' The truth - We will go extinct, very soon.'
POSTED BY: reaverfan
UPDATED: Sunday, May 18, 2025 05:23
VIEWED: 65274
PAGE 59 of 68
Quote:
Originally posted by WISHIMAY:Quote:
Originally posted by 1KIKI:
TULSI FOR PRESIDENT!!!
Yeah, we know...Russians for Tulsi already...
Even Hillary knows that one...
It's not gonna work a second time. No one here, INCLUDING THE RETHUGS NOW!!! wants anything to do with a Russian backed player.
Not that she had a chance in hell to begin with.
Unfortunately, none of the other Dems on the debate stage agree with Hillary's assessment, and she was called out even by CNN on her bullshit there.
But please, do tell us what evidence you have that Tulsi is a Russian asset. We'd all love to hear about the dirt you've dug up on her.
DISCLAIMER: I'd never vote for her in the first place because she's almost as far left as some of the other goons up there. I like her stance on war and American intervention as well as reforming the prison system, but other than that she's a looney toon.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, we all know WISHY is kind of a loony toon herself. It's hard to take much of what she posts seriously.
*****
Back to the topic of energy efficiency.
I watched a long video of Cuba's response to its own energy crisis. The backstory is that when the Soviet Union fell apart, Cuba suddnely lost almost all of its oil imports. How it adapted to the sudden and almost total loss of energy of ALL kinds ... gasoline, diesel, and oil-sourced electricity ... might be a window into how any other economy might adapt to serious energy reductions.
As I recall, energy was devoted to the most critical aspects, including food production and medical services. Transportation took an immediate hit: Cubans cobbled together a "mass transit" system that included using trucks, vans and buses to help people get around. Air conditioning and elevator service disappeared, so anyone who lived more than five flights up had a long climb! And apartment buildings that weren't designed to let the sea breeze thru got kinda moldy. So ... mass transit, and climate- sensitive and walkup-able buildings.
Food production sank. Pork became scarce to non-existent and rice was expensive. People were encouraged to farm/garden and grow food around their dwellings; vegetables and chickens became more common.
Many things became very localized: farming/gardening, schooling, shopping (neighborhood farmer's markets sprang up) etc. The things that were centralized (cement production for export, sugar production) were serviced by specific mass transit.
IF WE INSTITUTED A CARBON TAX AND DOUBLED THE PRICE OF FUEL, WE MIGHT EXPECT TO SEE THOSE KINDS OF ADJUSTMENTS, although a carbon tax/ fuel proce increase should be implemented in stages (say, 20% per year for 5 years) to allow for smoother adaptation.
I'll see if I can find that video again. It was a lot of positive spin about how the socialist economy of Cuba managed their fuel cutoff, but there might be useful indications of what might, or should, happen in a regimen of "less energy".
BUT SEEING AS HOW YOUTUBE AND GOOGLE ARE BUSY CENSORING EVERYTHING, I'M NOT SURE I CAN FIND IT AGAIN.
Oh btw the video that you were thinking of KIKI is called A CENTURY OF SELF: How Edward Bernays (Freud's nephew) used psychology to mold people into thinking of themselves as "individuals" and "consumers", to profit the mass production companies.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
You idiots have been oppressing the entire sexual spectrum as long as you have existed. I can't wait for the day your kind is dead - WISHIMAY
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Can't find the original but this references Cuba's "oil shock"
ALSO
this is the first of four parts
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
You idiots have been oppressing the entire sexual spectrum as long as you have existed. I can't wait for the day your kind is dead - WISHIMAY
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Oh THANK YOU so much for the name.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
A CENTURY OF SELF: How Edward Bernays used psychology to mold people into thinking of themselves as "individuals" and "consumers", to profit the mass production companies.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
You idiots have been oppressing the entire sexual spectrum as long as you have existed. I can't wait for the day your kind is dead - WISHIMAY
Here's the link:
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Thanks. That's a real-life instructive video on how to get by with almost no petroleum and massively reduced energy consumption.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I watched a long video of Cuba's response to its own energy crisis. The backstory is that when the Soviet Union fell apart, Cuba suddnely lost almost all of its oil imports. How it adapted to the sudden and almost total loss of energy of ALL kinds ... gasoline, diesel, and oil-sourced electricity ... might be a window into how any other economy might adapt to serious energy reductions.
As I recall, energy was devoted to the most critical aspects, including food production and medical services. Transportation took an immediate hit: Cubans cobbled together a "mass transit" system that included using trucks, vans and buses to help people get around. Air conditioning and elevator service disappeared, so anyone who lived more than five flights up had a long climb! And apartment buildings that weren't designed to let the sea breeze thru got kinda moldy. So ... mass transit, and climate- sensitive and walkup-able buildings.
Food production sank. Pork became scarce to non-existent and rice was expensive. People were encouraged to farm/garden and grow food around their dwellings; vegetables and chickens became more common.
Many things became very localized: farming/gardening, schooling, shopping (neighborhood farmer's markets sprang up) etc. The things that were centralized (cement production for export, sugar production) were serviced by specific mass transit.
I'm now thinking about what were the SPECIFIC differences between that lifestyle and our high-consumption one.
One of the main differences though is that Cuba has no industry to support. I'd need to think about that.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The reason why I brought up Cuba is because I've seen analyses that day that it's less energy consumptive (per ton) to ship grapes by freighter from Chile than trucking then in to your farmers market 200 miles away.
Also, that the city dweller uses less energy per capita than the exurban or rural dweller who must have items trucked in from many miles away. That's one of the reasons why I would have wanted much higher granularity on the per capita map.
But that's assuming you remain with a system of shipping non-local production around. The suburbs, exurbs and rural areas actually have a higher chance of producing hyper-locally than the cities, at least as far as food is concerned. Pesticides, fertilizer, and GMO would become very expensive.
I too have to think about manufacturing. One can produce some energy off_grid, and simple tools and parts can be fabricated from iron, but complex products like engines, electronics, and pharmaceuticals require concentrated labor. The only way to square that circle is to step back in complexity and step forward on repairability wherever possible. Again, I'll give more thought as to which products can be localized and which can't
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
You idiots have been oppressing the entire sexual spectrum as long as you have existed. I can't wait for the day your kind is dead - WISHIMAY
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
WHERE IS MARCOS!??
Impeachment is finally underway.
There is zero chance he wouldn't be here for that.
Which one of you idiots lost the password to your sockpuppet account?
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh I'm having a wonderfully wonkish thought experiment with Kiki. Who cares about Marcos?
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
You idiots have been oppressing the entire sexual spectrum as long as you have existed. I can't wait for the day your kind is dead - WISHIMAY
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I'm guessing that's if you ship tons of pallets all at once vs packing a few crates each week on a truck for the local market. ... But then, you still have to break that big shipment down into smaller quantities and ship them to individual stores, so I'm not seeing the energy savings there. Either way, a truck transports small(er) quantities to vendors. That truck may have originated at a warehouse or at a farm, but that part of the distribution chain looks identical.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The reason why I brought up Cuba is because I've seen analyses that day that it's less energy consumptive (per ton) to ship grapes by freighter from Chile than trucking then in to your farmers market 200 miles away.
I just looked it up yesterday (didn't post or save), and there's an estimated 4-7% savings of 'greenhouse gasses' due to FOOD shipping in the form of CO2 due to shipping, from 'buying local' (which is assumed to be within 200 miles). But the total greenhouse gas emission are due to nitrites/nitrates, methane, etc, so it isn't about energy savings per se. Still, buying local seems to save some transport CO2.
The analysis you saw might have been an extreme case analysis.
Quote:I wonder if this topic is amenable to spitballing, or if the question is so finely balanced it requires detailed analysis.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Also, that the city dweller uses less energy per capita than the exurban or rural dweller who must have items trucked in from many miles away. That's one of the reasons why I would have wanted much higher granularity on the per capita map.
But that's assuming you remain with a system of shipping non-local production around. The suburbs, exurbs and rural areas actually have a higher chance of producing hyper-locally than the cities, at least as far as food is concerned. Pesticides, fertilizer, and GMO would become very expensive.
I too have to think about manufacturing. One can produce some energy off_grid, and simple tools and parts can be fabricated from iron, but complex products like engines, electronics, and pharmaceuticals require concentrated labor. The only way to square that circle is to step back in complexity and step forward on repairability wherever possible. Again, I'll give more thought as to which products can be localized and which can't.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
You idiots have been oppressing the entire sexual spectrum as long as you have existed. I can't wait for the day your kind is dead - WISHIMAY
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/use-of-energy/transportation.php
This source indicates 28% of energy use is for transportation, and of that, 54% is for gasoline (it looks like they assume transport energy is pretty much 100% fossil fuels). So when it comes to goods transport, I'd assume all gasoline is passenger, and the rest is commercial.
I'm just putting this out as a marker for later.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Oh I'm having a wonderfully wonkish thought experiment with Kiki. Who cares about Marcos?
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
You idiots have been oppressing the entire sexual spectrum as long as you have existed. I can't wait for the day your kind is dead - WISHIMAY
I'm just wondering which one of them is Marcos.
It's not Wishy. No point in having a sockpuppet if you're going to behave worse than the sockpuppet does.
My money is on Captain.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME