[Sustain] [Transpo] Excellent Short Audio On The Biofuels Myth

[Ann Garrison]

My comment below Dennis's, as it should be.  I'm trying to get better  
about using e-mail to interact, as originally intended.

On Apr 5, 2007, at 1:07 PM, Dennis Brumm wrote:

> At 11:55 AM 4/5/2007, Eric Brooks wrote:
>> I'm am so sick of the peak oil crowd using this ridiculous bogus
>> argument that I am literally about to lose my cool over it.
>
> Renewables certainly need to be promoted big time; in the circles I
> travel in, I can't remember anybody not wanting that (and that
> includes an awful lot of peak oil folks). That doesn't necessary fit
> in with the plans people in power who intend to profit off energy
> have, because some of these renewables could prove to be very
> empowering for the people who now are their energy serfs. But when
> renewables are used to promise that the way of life we live now is
> going to continue, I certainly don't think that's very likely.

> We are embedded with a "progress is good" meme that needs to be
> highly reconsidered; or else (I believe) the definition of what is
> "progress" needs to be changed.

YES.  "Economic growth" is the unchallenged value spouted on every  
media outlet everywhere, including those we support, without  
challenge.  Growth for what purpose?  Rate of return on investment?   
What else?

How about the growth of freedom, creativity, and above, all dignity,  
instead?  (Enough of this parliamentary democracy baloney; bankrupt  
word; bankrupt institution.)

But what's this "peak oil" crowd everybody keeps talking about?   
Seems like the oil companies never stop hitting a new gusher.   I'm  
gonna get a "you can't post to this list" from the owner of the  
transpo group.  If anyone can add me, just so I can be part of this  
discussion, that'd be nice.  Energy and transpo are inextricable.
>
> I also don't know how you will change the minds of so many Americans
> to embrace mass transit in a 25 year time frame without a genuinely
> huge consciousness shift (these shift may be able to happen, but in
> my lifespan I've not seen any of them, especially when they require a
> change in what we all love because of our evolution: convenience.
>
> By the way, I'm glad to see the "peak oil crowd" seems to have a
> unified voice. Were that really true, at least with much of message,
> life would be a lot easier. :)
>
> The way we are living and consuming now is a big lie; without
> lifestyle changes these arguments all become moot. Education needs to
> go way beyond the Al Gore message of "change a lightbulb, save the  
> world."
>
> The major oil field in Mexico is now in big decline (they're our 3rd
> largest supplier); the biggest field in Saudi Arabia is apparently
> starting the same process. The longer we wait to create renewable
> energy, not boondoggles for our convenience, the more these things
> will cost, along with everything else. It's already way beyond where
> it should have begun, if we operated outside of the delusional space
> of "the way we live now is normal."
>
> AND REALLY IMPORTANTLY, We also will not continue to inhabit the
> planet in the numbers of people now here. I don't see anyway it is
> likely to support us in 6 or 9 billion numbers with organic or
> permaculture used as agriculture. This is the elephant in the room
> that nobody in a political sphere dare touch, but talk to ecologists
> or environmental biologists and read their science. Just lowering
> birthrates so that actual numbers still increase, albeit slowly,
> still impacts the planet with more degradation. We desperately need
> to encourage very very small families immediately.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sustainability mailing list
> Sustainability at sfgreens.org
> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainability

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://list.sfgreens.org/pipermail/sustainability/attachments/20070405/1aaccf9c/attachment-0001.htm