Re: Energy Sources now and in the Future - World moves on Oil
From: Norman Gauss (
Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2011 15:49:52 -0700 (PDT)
There is a tendency to forget that the world moves on oil.  All of its
airlines, railroads, trucking fleets, and commercial shipping are fueled by
oil.  Much of its electricity is generated by the use of fossil fuels.  If
the cost of extracting and refining oil permanently increases, so will the
cost of much of what is for sale in stores.  Even the poor will suffer.  BP
may have goofed in public relations, but at least they are trying to extract
more oil until it becomes so expensive that burning it is not cost effective

As for natural gas, so far, transportation has not accepted it as a cost
effective fuel.  It might be available for generating electricity and
heating buildings, but for now vehicles need petroleum products, as
gasoline, diesel oil, jet fuel, etc.

Norm Gauss

-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne Tyson [mailto:landrest [at]] 
Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2011 3:05 PM
To: Cohousing-L
Subject: Re: [C-L]_ Energy Sources now and in the Future


Forgive me if this point has already been made, but no finite resource can 
be exploited infinitely. "Conservation," or avoiding waste, can delay the 
inevitable, but once finite resources like petroleum and coal become more 
and more expensive to extract, their products and benefits will increasingly

become the property of, and for the exclusive use of, the most wealthy. As 
such points are approached, "production" will fall, hence consumption will 
fall too.

The burning of petroleum removes this highly efficient source for 
higher-priority uses like lubrication and, say, sterile, 
disposable/recyclable products like hypodermic needles (which have saved 
many a life and extended life-expectancy) from the equation earlier, meaning

that extraction of energy from biological sources will become even more 
uneconomical than it is now (even now it is largely a heavily subsidized 
con-job). "Biofuels" are only possible because of fossil energy inputs, now,

and the basic con is that outputs exceed inputs. However, that is doubtful, 
and even the "calculations" made to justify this practice (which diverts 
agricultural space and products from food production, thus raising food 
prices, and increasingly lays waste to complex ecosystems) can claim only 
marginal net outputs in excess of inputs (like sugar-cane). The "catch" is 
that sugarcane can't be grown just anywhere (and the expansion of sugarcane 
production or any other crop-based source of energy requires the destruction

of the ecosystems that now occupy the space "converted" to such production. 
The value of such ecosystems is NEVER factored into such calculations.

All world cultures are on a terminal binge--terminal, not just for humans, 
but for much of the earth's life.

There is no free lunch.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Norman Gauss" <normangauss [at]>
To: "'Cohousing-L'" <cohousing-l [at]>
Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2011 12:57 PM
Subject: [C-L]_ Energy Sources now and in the Future

> The Dept. of Energy has compiled a graphical representation of energy
> sources now in the future.
> If you can display the above webpage on your computer, you will see that 
> the
> sources of energy are listed in order of decreasing importance as follows:
> 1. Liquid (Oil mainly)
> 2. Coal
> 3. Natural Gas
> 4. Renewables (Wind, Water, Solar)
> 5. Nuclear
> Anyone who believes that non-fossil sources of energy are the wave of the
> future should take a look at this chart.
> Norm Gauss
> _________________________________________________________________
> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG -
> Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1516/3768 - Release Date: 07/16/11

Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:

Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.