gas price thread

[Voltron]

Just because people disagree with you is no reason to yell at them.

 

[CONSIDERABLE SHOUTING]

$4.50 for Premium now. $5.60 for diesel in the midwest.

Gas producers and gas station owners have learned an important lesson - most people will pay whatever they ask for gas. And they won't use less. They will keep driving 85mph by themselves to work every day. And until that changes, gas prices will keep going up. Basic economics.

Pretty much! As a great twitter joke once said, "Why would I bother looking at the cost of gas? Whattamagonnado? NOT buy gas?" fuckin' car-dependent infrastructure lmao, I could bike everywhere with a couple (big) changes. I gotta restructure my life lol

Just because people disagree with you is no reason to yell at them.

BUT MAH PLOT O' LAND IS BETTUR THAN YERZ

Ironically... there is more pollution from 5hp Briggs and Stratton Cement mixers and the like ( small domestic residential lawnmowers, construction equipment, ect..) that will never be able to be regulated for the stuff the expel .. And happen to be one of the biggest contributors to pollution and greenohouse gasses.

I'm actually looking at small catalytic converters for a 10HP K241 Kohler flathead I've got in my IH lawn tractor for that very reason! I got a muffler for it too (meant for something else, but I got it for $5 so I'll junkyard it together lmao) but until I can put the junker on a diet of electrons I'm trying to make it as "good" as I can.

This city bollocks is just chatting shit now, yeah they seem all efficient but without external influence they wouldn't exist in most cases citys are not villages that have grown they always been a central distribution area for many small towns.

No, cities are far more sustainable- Books like Streetfight! by Janette Sadik-Khan and Seth Solomonow detail it well, and historically Paris was sustainable in the 1870s to the point where the Prussian Army didn't even attempt to invade- they just went around it, because Paris had built "Fruit walls" to help grow wines and jams from fruiting vines and it would have been a nightmare of warrens for them to fight through. Their big draw is, that you can walk or bike anywhere and conservation becomes a question of land use.

What's cute to me is, everyone wants to evangelize their position as being "The one true system" which shows me neither of these whiny groups have ever lived in the other's region. I love Rural and the city. I love my source of noise at night being wildlife, I love walking to get groceries, I love open fields on backdrops of blue skies, I love having funny moments and quick friendships with random pedestrians on the crosswalk. Whatever choice you make, you should just be ready to leave it better than you found it.

 

[The Toecutter]

No, cities are far more sustainable- Books like Streetfight! by Janette Sadik-Khan and Seth Solomonow detail it well, and historically Paris was sustainable in the 1870s to the point where the Prussian Army didn't even attempt to invade- they just went around it, because Paris had built "Fruit walls" to help grow wines and jams from fruiting vines and it would have been a nightmare of warrens for them to fight through. Their big draw is, that you can walk or bike anywhere and conservation becomes a question of land use.

During the Prussian seige, the population of Paris, France were starving so badly in the 1870s that they resorted to eating rats. Even zoo animals were auctioned off to aristocrats and butchered for food.

https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/paris-siege-eating-zoo-animals

That being said, they were in a greatly better position having developed SOME food independence than if they had none. But sustainable? Far from it.

Cities in the U.S. are deliberately built to be hostile to pedestrians and cyclists to non-so-subtly nudge the inhabitants into expensive automobile ownership. This is one of the reasons my bikes more closely resemble cars than bicycles. I had to have a conveyance suitable for the infrastructure I am using and adapted for the environment I am operating within if I want to increase its effectiveness for the purpose of transport and reduce the risk of an accident. If I were using a normal upright bicycle as a platform, I'd likely be crippled or dead right now.

With what I've built, I'm not sacrificing much of anything versus using a vintage mid-20th-century British convertible sports car, but with the added benefit of an operating cost that is as close to zero as I can get, even cheaper per mile than light rail or the bus, but with all of the convenience of a car. All of the boobus Americanus glued to their smartphones are constantly distracted by my machine whenever I ride it and there are no shortage of people asking where they can buy one.

If I had the money, I'd attempt to mass produce a reliable, enclosed, full-suspension, highway capable, pedal-electric or pure-electric single-occupant microcar with a target cost of < $4,000. I think that there is an untapped market niche for such a thing, but that market niche becomes a LOT smaller as the cost increases. It needs to be comparable to or cheaper than the cheapest running decent used cars available, otherwise there will be very few units sold and I might as well hand-build them for $XX,XXX to a handful of rich buyers.

The people that such a vehicle appeals to are already broke because of high gas prices and generally cannot afford a replacement used car for what they already have. It needs to be priced in a manner where they can aspire to affording it at some point without having to rely on credit. It also has to be sufficiently inexpensive that if it is to be purchased as a 2nd or 3rd vehicle, that the operating cost savings for using it when space for only one person is needed will pay for the vehicle in a reasonable period of time(< 2 years). So someone might have a used 16 mpg GMC Suburban they picked up some years ago for $2,000, which they can use as their kid hauler, and then they could use this vehicle in its place whenever they don't need to use the Suburban, and it would pay for itself in short order.

The upper middle class and wealthier are driving almost all of the new car sales, and since money is no object to them, things like fuel economy are an afterthought. That is one of the reasons aesthetics, ego gratification, and an intimidating road presence take precedence over variables such as efficiency, low operating cost, and reliability in automotive design language. Then you have the profit-driven auto industry whose only goal is to extract as much money from the buyer as they can, regardless of whether the buyer wants to retain their money or not. Those who can't afford new have to make due with whatever is on the used market, and it is telling what vehicles best retain their value on the used market as that is a true indication of what the masses want in a car(Tesla Model 3s, Toyota Corollas and Toyota Prius, Honda Accords and Honda Civics, are all retaining their values very nicely because they are INEXPENSIVE and RELIABLE transportation).

There is no technical reason we can't have an automotive fleet average of 60+ MPG without giving up ANYTHING other than BS styling, planned obsolescence, and corporate design language. Were income/wealth more equally shared, the common American would have a lot more sway in what gets built and sold with their buying power, but we don't live in that world. Like every other civilization that has seen its wealth distribution curve become a hockey stick as all major policy decisions are hijacked by and for the benefit of a small few without regard to the consequences inflicted upon everyone else, we too will collapse. The writing is already on the wall so to speak.

 

[CONSIDERABLE SHOUTING]

https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/paris-siege-eating-zoo-animals

Whelp, lmao. Shows what I half know :lol:

If I had the money, I'd attempt to mass produce a reliable, enclosed, full-suspension, highway capable, pedal-electric or pure-electric microcar with a target cost of < $4,000. I think that there is an untapped market niche for such a thing, but that market niche becomes a LOT smaller as the cost increases. It needs to be comparable to or cheaper than the cheapest running decent used cars available, otherwise there will be very few units sold and I might as well hand-build them for $XX,XXX to a handful of rich buyers. The people that such a vehicle appeals to are already broke because of high gas prices and generally cannot afford a replacement used car for what they already have. It needs to be priced in a manner where they can aspire to affording it at some point without having to rely on credit.

I do wonder similar, but I won't lie that Microcars in history have all been vehicles of necessity and not actual *want*. But now with such automotive hub motor manufacturers like Protean and Elaphe, the possibilities of folded stainless exoskeletons with Tesla, and composites in the use of the Aptera... I wonder if you could. My current personal dream, is to make a tadpole 3-wheeler just for the role of the cheapest vehicle that can push that sub 2-second quarter mile through a combo of high aero, light weight, and said hub motors.

I think following the Polaris Slingshot in concept might be a good idea. Marketed as a toy... but a toy that also has heat and AC, meant to be your fun daily driver, oh and we just so happened to engineer this EV to be as cheap as possible to own.

Also- an Aptera-like 3 wheeler made like the Cybertruck from folded stainless would look rad as hell 8)

 

[The Toecutter]

I do wonder similar, but I won't lie that Microcars in history have all been vehicles of necessity and not actual *want*.

With the electric motor/controller/battery technology available today, they can be both. I think a vehicle built of pure necessity and designed for low operating cost with a brutal substance over style design language, and then inexpensively spiced up with enough performance to take on $XXX,XXX exotic cars at a stop light drag race, would be a vehicle millions would lust after. The difference in parts cost between one that could perform like a 28 mph street legal ebike and one that could perform like a Ferrari is at or under $1,XXX, whereas the difference in engineering costs would be huge. This is why mass production is needed, otherwise neither will never be affordable.

By pricing it to where it's more attainable than a used Honda Civic and comparable in purchase price to a moped or cheap motorcycle, it would definitely upset many apple carts within the automobile industry, oil industry, and tangentially related industries, by threatening to reduce the amount of money spent on them and allowing everyone to keep more of their hard-earned dollar. And that is exactly what we need, now more than ever.

The trick is to keep the entrenched industries from using the government they have captured to regulate such a thing out of existence. Because that will be their likely course of action, under the guise of "safety". All the more reason government is more often than not part of the problem, than the solution, because it has been hijacked by the few very moneyed and powerful interests that are at odds with the interests of the vast majority which have been rendered into a politically and financially powerless population.

 

[CONSIDERABLE SHOUTING]

I do wonder similar, but I won't lie that Microcars in history have all been vehicles of necessity and not actual *want*.

With the electric motor/controller/battery technology available today, they can be both. I think a vehicle built of pure necessity and designed for low operating cost with a brutal substance over style design language, and then inexpensively spiced up with enough performance to take on $XXX,XXX exotic cars at a stop light drag race, would be a vehicle millions would lust after.

By pricing it to where it's more attainable than a used Honda Civic and comparable in purchase price to a moped or cheap motorcycle, it would definitely upset many apple carts within the automobile industry, oil industry, and tangentially related industries, by threatening to reduce the amount of money spent on them and allowing everyone to keep more of their hard-earned dollar. And that is exactly what we need, now more than ever.

The trick is to keep the entrenched industries from using the government they have captured to regulate such a thing out of existence. Because that will be their likely course of action. All the more reason government is more often part of the problem, than the solution.

Of course, once I wrote that I realized that we ARE in a society now that requires that, since places like Arizona and Florida have seen rent more than double in this past year...

Okay, so for our mystery vehicle we already have cyclekart/cyclecar laws that these fit into now, and to keep it efficient we'll have no problem sticking below the weight limit (It's either 1,800lbs or 2,400lbs). At this point, I think things like heat pumps for efficiency are already obvious- I think the only "real" question we have, is what battery type we go for (I would argue Iron Phosphates over Ion for their long life and cheapness) and what seating arrangement (Unless Electramechanicca's Solo takes off, I'd argue 2 in the front, 1 in the back if possible). Of course, final price has to stay below $10K; we're basically fighting with the used car market at this point, which is the biggest challenge to me.

 

[Chalo]

Putting regular morons into flimsy kayaks with wheels and letting them run at what we consider highway speeds would result in an even worse bloodbath than today's cars. I guess the upside would be drivers having more skin in the game.

20 mph makes sense for efficiency, safety, resource footprint, noise, and maximizing roadway space. But suburbs and exurbs don't make sense at 20 mph. That's why both cars and and crackerbox parasite colonies will have to go away if we're to get ourselves out of this mess.

 

[The Toecutter]

At this point, I think things like heat pumps for efficiency are already obvious- I think the only "real" question we have, is what battery type we go for (I would argue Iron Phosphates over Ion for their long life and cheapness) and what seating arrangement (Unless Electramechanicca's Solo takes off, I'd argue 2 in the front, 1 in the back if possible).

What I'm proposing is either a one-seater or a tandem two-seater. Both of those would have roughly the same frontal area and drag, allowing for the highest possible efficiency.

With efficiency being the over-riding design consideration, a dense battery is not needed. Such a thing could work adequately with lead acid batteries, but because we have better technology available, from a lifetime cost standpoint and for all the benefits provided, LiFePO4 is perfect. Plus the fire risk goes away, and the battery could last for decades.

An enclosed tandem two-seater with a ready-to-ride mass of 150 kg and a CdA of 0.06 m^2 would easily get a 150+ mile range @ 70 mph with a 5 kWh battery pack when loaded with a 200 kg payload. It could be designed in such a way that no single component would cost more than $XXX if it fails, and so that it is fully repairable by a DIY type. The owners manual could describe how to install/remove/repair/replace every single component in the vehicle with hand tools. It would use so little energy that a small DIY home-mounted solar system costing < $1,XXX including auxiliary battery would be more than adequate to keep it charged even if one drove 100+ miles a day. THIS is how to make an automobile sustainable.

With such a low mass, a single Hubmonster in the rear wheel and two 3PH FOC electric skateboard controllers driving it would be enough for 0-60 mph < 4 seconds when fully laden, faster with just a single occupant.

Putting regular morons into flimsy kayaks with wheels and letting them run at what we consider highway speeds would result in an even worse bloodbath than today's cars. I guess the upside would be drivers having more skin in the game.

True, but most of that risk comes from sharing the roads with multi-ton missiles. These flimsy kayaks can easily be designed in such a way that they are safer for the occupants than riding in multi-ton missiles when smashing into stationary objects like guardrails and bridge abutments, simply because there is an order of magnitude less kinetic energy to dissipate for a given speed. If I were a pedestrian or cyclist, I'd also much rather be hit by a flimsy kayak with wheels than a multi-ton missile with wheels.

20 mph makes sense for efficiency, safety, resource footprint, noise, and maximizing roadway space. But suburbs and exurbs don't make sense at 20 mph. That's why both cars and and crackerbox parasite colonies will have to go away if we're to get ourselves out of this mess.

Agreed. But part of the issue is that resources have already been wasted building the crackerbox parasite colonies and it would take yet more resources to decommission them and relocate the population within them, resources which we won't have in the future. In the short term(also the timeframe where some of the worst problems caused by our "civilization" are likely to manifest), it makes a lot of sense to just use the resources and infrastructure we have much more efficiently. There is a lot of wasteful resource consumption that can be cut with minimal sacrifice to the common person, but the oligarchs that rule us would suffer massive losses if this consumption was cut, which is why much of the legislation in existence is worded in a way to preserve their profits and control and eliminate things that threaten it.

We won't be getting ourselves out of this mess. The best we can realistically do is to adapt to it and minimize the suffering caused by it, while removing from power those who have deliberately caused this mess by deciding to shape society in this manner to further both their profits extracted from us and their control exerted over us. It will likely require a revolt, the sentiment for which has been gradually increasing over the decades.

 

[CONSIDERABLE SHOUTING]

Putting regular morons into flimsy kayaks with wheels and letting them run at what we consider highway speeds would result in an even worse bloodbath than today's cars. I guess the upside would be drivers having more skin in the game.

20 mph makes sense for efficiency, safety, resource footprint, noise, and maximizing roadway space. But suburbs and exurbs don't make sense at 20 mph. That's why both cars and and crackerbox parasite colonies will have to go away if we're to get ourselves out of this mess.

I'm not advocating for something akin to that, but any truly efficient vehicle to be sold like this will have to be clever- and clever enough, to realize that being clever can scare the average buyer. I work EMS/fire and I can tell you that modern crash structures and impact protection is phenomenal and It's only getting lighter and better, especially as more and more composites become the norm and we print and cast more uniform metals than previous methods. Smart Cars are a good example- the NHRA considers them to all have roll cages because the body structure is so well designed.

I think for our wacky venture Toecutter, that you're right on the tandem at least; but I feel like we'll need it to have it be as decently car-like as possible, because too many will be scared off by light weight. I cannot begin to explain, when I tell people that I own an AW11 MR2, how it's 2400lb weight makes it so great and I get a "IsNt ThAt UnSaFe??????" answer every frocking time- it's not, it's poor design that's unsafe. It's a question of how you convert the energy now trying to crush your door in half into something else.

I pretty much agree in principle on the societal issues. Climate Change alone is already forcing states like florida and Cali into new degrees of water rationing (Flaw-rida because rising seas keep getting to the salination pools and polluting the drinking water) and fuel costs are throttling the cost of living to new highs- and even if Russia left Ukraine today, they would never correct because Americans would never hunt a boardroom and they've pushed some kind of Overton window far enough. But this nation is reactionary- never acts- so it's likely decisions will be made for your average American visibly soon, public and open instead of in the quiet ratcheting ways the powerful prefer.

 

[e-beach]

.......Smart Cars are a good example- the NHRA considers them to all have roll cages because the body structure is so well designed....

A year or so ago I was driving near my house and I saw that a Chevy Suburban and a Smart Car had somehow gotten into a head-on accident. The Suburban didn't look like it had much damage, but the whole front end of the Smart Car was smashed into the front line of the windshield..accordioned.

Both drivers were standing on the corner sidewalk, both frowning, but there was no blood or cry's of agony. I was amazed the the smart care driver didn't look hurt at all.

 

[The Toecutter]

I'm not advocating for something akin to that, but any truly efficient vehicle to be sold like this will have to be clever- and clever enough, to realize that being clever can scare the average buyer.

It's pretty much a given that no matter what you do, such a vehicle will scare the average upper-middle class new car buyer. Efficiency and operating cost are generally things they don't care about, and this demographic is exactly what the auto industry is catering to, after said auto industry deliberately spent billions of dollars on marketing and propaganda to shift this demographic's taste as such to what it is today. For those whom conspicuous consumption is a lifestyle, the vehicle I have proposed will never appeal, because in the medium and long term, it is anti-consumption.

My idea is to tailor to a more downmarket demographic, the bottom 80% of the population, where saving money and doing as much as possible for as little as possible is more commonly a deliberate and highly necessary financial decision at the individual level. Allowing a solution to allow this demographic to spend even less without penalizing them is oft ignored, or if any attention is paid to it at all to such a concept, it is done so with excessive hostility, precisely because the existing economic system is tailored to and dedicated toward extracting every penny possible from this demographic to prevent them from building any wealth of their own and achieving financial independence from greedy creditors and other various parasites.

I work EMS/fire and I can tell you that modern crash structures and impact protection is phenomenal and It's only getting lighter and better, especially as more and more composites become the norm and we print and cast more uniform metals than previous methods. Smart Cars are a good example- the NHRA considers them to all have roll cages because the body structure is so well designed.

IMO, it would suit everyone well to roll back the majority of safety standards from the last 50+ years, and keep it simple: roll cages, collapsible steering columns, crumple zones, and 5-point harnesses. Airbags are really unnecessary and even a liability if the car is designed properly. We should build automobiles to be more like F1 cars and LeMans prototypes structurally-speaking, and less like medieval war wagons. It would improve overall safety(especially at illegal speeds) and open more design freedom.

Even an otherwise death trap of a 50+ year old vintage British sports car, when fitted with a proper roll cage, can be safer than many new cars at triple digit speeds when in a wreck, simply because the occupant(s) won't have to worry about the car itself crushing them to death.

Roll cages are wonderful. Yet modern regulations ignore them because these regulations generally aren't about safety, they're about preventing competition to established corporations via greatly increasing the costs of compliance. This prevents a small cottage industry from coming in and selling a no frills fun-to-drive $15,000, 70+ mpg midsized sedan with Toyota reliability that does 0-60 mph in 4 seconds, or an EV startup from offering an electric version of similar. The fact that cars have gotten safer over time is arguably more a function of technology than regulation. What regulation is successful at doing is allowing the established industry to force upon every buyer a bland series of over-priced, excessively-massive, feature-laden, high-maintenance, gas-guzzling products that only appeal to those with excess money to burn, and to correlate performance with cost(want a fun car? They make you PAY for it, even if it might be inherently cheaper to make than slower cars). When the used vehicles trickle down to your average Joe who just wants to get from point A to point B in comfort with minimal expense and drama, he has to make due with all of the associated maintenance and upkeep of those bloated products, and it is breaking his budget and forcing him onto an endless debt treadmill to retain individual transportation. This is no accident, but a deliberate decision.

Cars like the Tesla Model 3, Toyota Prius, and such hold the most appeal to the portion of the population that can't afford them new and are making due with a used gasoline car they picked up for $X,XXX. And gas prices are screwing this portion of the population harder than they are any other, making them even less able to save up for something that costs less to operate. Without all of the onerous regulations we have today, someone could cheaply come in and offer a highly efficient, bare-bones, highly streamlined, low-mass car appropriate for carrying a family with performance comparable to a Dodge Charger for Mitsubishi Mirage money, or even many of those cheap $X,XXX Chinese-made 100+ mile range EVs would then be available in the U.S., and having such things available would cannibalize the sales of many overpriced new cars and their parts.

But this nation is reactionary- never acts- so it's likely decisions will be made for your average American visibly soon, public and open instead of in the quiet ratcheting ways the powerful prefer.

Americans are not going to like those decisions, and they are certainly going to react to them. This is why the U.S. government is treating everyone as terrorists and literally preparing for war on its own people. It knows about cause and effect relationships, especially thanks to its repeated meddling abroad. Those chickens are now coming home to roost. It's going to get very ugly.

 

[john61ct]

That's why both cars and and crackerbox parasite colonies will have to go away if we're to get ourselves out of this mess.

That's just not going to happen. We are frocked and that's a fact. Plan accordingly, or get out while you can.

 

[Chalo]

That's why both cars and and crackerbox parasite colonies will have to go away if we're to get ourselves out of this mess.

That's just not going to happen. We are frocked and that's a fact. Plan accordingly, or get out while you can.

I think it can happen-- not out of some central plan-- but as we cope with the implications of moving towards the global economic median. Cars will phase out as people can no longer afford them, and suburbs will become towns as they integrate other uses (retail, services, workshops, industries, warehousing, etc.) at distances from housing that don't have to be driven in a car. Good quality, high volume transit projects will probably become unaffordable, but local private bus services will appear to fill the void, just as they do in the global south. We'll wish our streets were laid out better, but targeted demolitions can improve them somewhat, fairly cheaply. Don't be at the end of a cul-de-sac when that happens.

Our way of life is progressively impoverishing us, but that same poverty will force changes to the conditions that caused it.

The larcenous class will stay larcenous, but they'll be serving themselves unfair shares of an ever-smaller pie. Russia shows us how that works.

Or... we can make a better plan, radically cut birth rates, build public transit, permit sustainable neighborhood development, commit to clean efficient industries. I think this is the thing we know probably will not happen.

 

[CONSIDERABLE SHOUTING]

Considering the absolute Wildfire speed that Not Just Bikes and Strong Towns took off at, I imagine that some of these changes will be happening faster than people realize. The housing market crisis will add onto it as well; pedestrian infrastructure will be wanted over anything else in housing millions, because the walkable stuff is so cheap to maintain that it's essentially free. The bankrupt nature of many of America's cities (much like the first European cities with bike infrastructure) are forcing them to go to it, but only if they actually accept the nature of the problem of the housing crisis.

And now that the fed's interest rate's back at ~7%... well, I think we'll only see good changes in the housing market if either progressive leadership is elected, or if homeless people begin invading the wonderful lawns of the upper %1.

That's why both cars and and crackerbox parasite colonies will have to go away if we're to get ourselves out of this mess.

That's just not going to happen. We are frocked and that's a fact. Plan accordingly, or get out while you can.

Doomer sayings will get you nowhere my dude, especially when you're trying to get people to change their behaviors. Besides, the things you'd "need" to "ride out the apocalypse" would essentially be a microstate. Besides, there's plenty of proof that says we're gonna hit that climate accord; we've got entire nations running off renewables some days now.

 

[Hillhater]

......... we've got entire nations running off renewables some days now.

Really ?... name one !

 

[CONSIDERABLE SHOUTING]

......... we've got entire nations running off renewables some days now.

Really ?... name one !

Bhutan.
https://www.biogasworld.com/news/bhutan-sustainability-renewable-energy-leader/

Costa rica.
https://metaefficient.com/uncategorized/costa-rica-is-99-powered-by-renewable-energy.html

It was very difficult to find- took 5 seconds of horrible, awful googling

 

[The Toecutter]

And now that the fed's interest rate's back at ~7%... well, I think we'll only see good changes in the housing market if either progressive leadership is elected, or if homeless people begin invading the wonderful lawns of the upper %1.

We definitely need the latter. The former doesn't exist in U.S. politics whatsoever, only the illusion of it, and the political system is deliberately designed to fully prevent this sort of leadership from ever forming, let alone attaining political power. Elections in this country, if you can even call them that, are neither fair nor honest nor are the candidates available on the rigged ballots even representative of the views of those who are tasked with voting for them.

So I'm all for the latter. In fact, I'm all for arming the homeless. Give them automatic weapons.

Doomer sayings will get you nowhere my dude, especially when you're trying to get people to change their behaviors. Besides, the things you'd "need" to "ride out the apocalypse" would essentially be a microstate. Besides, there's plenty of proof that says we're gonna hit that climate accord; we've got entire nations running off renewables some days now.

People won't change when you have an economic system and government that penalize the actions that allow for the realization of such needed change. IMO, it's going to crash and burn. Technology is not the issue and is more than good enough to allow common people a decent if not improved living standard while minimizing fossil fuel use and environmental impact. But renewables aren't currently able to produce enough energy to allow an aristocracy, a bloated military-industrial complex, a massive control grid, and a fractional-reserve debt-based currency system in conjunction with common people having a decent living standard. It is the latter that the power elite are placing on the chopping block under the guise of "saving the planet", and the consumption of this elite by itself is so wasteful that it alone will suck this planet dry of resources and perhaps kill the biosphere outright over the course of this century. Yet the masses are told they must "own nothing and be happy". The middle class is being eviscerated and stripped of wealth/earning power as we speak, and this is the result of intentional policy decisions in places of power.

I think it can happen-- not out of some central plan-- but as we cope with the implications of moving towards the global economic median. Cars will phase out as people can no longer afford them, and suburbs will become towns as they integrate other uses (retail, services, workshops, industries, warehousing, etc.) at distances from housing that don't have to be driven in a car. Good quality, high volume transit projects will probably become unaffordable, but local private bus services will appear to fill the void, just as they do in the global south. We'll wish our streets were laid out better, but targeted demolitions can improve them somewhat, fairly cheaply. Don't be at the end of a cul-de-sac when that happens.

Our way of life is progressively impoverishing us, but that same poverty will force changes to the conditions that caused it.

This is a realistic assessment, if not slightly optimistic. Food shortages are looming in the near term. What form they will take will prove interesting.

The larcenous class will stay larcenous, but they'll be serving themselves unfair shares of an ever-smaller pie. Russia shows us how that works.

The larcenous class is the problem. It needs to go, or no actual solution will ever be allowed to take effect. An ever-smaller pie will be the result of biosphere degradation and exhaustion of natural resources. Our grandchilden will be mining landfills for trace amounts of materials that are commonly used today.

Or... we can make a better plan, radically cut birth rates, build public transit, permit sustainable neighborhood development, commit to clean efficient industries. I think this is the thing we know probably will not happen.

The time to start such a plan was 50 years ago. Those chickens are coming home to roost as we speak. We're going to have to repurpose what we already have and properly maintain it in order to adapt to this unfolding nightmare. Failure to adapt will bring about civilization collapse.

 

[Hillhater]

......... we've got entire nations running off renewables some days now.

Really ?... name one !

Bhutan.
https://www.biogasworld.com/news/bhutan-sustainability-renewable-energy-leader/

Costa rica.
https://metaefficient.com/uncategorized/costa-rica-is-99-powered-by-renewable-energy.html

It was very difficult to find- took 5 seconds of horrible, awful googling

Well done, ..however, two issues there..
1). Size... fewer than 6 million population between them both !....not exactly typical “nations”
2). Generation source...both are mostly hydro,.. which is not possible for most if not all major nations.
They are little more than demonstration sites , which cannot be replicated on a world scale.

Bhutan's installed power generation capacity is approximately 1.6 gigawatts (GW). Over 99 percent of the country's installed capacity comes from hydropower plants, accounting for 1,614 megawatts (MW)

More than 99 percent of the energy in Costa Rica was generated from renewable sources in 2019. According to the country’s National Center for Energy Control, Costa Rica has been running on more than 98 percent renewable energy since 2014. The majority of this energy, 67.5 percent, comes from hydropower. Additionally, wind power generates 17 percent, geothermal sources make up 13.5 percent and biomass and solar panels comprise 0.84 percent. The remaining 1.16 percent is from backup plants.

 

[Chalo]

Bhutan.
https://www.biogasworld.com/news/bhutan-sustainability-renewable-energy-leader/

Costa rica.
https://metaefficient.com/uncategorized/costa-rica-is-99-powered-by-renewable-energy.html

It was very difficult to find- took 5 seconds of horrible, awful googling

Well done, ..however, two issues there..
1). Size... fewer than 6 million population between them both !....not exactly typical “nations”

Says the Aussie! Hahahahaha! By those standards, Bangladesh is 6-1/2 times the nation that you call home. Heck, by the same standards, Texas is a greater nation.

I have a conjecture about the intelligence of groups that suggests smaller countries will make good choices before larger ones do.

 

[JackFlorey]

Besides, there's plenty of proof that says we're gonna hit that climate accord; we've got entire nations running off renewables some days now.

Yep. A few months ago California ran off 100% renewable energy for over an hour. (Actually more than that; the surplus was exported.) That's 40 million people, more than the population of most countries. This will continue to improve; we will see longer and longer stretches of time where nothing other than renewables are needed. And those times will represent times that no natural gas has to be burned for power. It also means that hydro dams can shut down and save their water for more important uses, like drinking and irrigation.

 

[Hillhater]

Yep. A few months ago California ran off 100% renewable energy for over an hour. (Actually more than that; the surplus was exported.)

Wow !... an hour !, ..you may be impressed,.. but let me guess, it was a low demand period ? Weekend ? Off peak ?
Oh yes,....... why then does Ca rely on other states to import 20+% of its electricity ?

 

[Chalo]

Oh yes,....... why then does Ca rely on other states to import 20+% of its electricity ?

Because almost 40 million people live there?

 

[Hillhater]

Oh yes,....... why then does Ca rely on other states to import 20+% of its electricity ?

Because almost 40 million people live there?

That is not a reason,...... unless all 40 mil actually wanted to live with the possibility of daily blackouts !

 

[Ianhill]

Orkney islands regularly sustain themselfs but its got a population around 23000 people and little industry roads etc so it works for them.

My local citys cardiff and swansea, wales uk tend to have mass transit migration too them everyday to support the city.

Why is this ? Is it becuase people like to travel 50 miles or more each morning for a jolly or is it my valley house is far better than the shithole stacked battery farm thats got expense written everywhere u look.

We build bigger shoppimg areas everytime and the general folk dont realise its kicking the debt can down the road cant pay for what u got take a loan pay what u owe and build another out of town centre and do it apl again few years time when the interest is getting on top of them.

Its not the ones at the bottom thats got to change but we lead by example so i been taught and i dont see it enough theres a bunch of continuous scandals arising that mute any progress to a mumble at best.

 

[john61ct]

Simple solution from a personal POV, just get out of Amerika now already a failed state,only getting worse.

No systemic solutions will be possible in the US, even bloody revolution will no longer be possible, and the 0.01% combined with fossil fuel / pharma / etc corporate oligarchy just won't follow JFK's advice.

So get out while you can.