Comments on: Responding to the Challenge of Peak Oil (Richard Heinberg)

By: corneilius

corneilius — Mon, 14 Aug 2006 12:52:52 +0000

Cuba went throuhg their peak oil experience in the years following the collapse of the Soviet Russian system .... and today they grow all their food with bio-dynamic and organic methods, they produce their own supplies of bio-deisil and ethanol .... and we can do the same, though we will have to fight the Pharmaceutical Elites to do this, as they are powerfull lobbyists and selfish, (being geared towards profits for their shareholders) and unwilling to acknowledge the damage their industries cause, either to human beings or to the environment that supports us.

So the question that arises is this - should we tolerate the negligence of governments who support the pharmaceutical giants, and thus undermine our childrens futures?

My answer is a resounding NO!

Roll on peak oil! Roll on people growing organic foods as our first industry of importance! Roll on reality checks!

Kindest regards

Corneilius

By: G. R. L. Cowan

G. R. L. Cowan — Sat, 29 Jul 2006 17:20:04 +0000

Government can make rules
discouraging conservation
and making the switch
to nuclear slow and
difficult, and is the main
fossil fuel profiteer, and
DOES make such rules.
No-one disputes this but
many, Heinberg is typical,
seem to think of themselves
as serious students of the
matter, but seem disinclined
to, as the saying goes,
connect the dots, indeed,
disinclined even to mention
them.

This will change. On burning,
petroleum becomes
atmospheric CO2 and water,
but nuclear power stations,
and perhaps large-scale
concentrating-solar ones,
can reverse that chemistry
and make oil and oxygen.
So a Chevy Impala
whose driver today knows
he is altering the climate
and funding a privileged
class could, with 20
years of good maintenance,
still carry the same driver
and burn the same stuff,
only now, because
the gasoline will be nuclear,
the driver will know he motors
without sin, and without paying sin tax.