LISTEN TWICE to this broadcast:
http://www.netcastdaily.com/broadcast/fsn2006-0218-2.asx
*especially from the 36th minute

Then let's talk.

PUPLAVA's PEAK OIL PANEL discusses some Big Issues
(Richard Heinberg, author of Powerdown. James H. Kunstler, author of The Long Emergency)
= = = = =


The late 20th century dream of a "Drive-in Utopia" was flawed,
and will get us into deep trouble, as the assumptions that it was based upon prove unsustainable. "We are headed into a period of turbulence and hardship... violence & political mischief"... We need to wake up from "consumerists idiocy" to become brave, neighborly, and generous.

Why? Peak oil means we are headed to a period of expensive and scarce oil.
Think: shortages, rationing of petrol, fewer jobs, mobs of unemployed...

WHAT ARE THE WINNING STRATEGIES: ("Carless Community"?)

+ Hands-on and local, because long-distance transport is too expensive,
+ Near to agricultural area, so food will not be too expensive,
+ Neighborhoods where people know each other, and care about their welfare,
+ Public transport as the lifeline to jobs and other life necessities,
+ Practical skills will provide livelihood,
+ A vision beyond consumerism which unites people & gives purpose (religion?)



= = =
LINKS:
Financial Sense... : http://www.netcastdaily.com/fsnewshour.htm
Oil Drum website.. : http://www.OilDrum.com
The Hirsch Report. : http://www.projectcensored.org/..Hirsch_Report..
City on the Hill . : http://www.theperfectworld.us/thread.php?id=1154&postNum=1
HPC thread on CF.. : http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/ind...showtopic=24463
- - -
Winning Back Public Space : http://www.rudi.net/bookshelf/.../chapter1/c.shtml

= = =
Future Automotive Technology and Fuels: The Options and Their Impacts
MIT Video:

SPEAKER:
John B. Heywood: Sun Jae Professor of Mechanical Engineering Mechanical Engineering
Sloan Automotive Laboratory site
Center for 21st Century Energy Site

ABOUT THE LECTURE:
While "too many of us use too much stuff too often," says John Heywood, cars may prove the worst commodity of all. They are responsible for a steady degradation of the ecosystem, from greenhouse emissions to biodiversity loss. What's worse, even if we improve vehicle efficiency, turn to fuel hybrids such as the Prius, or make rapid advances in hydrogen-based fuel technologies, the scale for slowing down the degradation may run to the decades. We have 130 million cars on U.S. roads right now, and add 15 million more each year. "Turning the curve won't be easy," says Heywood. "Human beings simply won't do as much as they can." Recommendations: an integrated policy approach, including better mileage standards and a stiff gasoline tax.

NOTES ON THE VIDEO (Time Index):
Video length is 1:16:41.

@: http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/222/

Technofix-ation
Japan is sold on - and selling - technology to cure all
environmental ills. Rick Davis doesn't buy it.

MY son has a chronic cough because of the busy street in front of our house. Newspapers report that all over Japan there is an increase in small children being admitted to hospitals. They have asthmatic conditions that are largely attributable to automobile air pollution.

Just a few blocks from my home a street that was suffering chronic traffic jams was widened to add two more lanes. Homes and businesses were torn down to make room for more cars. Owners were handsomely compensated with tax yen. The new section is now nearly complete, and the heavier volume of traffic is helping to make the city’s already acrid air even worse.

For me this typifies the way the Japanese Government deals with environmental problems. Congestion is dealt, with by street-widening, rather than by cutting traffic volumes. This is classic ‘technofix’, leaving the causes - and the system - intact

...MORE: http://www.newint.org/issue231/techno.htm

Travelling to visit a friend this weekend on my motorbike really brought home some of the madness to me. The roads out of London felt horribly congested and the tension was like treacle. Yet virtually all the cars I passed had just one person in them.

During the weekend we visited some local beauty spots. Well, they would have been, had it not been for the constant roar of traffic that now forms the backdrop to urban and rural life alike.

I like walking around Shoreham and Otford, down south east of London. A lovely spot, but almost impossible to escape the roar of traffic from the M25. It is still a pleasant escape from the 'big smoke' though.

Getting away for a while to somewhere truly remote like the Scottish Highlands or parts of Wales is definitely good for the soul, though. Some of my happiest times have been heading off with a rucksack and setting up a campsite miles from anywhere and anyone, and cooking up a simple meal on a camping stove. Simple pleasures are often the most profound.

TLM

Agreed.
Sometimes only a walk in nature can calm the nerves.

And some sad folks almost never get the chance

Next generation of public transport?


http://www.atsltd.co.uk/prt/




Personal Rapid Transit System

ULTra is an innovative form of Personal Rapid Transit (PRT). ULTra (Urban Light Transport) emerged from a fundamental reappraisal of the transport needs of a city. It is designed to meet the expectations of passengers - convenient, inexpensive, reliable, safe and easy to use, while also satisfying public demands for value for money, ease of construction and environmental benefit.

Conventional forms of public transit require passengers to collect in groups until a large vehicle is scheduled to travel on predetermined routes. In contrast, ULTra offers personal transport with no waiting, and takes passengers non-stop to their chosen destination. This is a transport system which is as convenient as, or in congested environments more convenient than, the car, but with minimal environmental impact.

Basic Operation

The passenger uses the system by going to the nearest station on the network. Stations are distributed around the area served like bus stops or cab ranks. At each station there are a series of berths at each of which the passenger can select their desired destination.

The passenger boards the programmed vehicle which takes them to their desired destination automatically, non-stop and by the best available route. At the destination the passenger leaves the vehicle, which may either wait there for the next fare or, alternatively, be redirected by central control to places with known demand.

All this talk of utopian societies and solutions to problems.....I'm not convinced.
Personal freedom as embodied by the automobile will not be surrendered lightly by western populations - and nor should it.

(Psychology bit - and we knwo how important psychology is)
I prefer to look at what the rich do and what they have.
As the majority of people want this lifestyle, they observe the rich and copy their clothes, habits, gestures..etc in the hope of identifying or being identifed with this group.
Air-conditioning in cars, paved driveways in homes, Burberry clothing are some of the many recent fads that have hit the big-time.

So what would a rich person who doesnt have a car (work with me here) do?
S/He would hire one, as and when they need it.
This is the future.

While all you people are out there investing in Nanotech or whatever waiting 20 years for a return (BTL anyone?) other people are busy ferreting away in small businesses providing these services.

What all you money-men and hippy-dreamers are looking for is called fractional ownership.
This is a bit like time-shares (remember those) only you apply it to car ownership.

Bubb - youre probably rich - think Net Jets.
The well-off dont buy Jets, they rent them.
Look at the F1 Club.
You dont buy a Ferrari, you buy a share.
The rich do it now - the plebs will be doing it in 5 years...

Big money to be made here when people cotton on to it.

PS - does anyone here actually do any real work or are you all just arbitage investors?
Any entrepreneurs?

Fuel costs are rising, and so cars may get smaller and lighter to keep consumption down. Also, parking costs are rising sharply.

Many people may prefer to live somewhere where they do not need to own a car, but have access to one when needed. Car rental as part of the services of a high rise building may be atrend of the future. If people drive less, that may prove more reasonable than owning an expensive parking space. Let the owners of the business cope with the parling problem when you return the car. Renting once a week (or whatever) may be cheaper than owning every day.

If I lived in an apartment, I wouldn't have a problem with ditching my own car, and renting when necessary...

BUT, I'd want immediate access to a set of wheels with no red tape. Often you want or need to go somewhere on the spur of the moment. I haven't rented a vehicle in ages, so maybe it's all more streamlined than this now, but I do remember the tedious phoning/logging on and form filling, sorting out insurance, etc. Then going to pick up the car, or awaiting delivery, doing checks for damage, etc, both before and after the main trip - and that was all planning well ahead.

A spur of the moment idea for a drive to the coast or local shopping centre could take well over an hour just to acquire the vehicle and then maybe the same when returning

Maybe if all new build apartments had car parks (underground?), rental agencies could run a pool of cars from these and maybe automate the booking process in some way - 'chip and pin' in each vehicle perhaps, each user to log any damage apparent before driving away. Billing automatically determined by duration, or mileage via GPS logging, maybe. A variety of fleet vehicles for everyday use, prestige for special occasions, and the odd van for getting that IKEA flat pack home, could be available. Cars could be booked ahead, but one problem would be assessing demand for 'spur of the moment' use. It'd be a pain to want to go for a spin and find everything taken...

As Needle says, psychology is all important, it will take a seismic shift in culture to move people from car ownership.

TLM

"a pool of cars from these and maybe automate the booking process in some way - 'chip and pin' in each vehicle perhaps, each user to log any damage apparent before driving away"

YES. That may be a way around it.
A car could be pooled amongst a group of people, who would then share the insurance costs, and pay according to how much they drive. But do you trust your neighbors enough??

I suppose if a car were cheap enough to repair and to replace, you could get insurance for all sorts of minor damage. But would the responsible party own up to it? And if not, there could be alot of squabbles

I think this would have to be professionally managed with rented vehicles to work.

It's similar to groups of leasehold flat owners buying, sharing and managing the freehold. Every instance I've ever heard of seems to lead to problems between occupiers; someone doesn't want to pay for redecoration, new roof, etc. One reason I don't think I'd ever buy a flat. However, having a landlord freeholder can lead to rip off service charges. A difficult decision....

Watertight legal arrangements might be possible, but even then, the idea of taking neighbours to court, with all the expense, hassle, ill-will and then having to declare any disputes on sale of the property to potential vendors makes even a cast-iron contract pretty useless, (whether for cars or property!).

Definitely a challenge for the entrepreneur.

TLM

Many will not be able to afford a car,
so they will be thrust into a Carless Future, without wanting one

what about campus type communities.

maybe it was the limitless alcohol and 18 year old women. but unvesity campuses always seemed happy stess free and and fairly car less societies, where public transport was the norm and taxi pooling was something everyone did.

"university campuses always seemed happy stess free and and fairly car less societies"

For many, someone else was covering the bills, and there was alot of free time.

But other reasons it felt that way:

+ No one had much money, and there was a limited desire to push yourself in from of others by spending more on consumer goods,

+ People were "light" on possessions, and forced to share many things, and consider their flatmates and friends. This creates a certain "a spirit de corp", which you could also find in certain countries during the communists era.

+ As you have said, there was a ready supply of 18 year old women. At that age, they were not seeking their boyfriends for the material comforts they can provide. But wait a few years, and when Daddy stops paying the bills, it all changes.

+ The desire to raise a family in comfort is certainly a big part of our drive for bigger homes

"No one had much money, and there was a limited desire to push yourself in from of others by spending more on consumer goods"

Interesting that it seems that under certain circumstances hapiness has an inverse correlation to money.

maybe the Beer @ 1.30 per pint...

"hapiness has an inverse correlation to money"

Right. there's a new section here (...health) that talks about how stress correlates with income:
Higher income, higher stress

This already exists

catalunya car sharing

a more established example (has evolved)

http://new.greenwheels.nl/home.nl

These are aimed principally at one off trips.

Ride sharing is more appropriate for commuting trips.

Wardrop

First a question: What percentage of travel is business related and what percentage is leisure?

My bet is that business (car) travel is 70 - 80% % of all travel - if that is correct then this is what needs to be curbed / cured.

I think when the auto culture emerged it was in good faith - i.e. for personal, pleasurable and reasonable business use - it evolved into something more endemicaly more harmfull and the law of unintended consequences took it to the extreem that we see today.

HAL

The car is part of a whole "living system" with all parts integral to one another, not unlike a literally living organism. The built infrastructure of our current city/town/village is this:

Cars/sprawl/paving/cheap energy infrastructure.

It happens to be a pathological system, but nonetheless it functions basically like any living organism with integral organs, one of which happens these days to be cars.

To "improve" the car is to fool ourselves that we are improving the whole system. In fact we are making it possible for people to expand sprawl development because these parts of the whole do not exist in isolation from one another any more than do our organs, bones, muscles, sense organs and so on do.

Thus "bettering" the car expands geographically and perpetuates in time the disastrous infrastructure we have now that is gobbling land, killing 500,000 people in "accidents" facilitated by policy (that which builds roads and promotes car ownership), paving agriculture, competing with hungry people for fertile soil as

...more: http://ecocityviews.blogspot.com/2006/09/b...-brilliant.html

Talkof carless future and ecocities is premature. As a previous poster pointed out, the western populace, especially the errm.... less intelligent species will not be easily separated from their beloved cars. One must not forget that it is the car that gave the lower classes (perceived?) freedom.

Yes, peak oil and all that will eventually spell the demise of the car and non-essential travel in general, but this is a long way away. Even with the most pessimistic peak oil projections, placing peak oil about now, we are still looking at 50 years more of oil supply. Sure, prices will rise, maybe violently, once peak oil realisation sets in. But this will not change the car society for a long time to come. Even if oil and thus petrol prices double, triple or quadruple, people will still drive their cars. They will simply readjust, spending less for other goods, in the same way as they have reallocated money towards theier mortgage payments during the housing boom of the past decade. At the same time, the car industry will produce ever more fuel efficient cars. I reckon that mileage per gallon can probably be tripled or quadrupled by a combination of more efficient engines, hybrid-cars that re-use breaking energy, lighter materials, intelligent technology that switches of enginges at lights or when no power is needed, and a more economic driving style. That would make up for a tripling or quadrupling of fuel prices, and the consumer would probably tolerate another tripling or quadrupling of net fuel cost before seriously changing their driving habits. So, in my view, not much will change between now and oil at $800 per barrel.

It is only when petrol becomes prohibitively expensive, so expensive that even getting in your car and driving into town would cost you a fortune, that things will really start to change. That is minimum 25 years away. The other thing is of course that once oil is that expensive, one has other things to qworry about than whether suburbia is sustainable. World War 3 springs to mind.

Sounds a touch too complacent to me.

Dont forget all those people in China, India, and other emerging markets who think they want a "home and car" lifestyle, like they see in America. Americans (and Brits too), will need to compete with the rising Middle Class in those other nations too. And this is likely to happen when the dollar is sinking and losing its purchasing power.

I can easily imagine a $200 oil price in 4-5 years time, with a dollar that has lost half of its value.

America will need to make huge changes in a $200-oil-world

Well, that would improve my portfolio a lot, with my 2012 oil futures...so I hope you are right,

Carless future - is all the rage with some progressive architects

There has been an important experiment in Germany- a place called Vaubon, near Fribourg

I attended and excellent seminar on it, and will start a thread here soon

"Drivers have known for years that throttling back is a sure way to improve gas mileage...

Recent surveys show that many drivers have changed their habits to cut fuel costs, but the changes tend to be ones that bring immediate gratification _ such as using the Internet to find stations with the lowest prices and putting less gas in the tank instead of filling up, said Larry Compeau, executive officer of the Society for Consumer Psychology and an associate marketing professor at Clarkson University.

"If you buy a more fuel-efficient car or find cheaper gasoline, those things are right in front of you," Compeau said. "Whether you do 65 or 55 is much more nebulous. There's no way for you to immediately see the impact."

Based on recent highway traffic volume trends, throttling back to 60 mph from 70 mph would likely reduce gasoline usage between 2 percent and 3 percent, which is about what happened when the 55-mph limit was imposed in the 1970s, said David Greene, a senior researcher at the U.S. Energy Department's Oak Ridge National Lab.

"We're talking about a 2-to-3 percent reduction in demand, which would mean a much larger percentage reduction in price, maybe 10 percent," Greene said. " (???)

THEY THINK the oil price rise is temporary - IT ISNT TEMPORARY !

Once they get that, they will begin to think about "the living arrangement".
They need to get out of those stranded suburbs, and somewhere closer to work- with a shorter drive

I really feelthis is the solution for congested cities. Not only for the enviro factor, but also can you imagine everyone driving around in 75hp cars? Traffic should in theory flow much better.

It's all "hot air", I reckon

Boom boom. For the really extravagant you could fit a corac turbo compressor....cost effective it may not be!

HUMBLE SUGGESTIONS - The Real ones are coming later

Sean Brodrick
Slow Down And Save *AUDIO*
http://www.howestreet.com/audiovideo/index...mediaplayer/852

"We need leadership... but Washington seems to 'lack the cajones' "

Indeed, instead of lowering speed limits, forcing even/odd filling days, etc.
Hillary-Billary-Bob is talking about waiving the gas tax for the summer.

It seems amazing to me, the way you have most of the US driving big SUVs that do 10-15 to the gallon, moaning about the price of gas and wanting a tax holiday. In the UK we currently pay around 75% tax on fuel. Why don't Americans drive smaller engined cars, save money and the environment?

I guess there is no need, they can moan to their leaders and they will take on more debt to bail them out!

You are right- it is crazy, and cannot last.
But no politician has the courage to tell the voters that yet.
At least Obama right called Hillary's tax back gimmick "pandering"

Petro prices will rise in the UK too, and eventually people will work out that living in the Strand Suburbs
will be an economic disaster

Bob Rivers Show - Can't Afford to Drive My Car
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPJkVqBGAKE

= with thanx to Wol

It's the same for Canada and the States. What took the most getting used to over there was the almost continuous sound of a V8 engine. In these islands, that's a very uncommon sound, but in Canada, every third personal (ie not commercial) vehicle is a V8 of some description (usually a very big truck).



In the UK, the government shafts its citizens royally. I know that all governments are liars, but, the UK gov are not only liars but blatant thieves also.

The only way that environmental solutions will be found in times like now, is when people look at the price of petrol and just balk, then they look around for alternatives.

That's starting to happen in Canada and the US, people are opting for more fuel-efficiency, in fact you see a lot of commercials touting 33MPG Highway and the like. (I always think, "jeez is that all?"), but it is happening.

It will be interesting to see how this all pans out with regards to the Now oil shock, if Canada decided to keep the majority of its oil for its own uses, the US would be totally screwed. (They can't I know, because of NAPTA, they are obliged to sell the US about 70 percent of their output, approximately allegedly).

Of course Canada could always declare war, to preserve their oil wealth, but they're too polite, have loads of the stuff and like to be well paid.

They still DONT GET IT.
They are mostly looking at temporary things like: driving more slowly, making a few less journeys, and maybe changing
away from the SIV. When they talk about GETTING RID OF CARS ALTOGETHER, and structuring their living arrangements
so they can live a quality life while doing that - then, and only then, will they be on the road to a lasting solution.

Until that happens, I expect America's wealth to ebb away.

This is true. It is seemingly incomprehensible to most folks to imagine that they won't be able to run a car, or that oil will become so expensive that it will 'effect' their entire lives beyond just the price at the pump.

It seems that most folks just don't get it, the world runs on oil.

Even if they find shedloads of the stuff, you know 100 Billion barrels here, another 300 Billion barrels there, it's only a temporary stopgap, literally like re-arranging the deck chairs on the titanic.

But until that day...

Exactly.
Now here's the interesting part. The anti-suburbs investment strategy IS WORKING.

Those who can walk, or cycle to work, are little hurt by the rise in petrol prices.
And I believe it is a fact that HOMES NEAR PUBLIC TRANSPORT are holding value far better than those
far out in the "stranded suburbs". People are talking about it yet, but if you check the data, I think you
will find this is true.

No country is going to get rid of cars altogether. Cars will get smaller and cheaper to offset higher fuel costs. Personal mobility is such a powerful status symbol that great ingenuity will go into sustaining ownership levels. Here in Britain as you know we now pay $10/Imp gallon (about $7.50/US gallon) for petrol and even more for diesel. People still commute 50 miles per day in large cars. Bicycle use is not increasing nationally. They aren't changing. I think the permanence of high prices has not sunk in, due to general ignorance about Peak Oil. The media is clever at devising reasons why oil is high but there is no shortage. The journalists themselves can't grasp technical issues and so rake together whatever appears reasonable.

I recently read an astoundingly naive article on oil in the journal of the Institute of Engineering & Technology, a publication in which one might have hoped to read insightful analysis of the oil supply condition. I will see if I can scan it and ost it here for your delectation.

I think a carless future is the way forward for many reasons, though I am always dissapointed at how bad the public services are in the UK, especially since they have been 'privatised'.

How can a government which is pro public transport usage watch as costs are ramped so much and the standard of service steadily declines.

I have just bought a car to ferry my new offspring around as sadly it makes travelling outside London practical and possible within a weekend.

-------------

As an aside, did anyone see the Q&A session with the Green cadidate for London Mayor? Something along the lines of:

(Member of public) Q: How did you get to work this morning?

Green candidate: I took a cab. There were four of us in it so it was as environmentally friendly as travelling by bus at that time in the morning, which are generally only one third full at that time in the morning.

As someone who gets the bus at 6.30 in the morning, I nearly fell of my crampbed bus seat laughing....

Yes, True.
But higher oil prices are getting people to understand DRIVING CAN BE EXPENSIVE, and they think more about the journeys they take.
Next step, is to get to a point where they try to shorten the journey, or even eliminate it.

(I recently stumbled across the Carfree.com website):


The Problem
The industrialized nations made a terrible mistake when they turned to the automobile as an instrument of improved urban mobility. The car brought with it major unanticipated consequences for urban life and has become a serious cause of environmental, social, and aesthetic problems in cities. The urban automobile:

+ Kills street life
+ Damages the social fabric of communities
+ Isolates people
+ Fosters suburban sprawl
+ Endangers other street users
+ Blots the city's beauty
+ Disturbs people with its noise
+ Causes air pollution
+ Slaughters thousands every year
+ Exacerbates global warming
+ Wastes energy and natural resources
+ Impoverishes nations (especially those with heavy suburban living patterns)

The challenge is to remove cars and trucks from cities while at the same time improving mobility and reducing its total costs.

Links:
Carfree Cities - the web site that goes with the book. Carfree Cities proposes a delightful solution to the vexing problem of urban automobiles.

World Carfree Network , the hub of the global carfree movement.

/more links: http://www.carfree.com/link/furp.html

Some think a return to the old idea of GARDEN CITIES is where we are headed

== == == == ==
The earthly paradise

Forget six counties overhung with smoke,
Forget the snorting steam and piston stroke
Forget the spreading of the hideous town;
Think rather of the pack-horse on the down,
And dream of london, small and white and clean,
The clear thames bordered by uts gardens green

William Morris (1868)
== == == == ==

Towards sustainable new towns

Most New Towns now have a public transport policy, and many of these propose
better bus or light rail connections, highquality facilities and frequent services.
In some towns, like Milton Keynes, improving public transport will require considerable
investment to overcome the problems posed by the urban structure. In other cases, for
example in France, local authorities are relying on regional or national decisions to
improve the transport system. Transport policies for most of the towns are still quite
limited: car use is sometimes still facilitated through the provision of parking places and
many areas within the New Towns are not accessible by public transport.

Raising urban densities may be an important condition for the introduction and use of
more sustainable transport systems. This is a longer-term goal and will not be easy to
achieve – it would mean developing real town centres and require further economic
growth and higher local authority budgets.

In the meantime, decision makers in New Towns have realised two things: increasing
congestion is not an asset for their town; and they need an alternative public transport
system directed principally at the elderly, lower-income families and students, but also
to offer viable options for people who do not want to travel by car every day.

/more: http://connectedcities.eu/downloads/magazi...05_dec_entp.pdf

(Lea Valley : A big experiment in effective transport without cars??
Build good transport to bring people in for the Olympics, then just reverse it.):

We’re aiming for 100 per cent of spectators to get to the Games by public transport, cycling or on foot.



Approximately 7.7 million tickets are available for sale for the London 2012 Olympic Games.

Eleven days of competition during the Paralympic Games will bring 1.5 million spectators.

Our transport plans for the Games will help transform the Lower Lea Valley into one of the best connected areas in the capital, bringing economic and social benefits that go far beyond 2012, and far beyond sport.

/see: http://www.london2012.com/plans/transport/index.php