished for most of that time. Cars fuel efficiency has actually gotten worse over the last 30 years, thanks to SUVs. I could go on, but I think you get my gist.
Afghregastan
08-05-2005, 04:27
Dear God, now you're suggesting that we EAT the crippled...er, differently mobile? Someone hold my keyboard while I storm out of this thread in a huff!
That would certainly solve the accessibility problem, now wouldn't it. Besides, I'm sure they'd be soooooooo tender and tasty.
Afghregastan
08-05-2005, 04:28
Why haven't anybody said it yet?

Improve technology, to be more fuel-effecient, or probably alternative energies. Ta-da.

You should have finished your quote with "Abracadabra" instead of "Ta-Da."
BerkylvaniaII
08-05-2005, 04:30
That would certainly solve the accessibility problem, now wouldn't it. Besides, I'm sure they'd be soooooooo tender and tasty.

"And for those who are unable to ride a bike, do not worry. We have installed extensive ramps to provide easy access...TO MY BELLY!"

*still trying to figure out the appropriate way of storming huffily out of a largely ironic thread.
BerkylvaniaII
08-05-2005, 04:31
You should have finished your quote with "Abracadabra" instead of "Ta-Da."

Steve Miller would sue.
Afghregastan
08-05-2005, 04:35
"And for those who are unable to ride a bike, do not worry. We have installed extensive ramps to provide easy access...TO MY BELLY!"

*still trying to figure out the appropriate way of storming huffily out of a largely ironic thread.

Maybe a pirouette would be more appropriate, I'm sure it would add a hint of panache to the usual goings on in the forums.
BerkylvaniaII
08-05-2005, 05:00
Ooo, a pirouette! Excellent idea. Graceful yet condesending all at the same time! Perfect. Now, where did I leave my toe shoes...?
CanuckHeaven
08-05-2005, 05:16
What about people who don't have legs?
Only you would come up with this. :D

FYI, I saw a guy just like that yesterday. He had legs but they were not useful. He had a bicycle that he could drive with his hands, with his legs straight out in front of him. Needless to say, his upper body was in terrific shape.
Leliopolis
08-05-2005, 05:26
The problem with the oil crisis is the OIL not the cars. In America, atleast, we can't really go without cars. The ecomony would take a nosedive and millions of people would be instantly laid off. The solution is a rather easy yet vague one. We need to invest in research to find better more efficient forms of energy. It will help the economy, the environment and our lifestyle in general.
BerkylvaniaII
08-05-2005, 06:02
Only you would come up with this. :D

FYI, I saw a guy just like that yesterday. He had legs but they were not useful. He had a bicycle that he could drive with his hands, with his legs straight out in front of him. Needless to say, his upper body was in terrific shape.

Damn you, Canuck! I'm not back two days and you're already blasting gaping holes of reality in my useless and nonsensical blather! ;)
Markreich
08-05-2005, 12:55
A bit of long term thinking is involved here...

1. Shoot every house cat in the world.
(The reason is that house cats are basicaly useless and serve no practical purpose except to destroy the local ecosystem...listen to me, I sound like a guy from Greenpeace ^_^)
2. Bury them all in a few swamps at key points around the world.
3. Wait 50 million years
4. Boom! Oil!

And even better, by the time we get all that oil the nuclear waste from the power plants and such will be harmless, and we can use the resulting lead to build orphanages.

An interesting concept, but my housecat kills gophers and field mice, so I'm not inclined to give her up.
Markreich
08-05-2005, 13:06
There are lots of things people can do to reduce the amount of fuel that they use. Here's what I've done:

1) I've fully insulated my home, and put in new windows. If you add up the "void space" in a house and put it on one wall, you probably have a 6'x6' hole, at least!

2) If I'm going to be home in the winter, I burn wood in a 106,000 BTU wood stove. This really cuts down on my oil bill. Further, it's great exercise.
(I also PLANT trees, so please, no one accuse me of deforestation...;) )

3) I take a train for my 60 mile commute to work, and line up all my driving so most of it is on the highway/through roads (no lights) and make as many stops as possible while out. I've cut down my milage on my car to 2/5ths what it was 5 years ago.

4) All the "regular" lights in my house are on timers, which I adjust with the length of the day. So not only do I never come home to a dark house, but I also never have a light burning all night, unless I turned it on myself.

5) I also installed a programable thermostat; so the house will never go below 40 F (I'd hate to have burst pipes), but also won't go up to 65 until I get home. It also turns off for the evening, so I never need to remember to turn down the heat before bed. The reverse is true for my air conditioning in the summer, so the house never "over cools".

6) I also bought a solar panel, which I use to recharge my laptop. As long as it's not too cloudy, I can work just fine w/o the power grid!
Tribal Ecology
08-05-2005, 13:09
Nuclear energy. It's not completely safe but we have the technology to avoid accidents and it's much better than all the pollution and wars.
Markreich
08-05-2005, 13:16
Nuclear energy. It's not completely safe but we have the technology to avoid accidents and it's much better than all the pollution and wars.

Good idea. But the US must also start building off shore (over the horizon) wind farms on the coast, new refineries (we don't have any more capacity, even if we GOT the oil), and more hybrid vehicles and solar research. Solar panels today are a lot more efficient than they were in the 70s. I hope they'll be more useful soon.
Greedy Pig
08-05-2005, 13:48
Good idea. But the US must also start building off shore (over the horizon) wind farms on the coast, new refineries (we don't have any more capacity, even if we GOT the oil), and more hybrid vehicles and solar research. Solar panels today are a lot more efficient than they were in the 70s. I hope they'll be more useful soon.

I read recently, that their testing some underwater wave generator in Australia. Since it's at the bottom of the ocean, it wouldn't disturb ships, and the waves are continually moving, so they'll generate electricity 24/7. Maybe more in certain hours.

I don't know about ecosystem about the reefs though. I think it should be reef friendly.
Tribal Ecology
08-05-2005, 13:55
There are enough energy sources now that are efficient enough to take over oil in some years. All we need is a little investment now and it will eventually be cheaper for everyone and better for nature.

But there are many people making huge profits out of oil, so this won't happen unless the peoples of the world demand it from their leaders. But people lack information (thanks to the leaders of the world, that keep them distracted with other things), so it will probably be too late...