Glenn wrote:
>I write this as a person whose responsibility it is to find new oil
>sources. While we have been wildly successful over the past 3 years,
my
>group hasn't been able to change the facts outlined below by much
more than
>a dent.
Well why don't we just destroy vast wilderness areas like Alaska's
Arctic National Wildlife Refige? Let's denigrate Creation in the name
of the world's oil-God!
>"At current rates of consumption, known reserves of Petroleum will be
gone
>in about thirty-five years; natural gas in fifty-two years; and coal
in
I've been hearing these stats for some 10-15 years now. You get
different numbers every few years, projecting the known reserves to
last another 10 years or so. I tend to agree oil will eventually run
out, but certainly not before big-money destroys all the last great
wild places. And if you've been to Alaska, you know how absolutely
amazing and irreplaceable it is.
> First, the auto will be a thing of the past--period. Enjoy your cars
while
>you can. People will either have to telecommute, bicycle to work like
the
>Chinese, or lose their jobs. Cities like Houston, where there are
major
>commute distances requiring lots of gasoline, simply won't be viable
in the
Halellujia for that!! If only it were so. I wish we could return to
agriarian societies where we drove horse and cart. That would be so
incredible. Ah to be able to breathe the fresh air and not
asthma-causing smog. (and I do live in Houston). More realistically,
we will turn to electric vehicles, OR natural gas (I didn't notice
Electric or hybrids mentioned in your alternatives - and God willing
my next car will be the Toyota Prius - the hybrid electric vehicle
that just came out). Yes petroleum is also used but if we actually put
some teeth into legislation that required stricter gas mileage on
vehicles, than maybe we could cut consumption in half. Oh, but then we
hear whining by the billion-dollar corporations who will "lose money."
>agricultural fertilizer. That means that food production costs will
rise
>and yields decline. Pesticides are also made from petroleum. While no
one
>likes pollution, without pesticides, crop yields would be much less
per
>acre, which is why organic food costs so much.
You really can't make valid assumptions about cycles of cause and
effect, and what will happen. I hear this type of thing from various
environmental groups all the time, and while I consider myself an
environmentalist, I prefer caution and faith. We can't predict what
inventions will arise or what will ensue. Nonetheless I am *all for*
less destructive means of transportation that gas-driven autos,
tractors, trains, ships. But I'd rather pump scientific money into
alternatives and innovation than in investing money in finding more
oil.
>Petroleum is used to make electrical energy which in turns powers
the
>computer upon which I am typing. A severe energy crisis will cut into
the
>power generation and thus the our ability to use computers, air
I don't really see how you can make such sweeping generalizations
about the future.
>While no single energy source is ready to take the place of fossil
fuels,
>their diminishing availability may be offset by a regimen of
>conservation and a combination of alternative energy sources. This
will not
Amen to that!!!!
>and there is absoltutely nothing we can do about it. A high effort
oil
>exploration program will slow the decline. Conservation, which will
surely
Is this a plug for your own job?
>occur as the oil price rises, will delay the ultimate day of
reckoning but
>not for long. If we were to cut the oil use by 1/3 today, we might
delay
>the decline by about 15 years.
We can use statistics to show about anything we want. Conservation
efforts can be very much more effective than 25-33%. If we actually
spent some government money on redoing our architecture, our
landscaping, our roofs, turned our blacktop to concrete, we could
significantly reduce our AC bills (there is a major EPA project
funding several metro areas to do just that). But if it were taken
seriously all over along with any number of other conservation
efforts, we would wean ourself of the milk of the capitalist God. Heck
I would welcome a stone age again. Sometimes I think this society is
set up for self destruction anyway.
You go to any number of impoverished nations and the people there are
so much more appreciative and giving -- when they have NOTHING to
give -- than we are in our fancy car, fancy house, fancy clothes
oil-driven society. What is more important -- our economic condition
or our spiritual condition? Obviously we in America have chosen
economics over God in many ways. God will bless our society with
continued prosperity if it turns to Him and not to Oil or Money but I
don't doubt your scenarios would strike terror in the hearts of those
who love their Money! (not that they would be so bad for those who
love God and have faith no matter the circumstance). With God's
spirit, Christians can endure any circumstance, any poverty, any
hunger, any pain. And with joy!
>For the oil man, the end of the cycles of hire and fire at our
companies
>may be at hand. As the oil supply declines worldwide, there will be a
need
>for good oil finders.
Better start training now for conservation work! :)
In Christ's love (and a slight bit of sarcasm)
Wendee
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jul 14 2000 - 22:58:50 EDT