It’s day 85 of the BP oil spill disaster. Are you tired of hearing about it yet? You shouldn’t be. No, at this point it would be more appropriate to feel sadness… or maybe if you’re past the grieving stage, then it would be alright to feel frustration… AND if you’re already beyond frustration, then it’s time to get mad at it. It’s time to make demands! What can we do? Well in the short term, I don’t know that anyone has a solution to cap the leak. Every day that goes by adds another 4 million gallons to the estimated 150 million gallons of oil already choking out the gulf. That’s the other question! How do we clean up hundreds of millions of gallons of oil that will spill before the leak is plugged? These are all extremely serious issues that we’re going to have to face for years to come.
The long term solution? Stop burning oil. In the United States of America, we consume some 20,000 barrels of oil a day. Right now some 35,000-65,000 barrels a day are pouring into our oceans. Yes we need petroleum for many products that we use on a daily basis, but we… you and I, don’t need to burn it in our cars. It’s time to really look at what it would take for us to cut our oil dependence by 50% if not 100%; NOT because it saves us money… chances are it will actually cost us more to make that change, but because of the toll it’s taking on our oceans and beaches and sea life and human livelihood.
When will you start thinking about making that change? When the spill has reached the 100 day mark? That’s just 15 days away. Will you wait until it hits 200 days? At this rate, it could very well go on that long. Will you quit when the Gulf of Mexico is completely dead of marine life? Or, is your only motivator “when gas hits $5 a gallon”? I’m no ocean scientist, so I don’t know exactly what to expect when this atrocity is over with, but Carl Safina is and if you watch the embedded video he’ll give you his take on what to expect.
13. July 2010 at 4:41 pm
How does one un-crap the bed?
.
14. July 2010 at 12:36 am
S**t happens.
If you want the ability to have world-wide comms at your finger-tips, to drive a modern low-emission, high-efficiency motor vehicle, to live and work in air-conditioned comfort, to eat food within 24 hours of it being harvested, and many other so-called “modern benefits”, then you have to put up with the days when it all turns to crap.
Because every one of those items I’ve mentioned above relies on raw petroleum for its manufacture.
However, if you want to return to the Stone Age and sit huddled around a guttering fire that you’ve created by rubbing two sticks together, fine – plug every oil well, fill in every coal mine and throw away every item that has even the tiniest amount of plastic in it.
Then try and create a world-wide communication system with a slate and a piece of flint in order to get your idyllic, utopian message across.
14. July 2010 at 11:20 am
Well Trevor, your argument is a false dichotomy. There is a middle ground that doesn’t involve burning $#!+. The goal is to NOT burn oil. Energy efficiency is the first step in moving toward a future that doesn’t rely on explosive fuels. The Grape-DR supercomputer uses less power than a typical light bulb. That’s the first step in a solar powered world-wide communication system.
You can’t see the world’s energy requirements as a black and white issue. It’s not Cavemen vs. Convenience.
It’s old school thinking be believe “raw petroleum” is the only answer to “low-emission, high-efficiency motor vehicles”, “air-conditioned comfort”, or “eating food within 24 hours of it being harvested”.
So, continue with your grandfather’s way of thinking if you want or open your eyes to new possibilities. Using ultra efficient transportation, like scooters, is a step in the right direction.
14. July 2010 at 9:38 am
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/
14. July 2010 at 2:24 pm
I think what Trevor might be trying to say is that progress, apart from making things better, does occasionally produce stumbles.
It reminds me of a scene from “Chain Reaction”. It was a stinker of a movie but there was a scene where Morgan Freeman’s character (Paul Shannon) is testifying in front of Congress about an enormous explosion at a site where they were attempting to find cheaper/better ways to crack hydrogen out of water.
In the scene a committee member asks him “What assurances can you give me and this committee that this will never happen again?”
Mr. Shannon’s answer fits this situation to a tee. Here it is-
“None, Senator. the incident in Chicago was tragic to be sure, but sometimes that is the price we must pay to ensure out competitive edge in the future.
We didn’t intend to pay for our space exploration program with the lives of 10 American astronauts but we did.
Never the less, we must not waiver in our commitment to technological and scientific research and development.
As you gentlemen know, there are many threats to our way of life and not all of them wear uniforms and carry guns.”
The oil spill is a horrible incident, no question about it. We should look into cheaper/more efficient energy sources. But history shows us that those efforts will not be without incident as well.
15. July 2010 at 10:18 am
Hey Tim! No, I understand the “if you wanna make a cake you gotta crack some eggs” axiom. My point was that it’s not either or. You don’t have to choose between a modern lifestyle and living in a cave.
Take transportation for example. The easy road is to “stay the course”… keep burning oil (in the form of petrol) as we’ve been doing over the last 125 years. Yes it’s true, oil is cheap and powerful and our methods of refining it have improved over the last century. The cost to suddenly implement a new, country wide, petrol free infrastructure and quit gas cold-turkey is too great to bare. It takes baby steps… a gradual, but conscious effort to move away from oil. It’s those baby steps that prove to battery and motor developers that there is money in their future and tells oil companies to not worry about replacing the rig they lost in the gulf.
And you last sentence, “history shows us that those efforts will not be without incident as well” emphasizes the importance of researching solutions with less potential for destructive incident. Modern nuclear reactors, for example, are amazingly clean and safe to operate but then we have the problem of potentially destructive waste. I’m not saying I have a solution. I’m keeping my eyes on fusion, but who knows what sort of destructive potential THAT could have.
Right now that gradual, conscious effort to move away from oil is the right move. Record sales of the Toyota Prius in 2008 and GE’s subsequently killing the Hummer is a great example of progress following the money.