Winter's Coming for the Boomers: Part 2

<< Continued from part 1

Generation X – Assuming Command

We yearn for civic character but satisfy ourselves with symbolic gestures and celebrity circuses. We perceive no greatness in our leaders, a new meanness in ourselves. Small wonder that each new election brings a new jolt, its aftermath a new disappointment. Not long ago, America was more than the sum of its parts. Now, it is less. Around World War II, we were proud as a people but modest as individuals. Fewer than two people in ten said yes when asked, Are you a very important person? Today, more than six in ten say yes. Where we once thought ourselves collectively strong, we now regard ourselves as individually entitled. Yet even while we exalt our own personal growth, we realize that millions of self-actualized persons don’t add up to an actualized society.

Strauss & Howe – The Fourth Turning

Barack Obama became the 1^st Generation X-er to be elected President of the United States. His background is a classic Nomad story. He has lived the life of a wanderer, living all over the globe, a child of divorce, fatherless, raised by grandparents, and a free agent in his career. Generation X grew up as abandoned children and alienated young adults. Generation X leaders will be pragmatic, savvy and practical. Obama has proven thus far to be pragmatic and able to get his agenda initiated. Previous Nomad leaders who proved to be highly competent doers during a time of Crisis include Dwight D. Eisenhower, George Patton, and Harry Truman. You may not agree with Obama’s plans or policies, but it is clear to anyone that he is an intelligent, pragmatic man that will institute dramatic change in the policies of the United States.

It is very likely that Barack Obama will lead the country into the next Crisis. He will not lead us out of the Crisis, as it is unlikely to subside until 2025. As the Unraveling transitions into Crisis the apathy reflected in historic low voter turnout will reverse itself as Americans become mobilized by the Crisis. The economy always undergoes wrenching transformations during a Crisis. The U.S. economy will likely be racked by panic, depression, inflation and war. We have witnessed a preliminary financial panic, but the real panic will be much more traumatic. The separateness and blame witnessed during the Unraveling will transform into gathering and family togetherness. McMansions will become useful as three generations will more frequently live under one roof. Immigration will decline as the population will fear outsiders and place strict restrictions on foreigners entering the country. During the coming crisis, our culture will likely be cleansed, censored, and harnessed for the public good. The current ongoing financial debacle will ultimately contribute to the Crisis causing trigger of a worldwide oil shortage.

Peak Oil + Green Energy = Crisis

"But I guess it just reminds me that as a society, we don't have the ability to actually come to grips with a crisis until it hits us in the face. I am discouraged enough now to think that we're going to have to have a really nasty shock before we wake people up. The most optimistic estimate for the average depletion rate of the world's currently producing oilfields is between 4% and 5% annually, or about four million barrels per day at our current rate of production. That means that each year we must find enough new oil to first replace those four million barrels of lost daily production before we even add enough to meet new demand. This is all the more worrisome because world oil discovery of new reserves has been slowing since the mid-20th century.”

Matt Simmons

click to enlarge

Matt Simmons has been a lone voice in the wilderness warning Americans about the impending crisis that will be caused by Peak Oil. His prediction of a worldwide peak in crude oil production at 73 million barrels per day in 2005 has proved correct. Worldwide total liquids production peaked at 86 million barrels in 2008. All of the easy oil and gas in the world has been found. Additional supplies will be found deep below the ocean, in challenging arctic regions, in tar sands, and shale. It will be dramatically more expensive to extract oil from these sources. Oil discoveries have been in a steady decline since the 1970’s.

The United States has been dependent on 600 million barrels of oil from Mexico every year. By 2012 Mexico will become a net importer of oil, so 600 million barrels of oil will need to be replaced. Iran’s oil production is in decline as capital investment has been ignored for years. Russia’s production has peaked. Saudi Arabia continues to lie about its ability to ramp up production. Their oil fields are 40 years old and in terminal decline. By 2012, the world will only be able to produce 80 million barrels per day. There is no doubt that demand in 2012 will be higher than today’s 85 million barrels per day as China, India and other developing countries continue to grow. Even a Wall Street economist could predict what will happen to prices.

Peak oil will have the most dramatic affect on America. We have 5% of the world’s population, but use 25% of the world’s energy. Practically 85% of the world barely uses energy. World population of 7 billion will likely grow to 10 billion by 2030. China and India both are selling more cars annually than the U.S. As people throughout the world enter the middle class, they want cars, TVs, and modern appliances. Energy demand cannot be turned back. Infrastructure constraints will exacerbate the coming energy crisis. The NIMBY crowd has managed to keep any refineries from being built in the U.S. since 1976. Our energy infrastructure is made of steel and is rusting away. It would take trillions to upgrade the energy system. These investments will not be made. The geologists and other experienced oil men are retiring, and no one is replacing them. Matt Simmons’ recommendation for the upcoming crisis is DOA:

"We should basically be going back to creating a village economy, so that we really reduce the energy intensity of how we live," he says. "We need big time conservation, not feel-good conservation. Make things where they're used. You'll end long-distance commuting, and we have the tools to do that now with webcams. Grow food locally. Grow food in your backyard. If they're not commuting, people will have time to do that."

The Green Agenda that is sweeping the country and is fully supported by the Obama administration will be the final nail in the coffin. The blueprint of success for the Green Agenda is ethanol. Government subsidized a fuel that required more energy to produce than it provides. The mal-investment in ethanol plants led to a boom and the usual bust when government interferes in the free markets. The use of corn for fuel caused prices to rise for other food crops and meat. With the crash in oil prices, ethanol plants have been going bankrupt at an accelerating rate. Renewable energy and green jobs are the catch phrases being used by Obama and the Democrats pushing the Al Gore led agenda.

“I believe it is appropriate to have an 'over-representation' of the facts on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience."

Al Gore

I’d like to know the difference between over-representation and lying. The real inconvenient truth is that the United States depends on oil, natural gas, and coal to supply 87% of its energy, with nuclear power providing another 7%. The beloved solar, wind and geothermal sources supply 1.5% of our energy needs. Harry Reid and his green disciples believe coal and oil are ruining the world. They want to eliminate the fuels that power 87% of our economy. Maybe they should just keep implementing their economic policies and keep the country in a permanent recession, as carbon emissions have declined over the last three years. Their false science claims, scare tactics in grade schools, and use of green catch phrases will not generate the energy needed to run this country.

The green extremists want to eliminate coal as an energy source in the U.S. Even though nuclear energy emits no Carbon Dioxide, it is unacceptable to the green extremists. There is just one small problem. The chart below shows that coal and nuclear provide 72% of all the electric power in the United States. Renewable energy sounds good, but it cannot replace our existing sources. Inconvenient facts like no ability to distribute any energy created by wind and solar to the places that use the energy are completely ignored by green extremists. Our transportation system depends on oil to provide 96% of its energy. I don’t think anyone will be commuting to work in a solar car or wind powered car in the near future. A plug in car will require electric power that comes from coal and nuclear plants.

The Cap & Trade Energy bill will eventually be rammed through by the Democratic controlled Congress. It is being spun as a bill that will reduce greenhouse gases and create thousands of green jobs. What is a green job? Will we turn unemployed investment bankers and auto salesmen into solar panel and wind turbine manufacturers? The green agenda bill will penalize manufacturers, refineries, natural gas producers and electric utilities with increased taxes. Sounds great. Let’s penalize the polluters. Every company that produces something will pass their costs along to their customers. This bill will increase the average family’s energy costs by $1,500 per year. It will convince many companies to move operations and jobs to China and India where these regulations don’t apply. Our agriculture industry will bear the brunt of this burden as they use tremendous amounts of energy in farming. Expect food costs to go up a lot. Since low income families spend a greater percentage of their income on energy, this bill will damage their finances the most. It will also trigger the coming Crisis.

20 Year Crisis - Financial Collapse, War, Rebirth

“Most of today’s adult Americans grew up in a society whose citizens dreamed of perpetually improving outcomes: better jobs, fatter wallets, stronger government, finer culture, nicer families, smarter kids, all the usual fruits of progress. Today, deep into a Third Turning, these goals often feel like they are slipping away. Many of us wish we could rewind time, but we know we can’t – and we fear for our children and grandchildren.”

Strauss & Howe – The Fourth Turning

The skies are darkening and a cold wind is beginning to blow. Autumn began with bright skies and warm breezes, but the atmosphere has gotten bitter as swirling winds rip the remaining leaves from the trees. Winter is approaching rapidly and it gives all indications that it will be a bitter, dangerous, harsh time for all Americans. We wish we didn’t have to face the coming trial, but there is no avoiding it. Generational moods are transitioning, and a Crisis will envelop the country for the next twenty years. Courage and fortitude on a level not seen since World War II will be required. The celebrity circuses like the Michael Jackson funeral, Britney Spears comeback tour, and Brangelina’s latest adoption will seem so trite during the coming Crisis. Wearing a blue rubber wristband and putting a yellow ribbon on your Mercedes SUV will not cut it. Previous 4^th Turnings in U.S. history have involved total war. Deaths during the American Revolutionary War were approximately 50,000. Total deaths during the Civil War were 600,000. Total deaths during World War II were 73,000,000. How many people will die during the coming Crisis? No one knows the answer in advance. An integrated global economy, combined with nuclear weapons, advanced military killing machines, terrorists, and peak oil appears to be a recipe for death on a colossal scale.

Anyone who doesn’t sense a turning in the mood of the country is just not paying attention. There is a foreboding feeling that something is dreadfully wrong with our country. For those addicted to cable television, we are about to leave the sheltered, superficial, coddled world of Housewives of Orange County and enter the frigid, dangerous world of The Deadliest Catch with 40 foot waves and the threat of a watery death at any moment. A dramatic event will soon shock the nation into action. The catalyst for the Crisis will likely be a sequence of events that will shift the mood of the country. The 1^st event will be seen as the financial system meltdown in September 2008. The 2^nd event will be viewed as the government’s reaction to the crisis. The remarkable sweeping steps taken by Ben Bernanke, Hank Paulson, Tim Geithner, and Barack Obama have further weakened the U.S. financial system and left it vulnerable to the next sudden shock.

The approaching Crisis will be sparked by known existing threats that have been ignored and discounted by our Baby Boom leaders. These known threats include titanic current deficits, colossal unfunded future liabilities, and unavoidable Peak Oil. As the economy continues to hemorrhage jobs, Congress will do what they do best and spend billions more on stimulus pork. As the National Debt approaches $15 trillion in 2012, a spectacular collapse of the U.S. dollar becomes more likely. By 2012 the world will realize that Peak Oil is a fact. As demand outstrips supply, prices will rise dramatically. This is when a catalytic event is likely to plunge us into a harsh Winter of darkness and death. As the U.S. economy begins to collapse under the weight of debt and oil shortages, a terrorist attack using nuclear or biological weapons on U.S. soil would plunge the country into chaos. Other possible triggers could be a natural disaster such as an earthquake that destroys significant portions of California or a hurricane that destroys oil rigs and refineries in the Gulf of Mexico. Significant oil shortages will bring commerce to a halt. Food shortages would occur within a week of oil supply disruptions, as most of the food in our stores must be delivered by truck. As real unemployment reaches 25%, interest rates soar, and the dollar becomes worthless, civil unrest will breakout and the Department of Homeland Security will be called upon to fight and imprison its fellow citizens.

Past Crisis periods were marked by Prophets leading and Heroes sacrificing (Gandalf & Frodo) as the soldiers of the Crisis. In 2012 the country is likely to turn to a Baby Boom President with strong leadership skills such as Newt Gingrich or someone who will appear out of nowhere (Abraham Lincoln was an unknown two year Illinois Congressman). As the U.S. domestic crisis deepens, Russia and China will attempt to take advantage of U.S. weakness by expanding their influence and control in Eastern Europe and Asia. Countries with domestic problems always turn outwards for a real or created threat to rally the nation. With the oil crisis getting worse, the U.S. will go to war in order to secure the precious supplies needed to run our economy. With China also seeking oil supplies a military conflict with China and Russia is quite possible. If the conflict turns into a cyber war of destroying satellites and disrupting computer communications, world leaders could be fighting blindly. If one of these leaders panics and decides to launch some of their nuclear arsenal, the world could be changed beyond all recognition. This scenario seems impossible today. On October 24, 1929 when the Stock Market crashed, did anyone foresee a twelve year Depression with 25% unemployment, a World War that killed 73 million people, and the creation and use of an atomic bomb in the following sixteen years? The impossible becomes possible during a Crisis.

A Crisis can end positively or negatively. Our previous Crisis periods have resulted in new golden ages. If the leaders we choose are strong, wise, and judicious and the Millennial generation can rise to the occasion as their GI generation grandparents did during our last Crisis, we can rejuvenate our national destiny. Winter always turns into Spring. But, Strauss & Howe offer a chilling warning:

“History offers no guarantees. Obviously, things could go horribly wrong – the possibilities ranging from a nuclear exchange to incurable plagues, from terrorist anarchy to high-tech dictatorship. We should not assume that Providence will always exempt our nation from the irreversible tragedies that have overtaken so many others: not just temporary hardship, but debasement and total ruin. Losing in the next Fourth Turning could mean something incomparably worse. It could mean a lasting defeat from which our national innocence – perhaps even our nation – might never recover.”

Comments

[Jimmy K:]

Jim you lost me when you mentioned "Gandalf & Frodo"

Jul 13 08:12 AM

[User 353732:]

All great polities rise to greatness when they combine in their people a shared vison of something far greater than themselves, articulate and agree on some tremendous goal, act with dscipline, scarifice frivolous or immediate gratification for the prospect(but no assurance) of vast rewards in the future and seek to reshape the world in their image.
No nation in recorded history has combined as many good things and transforming ideals as the US did until about 50 or 60 yrears ago. The US became the first global power and a truly universal nation not only because it was graced(that it was, of course) by a shared commitment to faith, family and freedom and vast internal resources and markets but because by both its creativity , its moral leadership and its work, it deserved to be.
Then, for reasons many have debated vigorously elsewhere it began to take its greatness as a given; its presitige and prosperity turned into entitlements ; its hard earned exceptionalism was viewed by a smug and increasingly complacent population as an inalienable right. The ME generation came into being and assimilated into itself almost all major national institutions(except the military, which has always been and still is full of WE and US people).
The USA went from being a nation of producers and savers to a nation of consumers and borrowers. Instant gratification and the gross indulgence of the basest sensual appetities became the norms of, first, a highly vocal and aggressive minority culture and then a submissive and co-opted majority culture. Entitlements overtook responsibilities and taking overwhelmed giving as the presiding social and cultural ethic. In my view, that was the Great Turning in America: a divide that started to separate America from its legacy, its historical virtues and traits and its founding generations.
Despite attempts to resist and restore and despite the foreboding and courage of tens of millions of Americans the DIVIDE has , in spurts and spasms, only grown over the decades since the 1960s.
Now it is chasm and the USA is now horribly separated from the America of our hymns, national anthems and songs of thanksgiving.
Our decline has been 50 to 60 years in the making but until 2009 has been disguised by the momentum of greatness built by generations now long gone. Finally, it seems the momentum of historical America has been completly arreseted and very quickly the retrogression has become tangible. No nation can stagnate for long, esp not one with 300million people and planetary reach. It must progress or regress.
We have forgotten and dishonored our legacy, mocked our history, and sneered at the past. We are now debasing the present and consuming our substance at a profligate pace. As a Nation we are living off the inventory of past achievements and confusing it with current achievements.
No one can prophesy what the next 10 years will bring. Revivals do occur. National cleansings, awakenings and regenerations do occur. Maybe the vestiges of Grace are still with us and we will once again become a great nation. If not, then America has done its job ; it has done more good, more quickly, for more people in more parts of the world than any polity we know of. Nothing human lasts forever and no nation does. Our rise was unpredented and maybe our fall will be too. We rose, in the main, by an extended act of shared national vision and will; If we fall, its because ,in the main, we have willed our own fall. No external enemy will have brought us down. The enemy within will have succeeded.

Jul 13 08:27 AM

[perceptions...:]

James, I congratulate you on a peice, which portrays where we are & where we may go.

For those, who may have seen some of my comments previously, you will know that this article conveys well, my thoughts.

To that end, following is an article written by me, some time back.
==================

What is the Motor of the World and why is it stopping?
Let me say from the start, that the world and its financial system are now more interlocked than any other time in history and that the butterfly effect is very real. We have also stepped into the unknown, into a new paradigm and there is no going back!

What is the Motor of the World?
There will be many opinions, some will say China is now the motor of the world, some will say modern computers, some the US, some Oil, some this and some that. The truth is there are probably over 6 Billion opinions and most opinions would be at least partially true, given a particular time frame.

It would be correct to say that China has been a very significant force in global economics, certainly in the last 10-15 years. Certainly, the impact of computers and related electronics, over the last 50 years, has truly moved the world.

And, over 150 years, the US and Oil have been inseparable, as the driving forces of the global economy. Such a large part of the global economy today can be traced back to the US and it’s partnership with Oil.

But, in back of everything, the steady and un-relenting growth in population has always been the engine of economic growth, at national and global levels.

However, that motor is stopping!

How did we get here?
Population Growth & Aging -
It took all of history, up to the year 1800 AD, for humanity to reach our first Billion people. Baby Boomers had their origins in the population explosion that started as the Great Depression was ending; they were a large part of our 3rd and 4th Billion.

The population explosion really took off in 1945, it Peaked in 1956, then levelled out to 1964, before slowing significantly since then. Now, at over 6 Billion people, we are starting to exhaust the earth’s capacity to support human species.

A continuation of past growth would have seen the global population increase to 10 Billion by 2050 and 20 Billion by 2150. Clearly, that is not likely to happen, as population growth is slowing and the global population may start to fall, in the not too distant future.

Why, because we are now bumping into immovable objects, such as Peak Oil, Climate Change and Peak Food Production, all driven by the Global population.

With a few relatively minor interruptions, the period 1945 to 2005 was the greatest Global economic BOOM in history. In particular, the period 1995-2005 was a Growth Tsunami, driven by the Peak earning and spending capacity of US & other Global Baby Boomer consumers.

In addition, around the same time, technology drove massive gains in productivity, leverage multiplied and interest rates in the US remained artificially low, for far too long, following the events of 9/11.

This was a perfect storm, for making money.

Peak Oil -
To make life more interesting, Oil has also gone from $10 to nearly $150 a barrel, in just a few short years. Whilst there may have been some external influences, the main reason for this huge increase was Supply & Demand.

And, while there are arguments for Abiotic Oil, Coal & Gas, there are drawbacks for these "replacements" and in some cases they may create more environmental problems.

Oil prices have since retraced to lower levels, in expectation of a substantial fall in oil usage, arising from a slowing economy.

Transport, Plastics, Medicines, Chemicals, the list is almost endless, that are dependent on oil, no wonder the US has had such a long lasting love affair.

When historians look back, they really will say, "did they just burn all that oil".

Climate Change -
Climate is our greatest asset, but changes are also starting to impact us now, as can be seen in the lack of water in some parts of the planet, increased storm severity in others and the melting of Glaciers and Polar Caps.

We have already passed major climate tipping points, the planets climate is set to get very difficult for humanity, including a possible new ice age. Sure, we can take the chance that the scientists have it wrong, but then if their right, this could be an Extinction Event.

Do we have the right to play Roulette, with the survival of future generations.

Peak Food Production –
With the total global population busting at the seams, we must make sure everything possible is done to ensure food production is provided for the increasing population, right?

Wrong, instead, we are diverting large parts of agricultural production away from food production and into the production of diesel, as a replacement for Oil.

Even if we wanted to boost Food production, Climate Change is and will continue to, raise serious questions on our present and future capacity, to deliver enough food, to keep the surging global population fed.


Where are we now and where to next?
Whilst the sub-prime debacle in the US has its own distinct origins, including NINJA mortgages (Greed), it has highlighted falling Real Estate values and New Housing starts, which has separate Demographic origins.

In economic terms, the primary driver of the real global economy is consumer demand. The largest demand driver is the 45-55 age group, primarily in the USA, due their big earning and spending capacity.

Demographic levels are already being re-shaped, as nearly two Billion Baby Boomers have commenced a 20 year transition from being big spenders, to big Retirement savers, to thrifty Retirees, before leaving us forever, in increasing numbers.

This massive aging of the global population is changing the dynamics of the world economy, with the bulk of Boomer wealth likely to pass on before they do and as the generations following behind the Baby Boomers, are relatively less in numbers.

In particular, Real Estate and New Housing markets, particularly in the US & Europe have already fallen and continue to do so, arising from a lowering in demand, led by thrifty and retiring Boomers.

As if housing issues were not enough, the aging process will also introduce some $50 Trillion in unfunded Health and Social Security costs.

So, we now see:
1) Supply (Oil) & Demand constraints.
2) A massive de-leveraging of financial markets, including some $500 Trillion in Derivatives.
3) Government Budget deficits continue to expand, due to the current Credit/Housing Crisis.
4) Massive increases Health and Social Security Costs, again expanding deficits.
5) Problems arising from Climate Change and Food production.

You can guess what awaits with Taxes, in the near future, to pay for past indulgences.

And, with Debt levels already at historical highs and past fixes, either not able to be used or possibly set to cause more harm, than help.

Now, we are just past the Peak of a once in history Population Growth Mega Cycle.
Now, expectations build of a slowing economic future, as reflected in stock markets and oil prices, next is reality.

Now, the perfect storm is reappearing, this time it is a Cat 5 in financial demolition!

What Futures await?
The very basis of modern life will be shaken, the magnitude of the quake, will be 9.9.
Whether we arrived at this situation, by accident or design, we are never likely to know, although events suggest a mixture of both, seems probable. So, the design has now been set in motion and we are now into the first quarter, of the highest stakes game, ever played!

Unlike the Great Depression, we are now truly between a rock and a really hard place.

The truth is, there is no magical, Hollywood, easy fix.
The truth is, there is no pot of gold at the end of the Kansas rainbow.
The truth is, things are going to be tough, for quite some time.

Had corrective decisions been made earlier, then it may have been possible to reduce some of the worst side effects, regrettably, that did not happen.

Regrettably, if we opt for a better now, then future generations will pay for our mistakes and indulgence. That reasoning is not acceptable and can not succeed!

As we look to the future, we need to look thru different eyes, thru different thought processes.
The days of Smoke & Mirrors, of Shock & Awe, of the Desire to Acquire & Retain Power, of Self interest, at the expense of societal interest, must end.

Can we make those changes, the answer is YES!
Will the required changes be made? Now there, is a $64 Trillion question!

The answers will come on these boards and others, in other forums, in politics, in business and the answers will need to come quickly.

There are discussions that must take place and Mindsets that must change; the time has come to look beyond borders and elections.

Good luck & watch the Debt!

Jul 13 08:30 AM

[grey road:]

Yes, this is basically what is going to happen or some version of it. Anyone who doubts it is foolishly kidding themselves. And if it is even a little bit better than this, than those that realize it is coming will see it as good thing. Those that doubt or resist or think they are entitled to what they wanty will be hit very hard(boomers)

Jul 13 08:34 AM

[Graham and ...:]

"If we fail, the whole world, including the United States, including all that we have known and cared for, will fall into the abyss of a New Dark Age, made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the light of perverted science."

Winston Churchill noted that this was a possible outcome during the last Fourth Turning (World War II). The stakes are just as high in the current Fourth Turning.

Jul 13 08:35 AM

[James Quinn:]

Lord of the Rings. Prophet & Hero. Gandalf is old and wise. Frodo is young and brave. Just an analogy.


On Jul 13 08:12 AM Jimmy K wrote:

> Jim you lost me when you mentioned "Gandalf &amp; Frodo"

Jul 13 08:37 AM

[pockyclips ...:]

We've basically wasted 30 years, and we won't get another 30 to get off or a**. 1973 should have been our wake-up call. Our dependence on foreign resources and foreign capital will be the death of Western civilization as we know it. If we are lucky, we will exist as a post-WWII collapsed British Empire.

Jul 13 08:49 AM

[conceptwizard:]

Very interesting points of views. So...by the sounds of this article and the current policies in finances and energy we are all but toast.

I always enjoy your articles, they really get the "mouse on the wheel".

I always struggle with the facts that the Powers that are dont already know this. It is impossible for them to line up all the strategies in a single line effort without taken into effect that they could be wrong. Without tooting the conspiracy horn, why are not all these options being looked at by the greatest minds on earth and contingency plans for a lot of different outcomes discussed.

The revelent fact is that they already know the perceived outcome.

I watch what the elite invest in and the projects the foundations that they are involved in invest in.

Why in the world would Bill Gates and David Rochefeller invest in a subterrainean lab in the artic to house 1000's of plants?

Why does Dick Cheny invest against the dollar and outside the US?

I learned a long time ago to watch what they are doing not what they are saying, its the language of truth.

Jul 13 08:50 AM

[morph366:]

James
While I really admire your writing style - almost biblical and prophetic-where I disconnect from your thinking is on the emphasis you place on the role of political leadership in the years ahead.
IMHO we are witnessing the end of the cult of political personality and the characterizations you provide are more appropriate to the cultural personality rather than any one individual.
The greying of the baby boomers is definitely causing a structural shift in sentiment but this is something faced by hundreds of millions of people across the globe - it is a demographic factor rather than having anything to do with political ideology.
My sense is that individuals feel more "on their own" than previously and if anything will become more and more disenchanted with elites and "leaders".
Ideas, demographics and economic factors (such as peak oil) will play a larger role in determining the shape of events to come than any President or Treasury Secretary.

Jul 13 08:52 AM

[Leftfield:]

I wish our leaders actually "overrepresented the facts" rather than Wall St. and lies.
A thought: I see that this article and the Fourth Turning are based completely on cyclicality and Christianity seems a bit dismissed to the extent it's message is linear. But, there has been technological progress for a long time, since the Renaissance mostly. And, symphonies and concertos were an invention since then that relied on a linear progression of events far more than the usual over-and-over with variations that characterizes songs and tunes. This was taught to me as a distinguishing feature only possible in Western civilization. Cyclicality, like linearity, can be overused.
We've started out this phase amazingly badly, with the worst lot of overprivileged leaders I can imagine and headed mostly in the wrong directions as fast as possible. This article does give me hope as it presents possiblities of change that, however painfully attained, will at least leave the present voter apathy and boneheaded leaders and policies far behind.

Jul 13 08:56 AM

[yellowhoard:]

I envision mass unemployment and a return to tribalism..

As unemployment rises and people continue to lose their homes, we'll see clustering on a large level.

I think there will also be a mass migration to southern states where energy needs are reduced by warmer winters and foraging off the land is easier due to the longer growing season.

Politically this will be bad for the red states in Dixie that have relatively strong balance sheets. As the dependant classes of the north move south like locusts to feed off of the new host.

Jul 13 09:08 AM

[Ivo P. Jane...:]

Your long-term time frame is quite similar to one extrapolated from a 300+ year chart of commodity prices. The end of the next Kondratieff “Winter” will likely not be seen until the year 2028. Since late 1700s, the Kondratieff waves have been running in pairs of shorter and shorter duration with also narrowing differences among the pairs (initially +/- 3years, then +/- 2 years, and the last pair differed only by +/- 1 year). Extrapolating this pattern forward, the next major bottom does appear to be the year 2028. For specific dates, please see InstaBlog Seeking Alpha from 6-2-09 at seekingalpha.com/insta...

Jul 13 09:12 AM

[small town ...:]

Having read Strauss and Howe extensively looking for clues ( for investment purposes) to where we are going next in the "turnings", your post is most interesting. I do not totally agree with your idea about peak oil, but for now that seems to be a most plausible catalyst for the "crisis" along with the financial mess. As you likely know Howe believes the current leadership in Washington is the start of the "fourth turning", but in the prior two Fourth Turnings never has a "Nomad" lead during this period of history. Obama is obviously a "Nomad" generationally, so that does not fit. However every time we have entered the serious phase of the crisis a "Prophet" has led, so maybe your point about another one taking over in 2012 is on the point. So for the "generational theory" of Strauss and Howe to be correct it is almost required that we have new leadership in 2012 or 2016, or the whole "generational turnings" theory just up in smoke, or we end the the crisis in badly. No other way can this play out.

Jul 13 09:13 AM

[Ray Winter:]

Extrapolating history is no true precursor to the future, although it is good to remember the reasons that made things go horribly wrong.

I recall that up and until the late 60's- early 70's, the micro-electronic industries were mostly unheard of and had not even begun to touch most people's lives, but over the past few decades they transformed our existence and opportunities in ways which were unimaginable at their outset. The stimulus to the micro-electronics industry was our focus on getting man into space and onto the moon. The spin-offs from those activities have been unbelievable and we now have more 1000's times more computing power in our Smartphones than was available to fly the spacecraft to the moon and back.

The new focus is to reduce our dependence upon fossil fuels and so enters the age of conserving energy and significantly reducing green-house gases. I am sure that we shall once again see the emergence of entirely new industries that will advance our lives and environment, so I take a very positive view of the future and man's abilities to evolve new and beneficial ways of doing things.

But just in case, I will stack-away some cans of food as somebody, somewhere, just might get trigger-happy.

Jul 13 09:23 AM

[perceptions...:]

Having read a number of your comments, I congratulate you on your grasp of subject matter and your use of language!


On Jul 13 08:27 AM User 353732 wrote:

>
> All great polities rise to greatness when they combine in their people
> a shared vison of something far greater than themselves, articulate
> and agree on some tremendous goal, act with dscipline, scarifice
> frivolous or immediate gratification for the prospect(but no assurance)
> of vast rewards in the future and seek to reshape the world in their
> image.
> No nation in recorded history has combined as many good things and
> transforming ideals as the US did until about 50 or 60 yrears ago.
> The US became the first global power and a truly universal nation
> not only because it was graced(that it was, of course) by a shared
> commitment to faith, family and freedom and vast internal resources
> and markets but because by both its creativity , its moral leadership
> and its work, it deserved to be.
> Then, for reasons many have debated vigorously elsewhere it began
> to take its greatness as a given; its presitige and prosperity turned
> into entitlements ; its hard earned exceptionalism was viewed by
> a smug and increasingly complacent population as an inalienable right.
> The ME generation came into being and assimilated into itself almost
> all major national institutions(except the military, which has always
> been and still is full of WE and US people).
> The USA went from being a nation of producers and savers to a nation
> of consumers and borrowers. Instant gratification and the gross indulgence
> of the basest sensual appetities became the norms of, first, a highly
> vocal and aggressive minority culture and then a submissive and co-opted
> majority culture. Entitlements overtook responsibilities and taking
> overwhelmed giving as the presiding social and cultural ethic. In
> my view, that was the Great Turning in America: a divide that started
> to separate America from its legacy, its historical virtues and traits
> and its founding generations.
> Despite attempts to resist and restore and despite the foreboding
> and courage of tens of millions of Americans the DIVIDE has , in
> spurts and spasms, only grown over the decades since the 1960s.
>
> Now it is chasm and the USA is now horribly separated from the America
> of our hymns, national anthems and songs of thanksgiving.
> Our decline has been 50 to 60 years in the making but until 2009
> has been disguised by the momentum of greatness built by generations
> now long gone. Finally, it seems the momentum of historical America
> has been completly arreseted and very quickly the retrogression has
> become tangible. No nation can stagnate for long, esp not one with
> 300million people and planetary reach. It must progress or regress.
>
> We have forgotten and dishonored our legacy, mocked our history,
> and sneered at the past. We are now debasing the present and consuming
> our substance at a profligate pace. As a Nation we are living off
> the inventory of past achievements and confusing it with current
> achievements.
> No one can prophesy what the next 10 years will bring. Revivals do
> occur. National cleansings, awakenings and regenerations do occur.
> Maybe the vestiges of Grace are still with us and we will once again
> become a great nation. If not, then America has done its job ; it
> has done more good, more quickly, for more people in more parts of
> the world than any polity we know of. Nothing human lasts forever
> and no nation does. Our rise was unpredented and maybe our fall will
> be too. We rose, in the main, by an extended act of shared national
> vision and will; If we fall, its because ,in the main, we have willed
> our own fall. No external enemy will have brought us down. The enemy
> within will have succeeded.

Jul 13 09:28 AM

[fireball:]

mr quinn
i always look for your articles. i am a "young" babyboomer. i blame much on us for tolerating what we should have changed. i blame a little on the preceding generation. however they had gone through so much i cannot blame much. how will the x deal with the generation that killed 40?million of them in the womb? not a pleasant prospect. national healthcare? euthenasia? useless eaters?
you can judge a society by how it treats the elderly. gangs in the streets. murders over a look. ridiculous numbers of children on ritilin or a comparable drug, easier than parenting? government on a quest of invasive power.
i see one course to avert disaster. that is insistance on constitutional adherence.

Jul 13 09:28 AM

[grey road:]

I don't think it really matters for the purpose of this article whether Obama is re elected or not in 2012. Either way the basic premise of this article will play out. It isn't a bright outlook either way. There are so many problems or potential triggers and all of them will come into play. As one post stated, the best outcome is a situation like Great Britain after WWII , however I believe it will be much worse than this. And the truth is not Obama, not Bush, not even Greenspan are to blame for this. That is just ridiculous if you think one man is the cause of anything. No, it is the illuminati, the banking families , the trash of the world who pull strings from behind a wall who are responsible for this mess which they created for there own benefit, however I think theyve outdone themselves this time.


On Jul 13 09:13 AM small town investor wrote:

> Having read Strauss and Howe extensively looking for clues ( for
> investment purposes) to where we are going next in the "turnings",
> your post is most interesting. I do not totally agree with your idea
> about peak oil, but for now that seems to be a most plausible catalyst
> for the "crisis" along with the financial mess. As you likely know
> Howe believes the current leadership in Washington is the start of
> the "fourth turning", but in the prior two Fourth Turnings never
> has a "Nomad" lead during this period of history. Obama is obviously
> a "Nomad" generationally, so that does not fit. However every time
> we have entered the serious phase of the crisis a "Prophet" has led,
> so maybe your point about another one taking over in 2012 is on the
> point. So for the "generational theory" of Strauss and Howe to be
> correct it is almost required that we have new leadership in 2012
> or 2016, or the whole "generational turnings" theory just up in smoke,
> or we end the the crisis in badly. No other way can this play out.

Jul 13 09:31 AM

[paulsjj:]

>We have 5% of the world’s population, but use 25% of the world’s energy.<

This is a very deceptive statement. How much is this 25%? How much energy do we produce here in the USA? How much energy do we BUY from foreign producers.

Jul 13 09:38 AM

[Pat C:]

Not sure I agree with some of the "4th Turning" logic but I sure appreciate your thinking. Our current economic and political thinking is short sighted and will change. I am hopeful that the "Turning" will be sooner rather than later and not as catastropic as could be the case if it takes longer. I hope unemployment and running out of (real) money with be the catalyst. Efficient energy and health care could be a way out and impetus for creativity if we all get on the same page. Thanks for the article, thought provoking and needed.

Jul 13 09:40 AM

[small town ...:]

My point was about the actual "generational theory" of Strauss and Howe. In their theory the end of "fourth turnings" and the actual "crisis", are always led by "prophet" type people. So with that in mind one of the next two or three elections "prophets" born 1943-1960, must be elected to lead us through this period.


On Jul 13 09:31 AM grey road wrote:

> I don't think it really matters for the purpose of this article whether
> Obama is re elected or not in 2012. Either way the basic premise
> of this article will play out. It isn't a bright outlook either way.
> There are so many problems or potential triggers and all of them
> will come into play. As one post stated, the best outcome is a situation
> like Great Britain after WWII , however I believe it will be much
> worse than this. And the truth is not Obama, not Bush, not even Greenspan
> are to blame for this. That is just ridiculous if you think one man
> is the cause of anything. No, it is the illuminati, the banking families
> , the trash of the world who pull strings from behind a wall who
> are responsible for this mess which they created for there own benefit,
> however I think theyve outdone themselves this time.

Jul 13 09:40 AM

[James Quinn:]

66% of our supplies are imported.


On Jul 13 09:38 AM paulsjj wrote:

> >We have 5% of the world’s population, but use 25% of the world’s
> energy.<
>
> This is a very deceptive statement. How much is this 25%? How much
> energy do we produce here in the USA? How much energy do we BUY from
> foreign producers.

Jul 13 09:53 AM

[Henry Hartman:]

Not to argue with your premise, methodology, or conclusions...but anyone using Peak Oil and specifically Matt Simmons to bolster their position MUST acknowledge the massive failure of Simmons and depletion to model natural gas production and reserves in US. Just three years ago Simmons uncategorically predicted inevitable, imminent, and inexorable decline. The US was for the first time becoming an importer of NG. Billions invested in LNG facilties to plug the growing gap between domestic production and demand....just like oil.

So what's happened in those three years? Recoverable NG reserves have been discovered in unprecedented quantities. America's NG reserves are now estimated on an oil equivalent basis in the range of 300 billion barrels. That's 100 years of domestic supply at today's rate of consumption.

"Peak gas" is not a crisis. The depletion model for NG completely blew up. Hubbert, Deffeyes, and Simmons...it's not geography. It's extrapolation based on geopolitics and markets. The peak oil emporer is naked and so is Al Gore on climate change.

I'm not suggesting that your 4th Turning foreshadowed by transitioning public mood doesn't have merit. James, even you said that Al Gore's "over representation" is lying. You sir, just summarized and packaged Peak Oil as a fact. You stated an outright fallacy...."all of the easy oil AND GAS in the world has been found". So...does YOUR analysis hold together? Or are you just another prophet of doom knitting a story from others' extrapolations. I'd say that if you use other prophets' extrapolations and conclusions uncritically then you're another propagandist. Am I splitting hairs? Maybe. But these things are too important to just jump on charlatan bandwagons without thinking. Fashion yourself a thought leader? Good term because most of America doesn't think for themselves. But with it comes responsibility.

Jul 13 09:54 AM

[The Geoffster:]

Fascinating reading. While many are headed for the abyss, due in no small part to poor values, they have elected leaders who will take many more down with them. We are reaching a point where trust in government has evaporated for all but the entitlement class and socialist utopians. The great experiment in American republicanism has come to an end and, for now, it looks like it will be followed by Corporate Fascism.

Jul 13 09:57 AM

[grey road:]

Boomers and their theories mean very little to me.. or this "book" that the author wrote. We ( everyone younger than boomers) are tired of this foolishness .. Can we please talk about reality instead of a fairy tale or your feelings or your theories. Having said this I totally agree with the basis of this article , which is we are headed for disaster more or less.


On Jul 13 09:40 AM small town investor wrote:

> My point was about the actual "generational theory" of Strauss and
> Howe. In their theory the end of "fourth turnings" and the actual
> "crisis", are always led by "prophet" type people. So with that in
> mind one of the next two or three elections "prophets" born 1943-1960,
> must be elected to lead us through this period.

Jul 13 10:04 AM

[James Quinn:]

Matt Simmons isn't the only person warning about Peak Oil.

Read the Hirsch Report.

Let's debate Peak Oil for another 4 years and see what happens.


On Jul 13 09:54 AM Henry Hartman wrote:

> Not to argue with your premise, methodology, or conclusions...but
> anyone using Peak Oil and specifically Matt Simmons to bolster their
> position MUST acknowledge the massive failure of Simmons and depletion
> to model natural gas production and reserves in US. Just three years
> ago Simmons uncategorically predicted inevitable, imminent, and inexorable
> decline. The US was for the first time becoming an importer of NG.
> Billions invested in LNG facilties to plug the growing gap between
> domestic production and demand....just like oil.
>
> So what's happened in those three years? Recoverable NG reserves
> have been discovered in unprecedented quantities. America's NG reserves
> are now estimated on an oil equivalent basis in the range of 300
> billion barrels. That's 100 years of domestic supply at today's rate
> of consumption.
>
> "Peak gas" is not a crisis. The depletion model for NG completely
> blew up. Hubbert, Deffeyes, and Simmons...it's not geography. It's
> extrapolation based on geopolitics and markets. The peak oil emporer
> is naked and so is Al Gore on climate change.
>
> I'm not suggesting that your 4th Turning foreshadowed by transitioning
> public mood doesn't have merit. James, even you said that Al Gore's
> "over representation" is lying. You sir, just summarized and packaged
> Peak Oil as a fact. You stated an outright fallacy...."all of the
> easy oil AND GAS in the world has been found". So...does YOUR analysis
> hold together? Or are you just another prophet of doom knitting a
> story from others' extrapolations. I'd say that if you use other
> prophets' extrapolations and conclusions uncritically then you're
> another propagandist. Am I splitting hairs? Maybe. But these things
> are too important to just jump on charlatan bandwagons without thinking.
> Fashion yourself a thought leader? Good term because most of America
> doesn't think for themselves. But with it comes responsibility.

Jul 13 10:10 AM

[James Quinn:]

If the world has such ability to increase output, why didn't output increase when oil was $145? Because it has peaked.

Peak oil does not mean we are running out. It means we are not discovering more than we are depleting. The deniers and pollyanna's like you are the problem.


On Jul 13 09:54 AM Henry Hartman wrote:

> Not to argue with your premise, methodology, or conclusions...but
> anyone using Peak Oil and specifically Matt Simmons to bolster their
> position MUST acknowledge the massive failure of Simmons and depletion
> to model natural gas production and reserves in US. Just three years
> ago Simmons uncategorically predicted inevitable, imminent, and inexorable
> decline. The US was for the first time becoming an importer of NG.
> Billions invested in LNG facilties to plug the growing gap between
> domestic production and demand....just like oil.
>
> So what's happened in those three years? Recoverable NG reserves
> have been discovered in unprecedented quantities. America's NG reserves
> are now estimated on an oil equivalent basis in the range of 300
> billion barrels. That's 100 years of domestic supply at today's rate
> of consumption.
>
> "Peak gas" is not a crisis. The depletion model for NG completely
> blew up. Hubbert, Deffeyes, and Simmons...it's not geography. It's
> extrapolation based on geopolitics and markets. The peak oil emporer
> is naked and so is Al Gore on climate change.
>
> I'm not suggesting that your 4th Turning foreshadowed by transitioning
> public mood doesn't have merit. James, even you said that Al Gore's
> "over representation" is lying. You sir, just summarized and packaged
> Peak Oil as a fact. You stated an outright fallacy...."all of the
> easy oil AND GAS in the world has been found". So...does YOUR analysis
> hold together? Or are you just another prophet of doom knitting a
> story from others' extrapolations. I'd say that if you use other
> prophets' extrapolations and conclusions uncritically then you're
> another propagandist. Am I splitting hairs? Maybe. But these things
> are too important to just jump on charlatan bandwagons without thinking.
> Fashion yourself a thought leader? Good term because most of America
> doesn't think for themselves. But with it comes responsibility.

Jul 13 10:15 AM

[Danny Furman:]

Thank you Mr. Quinn, as usual your writing satisfies my needs for knowledge and entertainment like no other.
The problem is that this topic is so stimulating I may have to actually buy The Fourth Turning and read a whole novel.
My crisis is here!!

Jul 13 10:16 AM

[James Quinn:]

I highly recommend the book. I don't do it justice in a short article.


On Jul 13 10:16 AM Danny Furman wrote:

> Thank you Mr. Quinn, as usual your writing satisfies my needs for
> knowledge and entertainment like no other.
> The problem is that this topic is so stimulating I may have to actually
> buy The Fourth Turning and read a whole novel.
> My crisis is here!!

Jul 13 10:42 AM

[Pax Americana:]

America's Greatness is our ability to assimilate waves of Immigrants and by degree turn them into productive Americans. Thereby, never allowing the higher layers of society to become ossified and suffer consequent decay. Kennedy, stated that America would go to Moon and come back, "not because it was "easy" but because it was hard"
and indeed his speech came into fruition in 69 with the Moon walk.
Agree we the Author that America has a dearth of politicians with any Inherent character or greatness able to Galvinise our still Great Nation

Jul 13 10:42 AM

[John Bowman:]

Many Americans have an attitude: Ignore something serious and it will go away. And to tell you the truth, with the number of serious issues facing the U.S, and the world, it is easy to have that kind of thinking. Information overload to the ordinary citizen is the norm today.

Some economists and analysts have warned of the impending consequences of the growing debt and it has mostly been ignored. And why not? The debt has seemingly taken care of itself. Obviously things changed a year or so ago when all hell broke loose.

However, the idea that the debt problem can not be solved by more debt still hasn't grasped the minds of many Americans and politicians. Piling on debt appears to have worked in the past so why not in the future?

The nanny government has taken every one of the major individual and collective issues under it's wings with no apparent harmful side effects. There is no area of life that is not covered by big government: care for the aged, unwed mothers, discrimination issues, workplace safety and on and on and on.

Have a problem? Call 1-800-BIG-GOVT and they will implement a new program for you. And it will cost you and your neighbors nothing.

This time it's different. The only people who haven't caught on are the ones watching Jerry Springer and those playing computer games incessantly. And intellectuals who actually believe that more socialism or even communism will work given the right place and the right time.

Even though they sense a kind of uneasy foreboding in their spirit, these people are convinced that when they turn the TV on tomorrow, the bad news will go away and the good guys will win the day.

"THEY" will think of something. "THEY" will figure it out. "THEY" know better than me.

Jul 13 10:47 AM

[75 Year Old...:]

Your article makes a interesting read , But here are the facts theres enough Nat Gas in America cheaply and easily recoverable to last about 200 years , Second theres enough proven reserves of oil off American shorelines also easily recoverable ( except for the Greenies , but in Reality there only about 2% of the population the hard core ones that is. ) that oil could last us another 100 years or more So in a very short time we WIll ( Drill Baby Drill ) that takes care of the peak demand theory pretty well...... And in a more couple years after those many millions of Good Paying "Green Jobs" Don't appear and Cap and Trade has forced American electric bills to Triple , and hundreds of companies to leave the US, Along with Millions more jobs A New Much Less radical administartion of Adults will once again be in Charge. But Your article is very good recap of history which is good to remember.

Jul 13 10:51 AM

[John Bowman:]

That may have been true 100 years ago, but there are too many immigrants today ready and willing to "suck off of the system" soon after they arrive. And too many politicians ready to accomodate them.


On Jul 13 10:42 AM Pax Americana wrote:

> America's Greatness is our ability to assimilate waves of Immigrants
> and by degree turn them into productive Americans. Thereby, never
> allowing the higher layers of society to become ossified and suffer
> consequent decay. Kennedy, stated that America would go to Moon and
> come back, "not because it was "easy" but because it was hard"<br/>and
> indeed his speech came into fruition in 69 with the Moon walk.<br/>Agree
> we the Author that America has a dearth of politicians with any Inherent
> character or greatness able to Galvinise our still Great Nation

Jul 13 10:53 AM

[Ferdinand E...:]

What about a Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin ticket? From there, win or lose, it can only be up.

And now James, I'll give you something that Dale Jorgenson gave me. The key thing is not to come up with new ideas, there are always plenty of those around. Instead the point is to get rid of the bad ideas as quickly and expeditiously as possible.

You have a lot of bad ideas in your work - the kind of ideas that would cause you a great deal of embarassment if you found yourself in a seminar room with my good self. But essentially you are right about a few things, to include oil and gas, and Mr Hartman is definitely wrong about oil, and probably about gas. He simply doesn't understand that the most important issue isn't geology, but geopolitics - or resource geopolitics, to be exact.

What is going to happen to the Big PX, or The World, as we called it in the army. Actually it is a simple problem, and I am absolutely certain that Mr Obama can solve it. The first step is to get the limousine liberals away from the levers of power, if there are any of that breed in the vicinity. As for the rest of it, well, I'll save that for a lecture next winter.

Jul 13 11:02 AM

[jerrydd:]

Interestingly he has not put the blame on this right where it belongs, Repubs who have been in charge most of the last 30 yrs. They have continued to not fix, but make worse our energy, debt, war and health care problems by letting corporate welfare by buying off congress, deregulation and giving the country to big business.

Then trying to blame the problems on the progressives who are the only ones trying to fix things.

Anyone who think peak oil isn't here is just not very smart.

But there are solutions that cost less than the path we are on now like RE, national health care, means testing SS and raising it's age.

The energy problem can be quickly, easily solve by removing the direct, indirect subsidies to oil, coal by a tax so they pay their real cost Or should we keep subsidizing them? Once they are at their real price, then the market will work fast as most RE is the stable, low cost energy source.

Once we are energy independent our war, military costs will drop to 1/3 of now.

National health care can improve it while lowering costs by 50% as proven in every other major country. So why not?

With these savings we can easily pay off our debt but only if we wean corporations off welfare, become energy independent by making fossil fuels pay there own way and become a great narion again. Or do it the repub way and become a basket cases. Your choice.

Jul 13 11:14 AM

[James Quinn:]

Your easily recoverable thesis is a crock. It takes 10 years from discovery to extract the oil in deepwater. Natural gas needs to be transported by pipelines that don't exist. Cars and trucks don't use natural gas today. It would take 20 years if we had consensus today to convert transportation to nat gas.

Everything is so easy in theory. Little things like the fact that geologists and experienced oilmen are retiring with no one to replace them may have an impact. How about no refinery capacity. How about the energy infrastructure rusting away and needing a $10 trillion upgrade that no one is willing to make.




On Jul 13 10:51 AM 75 Year Old Citizen wrote:

> Your article makes a interesting read , But here are the facts theres
> enough Nat Gas in America cheaply and easily recoverable to last
> about 200 years , Second theres enough proven reserves of oil off
> American shorelines also easily recoverable ( except for the Greenies
> , but in Reality there only about 2% of the population the hard core
> ones that is. ) that oil could last us another 100 years or more
> So in a very short time we WIll ( Drill Baby Drill ) that takes care
> of the peak demand theory pretty well...... And in a more couple
> years after those many millions of Good Paying "Green Jobs" Don't
> appear and Cap and Trade has forced American electric bills to Triple
> , and hundreds of companies to leave the US, Along with Millions
> more jobs A New Much Less radical administartion of Adults will once
> again be in Charge. But Your article is very good recap of history
> which is good to remember.

Jul 13 11:22 AM

[Vienna:]

I would like to give an alternative point of view.
Lets say we do not have peak of anything, we still live in a world of limited resources, so if we don't peak now we will peak some time in future.
If we want to learn from the crisis, we should learn that it might not be wise to push things to the dead end, but rather find a sustainable solution in time.
So lets mike it time now, and start usign alternative methods, rather dan using existing sources to the possible dead end, and leave nothing for your own children, because that is where we are heading if peaopel are to lasy and greedy to put in the effort to implement alternate energy, yes it might be more expensive, but then just don't use as much, or invest in high-tech, less energy consuming products, which again require more technology.
There is always a other way, don't just go ahead in the way that has been.

Jul 13 12:00 PM

[Vienna:]

I would also sugegst reading this article from Mr. Quinn
seekingalpha.com/artic...

Jul 13 12:03 PM

[Socialism c...:]

"You may not agree with Obama’s plans or policies, but it is clear to anyone that he is an intelligent, pragmatic man that will institute dramatic change in the policies of the United States."

It is clear that he is intelligent?? HARDLY! The man fumbles around like an idiot without his teleprompter. Moreover, if he were truly intelligent, he could not propose the things that he is, for the current problem set we are facing! One example is the promise to close GitMo, and his determination to do so, even if it means releasing many prisoners who will end up going back to lead terror groups again. Anyone who cannot grasp that NON-CITIZEN terrorists committing acts of war against U.S. *civilians* are NOT entitled to the legal protections given to citizens, is NOT intelligent by any account!!

Jul 13 01:01 PM

[Socialism c...:]

Blatant lie. Last year, during the $140/barrel oil "pricing crisis", Transocean's CEO testified to Congress that most new deepwater sites could begin production within 1-2 years, with the hardest-to-reach at a max of 5 years. Quit perpetuating the lies about time-to-production for deep-water drilling!!


On Jul 13 11:22 AM James Quinn wrote:

> Your easily recoverable thesis is a crock. It takes 10 years from
> discovery to extract the oil in deepwater. Natural gas needs to be
> transported by pipelines that don't exist. Cars and trucks don't
> use natural gas today. It would take 20 years if we had consensus
> today to convert transportation to nat gas.

Jul 13 01:03 PM

[Craig W:]

Your description of the Christian world view as linear shows a lack of Biblical understanding. The cycle, as demonstrated by the Hebrew people as a picture of the human condition in general, should be plain to any student of the Bible. This concept permeates through both the Jewish Bible and the Christian New Testimate. We live the cycle in our own lives individually just as we live it as a people. There is nothing new under the sun.

I also struggle with the notion that an societal/economic breakdown necessarily leads to a failed-state, violent form of anarchy. Perhaps with the moral state of America today, that could happen; however, a more Libertarian view of anarchy, as was held by the Founders, is one were the citizens operated under the concept of Natural Law. The Founders felt that only a moral and virtuous people could successfully self-govern. That is to say, the less virtuous the people, the greater the need for government. The source of their view of Natural Law was that of a Creator to whom the people would ultimately be accountable for their actions in this life in an afterlife. Weather you yourself accept the concept of Natural Law or not is not especially relevant, only it is important to realize that the Founders did and those views shaped their view of government. More to the point, those views of government, while not often articulated as such, are still held to by the majority of the citizens even today. I feel that the average people in towns and cities across this land would quickly regain order at a local level if the doomsday scenario of a failed state were to occur, and life will go on as it has for thousands of years.

Jul 13 01:06 PM

[searcher:]

Not to worry; there's a big meteor coming. I seen it already on TV. We can start all over again. If not too soon, then look out for the mole men coming up from the played out oil casings.

Jul 13 01:12 PM

[James Quinn:]

Discovery - buddy. Do you think you just stick a hole in the ocean floor and oil miraculously flows. It takes billions to discover oil under the ocean and billions more to extract it. Result- Prices will go up dramatically. You clearly are have no clue what you are talking about.


On Jul 13 01:03 PM Socialism cannot compete! wrote:

> Blatant lie. Last year, during the $140/barrel oil "pricing crisis",
> Transocean's CEO testified to Congress that most new deepwater sites
> could begin production within 1-2 years, with the hardest-to-reach
> at a max of 5 years. Quit perpetuating the lies about time-to-production
> for deep-water drilling!!

Jul 13 01:17 PM

[Spartacuss:]

Here again, we have the blind men feeling around the elephant.

We can postulate all kinds of things, but one thing for sure is that the people in congress are scared to death and are taking on draconian measures to deal with this crisis.

Once discipline is lost and chaos sets in, we then get another crisis which, as always, thrusts us into a desparate measures, most likely war. It is inherent in human make up to seek the warm and cozy without regard for cost. And cost us, it has, and now we have to pay the piper. All this green stuff, 'shoots' and all are attempts to gloss over the real problems as no one has any 'real' solutions for much of anything.

The great engine of this world has shifted from innovation by the private sector to desperation in the public sector; the worst of all outcomes. We shall all pay, and very dearly, on all fronts.

Jul 13 01:23 PM

[bindlepete:]

No question in my mind this crunch has a long way to go. Legs as they say. With unemployment on a steady rise and expected to continue well into the next year plus, purchasing power will continue to fall. The bottom can not be seen as there is alot of positive feedback involved.

We have no real unsubsidized \export market so manufacturing jobs wil continue to plummet and our international credit is close to zero for cash and services. So where to go but down.

I fear we will stiff our international creditors with inflation as well as our own elderly -- the savers -- and any wh have laid their future in currency. With state and local pension cost going to tripple in the next 5 years the local budgets are going to have to raise taxes at a monumental level. Again pulling down purchasing power.

All in all not a rosy scenario. Will prices collapse in defaltion? In you dreams. Education, medical and prices still are driving in the other direction. Food will follow within the year if not already and more an more retailers will fail. Those that do survive will have the opportunity of raising prices with their competitors gone and further stimulate the inflation and poverty.

My kids laugh at the thought of food riots. I do not.

What defensive or direction changing strategies exist with 3$ a hour overseas labor, or is that $3 a day? Brazil and China have rational policies in energy and materials. We do not unless we get rid of the political power and momentum of hold the " status quo" folks in DC.

I think we can modify the rate of decline in both our economy and
environmental degradation ( this includes man induced climate change) but it is now out of control.

Can we adapt? We have no choice but it will not ever again be business as usual as seen in the 2003-6 period nor will it be without pain and severe dislocation.

Jul 13 01:32 PM

[Dean M:]

I can't believe so many people are dumb enough to buy into this soothsayer mumbo jumbo. It reminds me of the academic study where a group of people are given their personal horoscope and 75% of them consider it accurate, never mind they all got the same horoscope. In this case you could twist the story around any way you want and some segment of people will still buy into the "magical" prediction.

Jul 13 01:43 PM

[Gtarras:]

I am a huge fan of Strauss and Howe, it is interesting that the book "Forth Turning" was written in 1997 and anticipated many events that transpired later.

I also appreciate the article.

Can anybody teach me how to save the article in the "Read later" section of the SeekingAlpha website?? I would like to be able to share it later with friends. TIA.

Jul 13 01:48 PM

[keithfeather:]

Business is war, and war is business. Identifying a profitable venture with a probability of success encourages one to pursue the venture, whether that be market share or land and assets. The question might be, by 2025, continuing on the US path, will the US be able to defend its assets against a collaboration of competitors? Will the US have sufficient "partners" willing to risk their own existance to defend its own? Will the US be willing, or indeed be able to recognize, its need to risk its very existance to remain independent?

Thank you for an interesting read.

Jul 13 01:51 PM

[hickupapea:]

I have faith in the American people to correct this situation at the ballot box in 2010 . I do not share your lack of faith in Americans ability to overcome adversity . Too much crystal ball gazing in your article to be taken seriously. Steven King might be interested in your writings.

Jul 13 01:53 PM

[Gtarras:]

LOL. please read the commenter above you:

"My kids laugh at the thought of food riots. I do not."

neither do I. After being raised in Eastern Europe (mostly USSR), I can attest to the fact that events can unravel in a fast and the most tragic ways than anybody could have anticipated. Do not be in denial, it can be dangerous to your well being, although ignorance is a bliss.


On Jul 13 01:43 PM Dean M wrote:

> I can't believe so many people are dumb enough to buy into this soothsayer
> mumbo jumbo. It reminds me of the academic study where a group of
> people are given their personal horoscope and 75% of them consider
> it accurate, never mind they all got the same horoscope. In this
> case you could twist the story around any way you want and some segment
> of people will still buy into the "magical" prediction.

Jul 13 01:53 PM

[AndrewBaker:]

In the short term, energy shortages through, say, high oil prices again, may make for problems where oil is not replacable by other fuels. In many cases, it is.

Longer term, we will solve the energy problem: the technologies are already there, and just need enough impetus as would be provided by energy shortages, to get them going. Wind, solar, wave, geothermal and other renewable methods can be used and a DC supply grid spanning thousands of miles can get such power from source to users without much transportation loss.

In short, short term problems will happen, but they will provide the catalyst for long term solutions to be found and implemented.

Whilst this is happening, I do hope that adherence to the mighty dollar may be replaced by a search for a good life with family and friends, where monetary wealth is not the prime mover and money itself a fuel to warm that life and not a means to an end itself.

Jul 13 01:54 PM

[Dean M:]

I don't say crises don't occur periodically, just that this version of astrology doesn't have anything to do with their timing.


On Jul 13 01:53 PM Gtarras wrote:

> LOL. please read the commenter above you:
>
> "My kids laugh at the thought of food riots. I do not."
>
> neither do I. After being raised in Eastern Europe (mostly USSR),
> I can attest to the fact that events can unravel in a fast and the
> most tragic ways than anybody could have anticipated. Do not be in
> denial, it can be dangerous to your well being, although ignorance
> is a bliss.

Jul 13 01:58 PM

[Dean M:]

Just to carry the astrology analogy a little further:
-Your destiny and personality is based on your birthdate
-It has shrouded itself in an elaborate system of pseudoscience
-It cherry picks data to fit it's prediction model and ignores what doesn't fit.
-Predictions are sufficiently vague to fir a wide range of circumstances


On Jul 13 01:58 PM Dean M wrote:

> I don't say crises don't occur periodically, just that this version
> of astrology doesn't have anything to do with their timing.

Jul 13 02:09 PM

[Gtarras:]

I suggest you read Strauss and Howe book. I already mentioned that it was written in 1997 and anticipated many events that have happened b/w now and ten years ago. The most impressive prediction to me was the collapse of the people's trust in current regime of "public institutions". I believe the current stage of the dissilusioment (specifically in financial institutions, where the shifts are monumental) is just the beginning. Time will tell.

I honestly do not understand the parallel you are trying to draw between the astrology and their theory. True, as all theories, it has flaws (I mentioned that i grew up under influence of the Marxist theory, just as an example). These historians offer heirs, based on facts of history of the human behavior. Have a good day.


On Jul 13 02:09 PM Dean M wrote:

> Just to carry the astrology analogy a little further:
> -Your destiny and personality is based on your birthdate
> -It has shrouded itself in an elaborate system of pseudoscience<br/&g...
> cherry picks data to fit it's prediction model and ignores what doesn't
> fit.
> -Predictions are sufficiently vague to fir a wide range of circumstances
>

Jul 13 02:31 PM

[James Quinn:]

Here is a link to the article at my website.

theburningplatform.com...


On Jul 13 01:48 PM Gtarras wrote:

> I am a huge fan of Strauss and Howe, it is interesting that the book
> "Forth Turning" was written in 1997 and anticipated many events that
> transpired later.
>
> I also appreciate the article.
>
> Can anybody teach me how to save the article in the "Read later"
> section of the SeekingAlpha website?? I would like to be able to
> share it later with friends. TIA.

Jul 13 02:31 PM

[keithfeather:]

Maybe I misunderstood you before. Wasn't the crux of your article that this situation was inevitable? How can individuals be blamed for 80 year cycles?


On Jul 13 02:30 PM James Quinn wrote:

> Read the book before you open your trap. Ignorance like yours is
> why we are in this situation.

Jul 13 02:35 PM

[Dean M:]

Hail great Gandalf I honor your powerful Fourth Turning Magic!


On Jul 13 02:31 PM James Quinn wrote:

> Here is a link to the article at my website.
>
> theburningplatform.com...
>

Jul 13 02:40 PM

[Dean M:]

I'm why we're in this situation? I don't have debt or a subprime loan, I am an engineer so I actually help American competitiveness and I have always driven fuel efficient cars. And I didn't vore for that idiot Bush.


On Jul 13 02:30 PM James Quinn wrote:

> Read the book before you open your trap. Ignorance like yours is
> why we are in this situation.

Jul 13 02:45 PM

[Dean M:]

And you don't call that a vague prediction that could have applied at any time in human history?


On Jul 13 02:31 PM Gtarras wrote:

> I suggest you read Strauss and Howe book. ... . The most impressive prediction to me was
> the collapse of the people's trust in current regime of "public institutions".a good day.

Jul 13 02:53 PM

[Chancer:]

It is the governing class (also new elites) from both parties that got us into this mess. (And American people who put them there).

We are moving into a period of more and more socialism that may result in (USSR styled) socialist state planned economy. That is when the mess and decline that socialism causes gives rise to more socialism to fix, and leads to more decline.

Illegal aliens as new Democrat citizens will give permanent monopoly power to Democrat socialists.

VAT (tax) on products and eventually services) will be the source of more and more tax revenue to support the growing socialist state. This will increase the cost of living, decline in living standards, and suck all potential for growth out of economy. This will begin to make the USA like socialist Europe, but probably end in something worse.

I really do not see that this will swing back to anything positive. The only change would have to come in a violent revolution which starts all over with a clean slate. That also could end in dictatorship. Sorry, but majority of Americans are generally too fat, lazy, dumb, stupid, and cowardly to resist. They will support anybody and vote away their own rights for a full rice bowl.

The USSR came out of communism. They now have a corrupt form of "cowboy capitalism". The elites are the corrupt political class and corrupt capitalists. I would not want to live in the current Russian system.

Jul 13 02:53 PM

[Howard_T:]

The only thing that the people in the Congress fear is not being re-elected. Thus, they will support anything that they feel their constituents want. Unless enough of us get the message to them that their days in DC are numbered unless they make decisions based on what is necessary and practical and effective, not on what is popular, we are doomed.

On July 13, at 1:23PM, spartacuss wrote:

>We can postulate all kinds of things, but one thing for sure is that >the people in congress are scared to death and are taking on >draconian measures to deal with this crisis.

Jul 13 02:54 PM

[johnbee:]

The author ignores the ingenuity of man and the future possibilities of technology in his long term appraisal. Otherwise plagues and wars may well provide the answer by depleting population growth as in past centuries. Nothing is sure. No so called fact or othewise. Man cannot forsee the future without knowing why he is here and how he got here. The present crisis simply demonstrates mans' innate greed and shortsighted selfishness. Wars will surely follow if it continues.

Jul 13 02:54 PM

[James Quinn:]

Are you saying that there are no ignorant engineers? You trashed the Strauss & Howe theory when you know absolutely nothing about it. Do some research before you trash things.


On Jul 13 02:45 PM Dean M wrote:

> I'm why we're in this situation? I don't have debt or a subprime
> loan, I am an engineer so I actually help American competitiveness
> and I have always driven fuel efficient cars. And I didn't vore for
> that idiot Bush.

Jul 13 03:03 PM

[Gregman2:]

Thanks for the general refresher. Globalism and limited resources are the two big factors at work, combined with all the demographics you note. Keep up the studious effort--it's definitely enlightening to revisit these eschatologic ideas from time to time.

Jul 13 03:04 PM

[Dean M:]

No, I'm saying as an engineer I had less to do with the current crisis than, say a mortgage broker. I only mention it since you were blaming me for the current situation. I'm sure that I'm very ignorant.


On Jul 13 03:03 PM James Quinn wrote:

> Are you saying that there are no ignorant engineers? You trashed
> the Strauss &amp; Howe theory when you know absolutely nothing about
> it. Do some research before you trash things.

Jul 13 03:05 PM

[James Quinn:]

I thought engineers needed to be extemely thorough and exact in their analysis. I wouldn't dismiss Strauss & Howe so quickly. They wrote their book in 1997 and began their Generational study back in the 1980s. I'm as skeptical a person as you would ever meet. Their theory and their ability to apply it all the way back to the 1500s is remarkable.


On Jul 13 03:05 PM Dean M wrote:

> No, I'm saying as an engineer I had less to do with the current crisis
> than, say a mortgage broker. I only mention it since you were blaming
> me for the current situation. I'm sure that I'm very ignorant.<br/>

Jul 13 03:29 PM

[James Quinn:]

Read the book and learn something that might benefit you in the next twenty years.


On Jul 13 03:06 PM WAKEUP wrote:

> The source book of this article, "The Fourth Turning," seems eerily
> reminiscent of "The Theory of the Leisure Class," by Thorstein Veblen.
> I suspect the authors of "The Fourth Turning" gave in, to a terrible
> temptation to cash in on the thoughts of Veblen, dressed-up, and
> dressed-out in modern parlance. After all, it had been almost a hundred
> years since Veblen published his book; these guys (Strauss &amp;
> Howe) could have had a vision of $$$$$ and other perks, just for
> doing an intelligent re-write. Enterprising? Sure. Profitable? Probably.
> New? NO.

Jul 13 03:30 PM

[Dean M:]

FYI Obama was born in '61, that makes him a boomer (1946-1964)


Barack Obama became the 1st Generation X-er to be elected President of the United States. His background is a classic Nomad story. He has lived the life of a wanderer, living all over the globe, a child of divorce, fatherless, raised by grandparents, and a free agent in his career. Generation X grew up as abandoned children and alienated young adults.

Jul 13 03:31 PM

[drewriders:]

Geez. You could put "I love oxygen" as a comment and somebody will give it a thumbs down.


On Jul 13 08:49 AM pockyclips 2020 wrote:

> We've basically wasted 30 years, and we won't get another 30 to get
> off or a**. 1973 should have been our wake-up call. Our dependence
> on foreign resources and foreign capital will be the death of Western
> civilization as we know it. If we are lucky, we will exist as a
> post-WWII collapsed British Empire.

Jul 13 03:37 PM

[James Quinn:]

Again, if you read the book their definition of Boomers is those born between 1943 and 1960. It differs from Demographers definition.


On Jul 13 03:31 PM Dean M wrote:

> FYI Obama was born in '61, that makes him a boomer (1946-1964)<br/>
>
>
> Barack Obama became the 1st Generation X-er to be elected President
> of the United States. His background is a classic Nomad story. He
> has lived the life of a wanderer, living all over the globe, a child
> of divorce, fatherless, raised by grandparents, and a free agent
> in his career. Generation X grew up as abandoned children and alienated
> young adults.

Jul 13 04:07 PM

[grey road:]

Why are all of these ridiculous points being discussed? Minor points do not matter.. the basis of your article is true.. you know it.. i know it... but many don't get whats going to be in the future.


On Jul 13 04:07 PM James Quinn wrote:

> Again, if you read the book their definition of Boomers is those
> born between 1943 and 1960. It differs from Demographers definition.
>

Jul 13 04:27 PM

[John Bowman:]

A friend of mine told me a few months ago that 40% of Americans are dependent on the government and another 10% are profiting somehow from them.

As that figure grows with increasing government programs, it will be very difficult for the remaining minority to kick the present rascals out of office in the future.


On Jul 13 02:53 PM Chancer wrote:

> It is the governing class (also new elites) from both parties that
> got us into this mess. (And American people who put them there).
>
>
> We are moving into a period of more and more socialism that may result
> in (USSR styled) socialist state planned economy. That is when the
> mess and decline that socialism causes gives rise to more socialism
> to fix, and leads to more decline.
>
> Illegal aliens as new Democrat citizens will give permanent monopoly
> power to Democrat socialists.
>
> VAT (tax) on products and eventually services) will be the source
> of more and more tax revenue to support the growing socialist state.
> This will increase the cost of living, decline in living standards,
> and suck all potential for growth out of economy. This will begin
> to make the USA like socialist Europe, but probably end in something
> worse.
>
> I really do not see that this will swing back to anything positive.
> The only change would have to come in a violent revolution which
> starts all over with a clean slate. That also could end in dictatorship.
> Sorry, but majority of Americans are generally too fat, lazy, dumb,
> stupid, and cowardly to resist. They will support anybody and vote
> away their own rights for a full rice bowl.
>
> The USSR came out of communism. They now have a corrupt form of "cowboy
> capitalism". The elites are the corrupt political class and corrupt
> capitalists. I would not want to live in the current Russian system.

Jul 13 04:42 PM

[Turnipseed:]

Nope, not a blatant lie. Here's the sequence for oil/gas production. Identify target - acquire target (usually by leasing) - collect and analysis additional geophysical data - select drill site - spud and complete well - build pipeline to connect to existing infrastructure. Of course there is all sorts of permitting that has to be approved along the way. Ten years is a pretty good general estimate.


On Jul 13 01:03 PM Socialism cannot compete! wrote:

> Blatant lie. Last year, during the $140/barrel oil "pricing crisis",
> Transocean's CEO testified to Congress that most new deepwater sites
> could begin production within 1-2 years, with the hardest-to-reach
> at a max of 5 years. Quit perpetuating the lies about time-to-production
> for deep-water drilling!!

Jul 13 05:33 PM

[buoy:]

Nice story, but not buying it.

Jul 13 05:49 PM

[donttreadonme:]

Dead on as far as the Generational Theory goes. I conclude that we have entered the Fourth Turning - 09/11/2001 was the gateway, followed by the Great Deleveraging that will rage for the next 5-10 years culminating in God knows how horrific a global conflagration by the late teens/early twenties. Peak Oil is a faith in and of itself much like AGW. The earth continuously makes the stuff, its just a matter of finding it.

Jul 13 06:01 PM

[jstratt:]

Based on your advise I think I will invest in a tombstone manufacturing company.

It sounds like nothing good can ever happen again. It is a good thing the 1st half of my life has been so wonderful.

Jul 13 07:32 PM

[James Quinn:]

There has always been a new High after every Crisis.


On Jul 13 07:32 PM jstratt wrote:

> Based on your advise I think I will invest in a tombstone manufacturing
> company.
>
> It sounds like nothing good can ever happen again. It is a good thing
> the 1st half of my life has been so wonderful.

Jul 13 08:02 PM

[jessducky:]

James

Actually, its interesting you mentioned a study involving horoscopes. Just before I saw your reply, I was thinking reading your article was like reading a treatise on astrology applied to history. And your response to this person's post is a good sign of your "prophet of doom" mentality. I never read so much psycho-babble in my life. You seem like an intelligent guy, but you are sadly disillusioned and wasting your time making up new historical epochs and squeezing them into your theoretical boxes and adorning them with odd cultural references. And as I can see from your previous series of articles, which always take two or three posts to make a simple point, you are also a gasbag. If you want to read another writer who believes history works in this sort of dialectical fashion, I can lend you some Karl Marx.
On Jul 13 02:30 PM James Quinn wrote:

> Read the book before you open your trap. Ignorance like yours is
> why we are in this situation.

Jul 13 09:17 PM

[Rob Gilpatric:]

James ~ Your article is an astute summary of Strauss and Howe's historical theory. I too found deeply compelling their premise of 80-year cycles of history, and I consequently read every one of their books — so yes, I am also a huge fan. You did a good job of applying their theory to the outgoing Unravelling, but my central criticism about this article is that you didn't address what I thought you would, namely the specific effects, as you see them, of this fourth turning Crisis period upon Boomers. I was hoping to see your take upon what Boomers will do and how they will react. How will they weather this winter. What should Boomers, specifically, do to prepare. I would be fascinated to hear your thoughts on that.

To those posters here who can't stand the "soothsaying" of cyclical theories of history: I don't blame you for feeling that way. Many smart people to whom I've shown Strauss and Howe books couldn't stand the idea of an 80-year saeculum (or cycle of history). They had a strong aversion to the idea because they think it eliminates free will. But Strauss and Howe unequivocally state in "Generations" that free will has a crucial place in the way cyclical history unfolds. Great tasks await surmounting by great men and great women. So read their ideas, and those of James Quinn here, knowing that — to quote the movie, "The Terminator" — the future is not set.

Jul 13 09:40 PM

[Rob Gilpatric:]

One more thing, James — I don't want to take away from the achievement of this article. It was excellent in many ways. One of the best applications of S&H I've seen in a long time. You've got me hooked now. : )

Jul 13 09:54 PM

[datadave:]

gandolf and frodo ... and Newt!!!

ok, I agree with the above feminine critic, Jim you lost us with that narcissistic pigheaded wingnut for President/Leader in 2012. Good luck!

Jul 13 11:13 PM

[User 357705:]

Wow, that cook job at Waffle House is really getting to you! You should go to your local mental health center for help with your failure and the anxiety it has so obviously caused you. Get some of that good public help that otherwise would be unavailable.


On Jul 13 01:01 PM Socialism cannot compete! wrote:

> "You may not agree with Obama’s plans or policies, but it is clear
> to anyone that he is an intelligent, pragmatic man that will institute
> dramatic change in the policies of the United States."
>
> It is clear that he is intelligent?? HARDLY! The man fumbles around
> like an idiot without his teleprompter. Moreover, if he were truly
> intelligent, he could not propose the things that he is, for the
> current problem set we are facing! One example is the promise to
> close GitMo, and his determination to do so, even if it means releasing
> many prisoners who will end up going back to lead terror groups again.
> Anyone who cannot grasp that NON-CITIZEN terrorists committing acts
> of war against U.S. *civilians* are NOT entitled to the legal protections
> given to citizens, is NOT intelligent by any account!!

Jul 13 11:19 PM

[User 357705:]

Because Duhmericant's have been trained that the relative merits of Pepsi or Coke are of earth shattering importance!


On Jul 13 04:27 PM grey road wrote:

> Why are all of these ridiculous points being discussed? Minor points
> do not matter.. the basis of your article is true.. you know it..
> i know it... but many don't get whats going to be in the future.
>

Jul 13 11:31 PM

[User 357705:]

"It will convince many companies to move operations and jobs to China and India where these regulations don’t apply"

The obvious solution to this problem is not to reward these corporate criminals. Rather, make it very clear that if they move their businesses to another country they will be taxed at 100% forever and that their products will be either banned or taxed at 300% forever.

Seems allot smarter than giving them grants and tax credits for moving their businesses offshore as is done now!

Jul 13 11:40 PM

[dragonpaw:]

Very pointed comment there James. Very succinct. How do you have the time for all the prose and poetry and yet read and respond to the bevy of illi terate blather?
Ah, yes, the politicos have only to appeal to that 50+ per cent.
Nuf' said.

Jul 13 11:49 PM

[Ken Sherman:]

...they called Babylon by his illustrious name, made it great on earth, and founded an everlasting kingdom in it, whose foundations are laid so solidly as those of heaven and earth;
- from the preamble to the code of Hammurabi, 1760 BC. They thought their civilization would last forever, as we in the US do now.

Jul 13 11:54 PM

[joeflynn:]

There is enough natural gas deposits and coal in North America to last 200 years. There is no energy shortage! The world can live without oil! The American Empire will be diminished due excessive debt. But the "trigger event" is most likely the destruction of one or two of our cities by a bomb smuggled into an American harbor in a ship highjacked by "Somali pirates". The nukes will come from Pakistan or Iran. The American freedoms we have enjoyed will be replaced with a less free society maybe even totalitarian and golbalization will be severly damaged.

Jul 14 01:44 AM

[User 357705:]

The nuke will be from Oak Ridge or Savannah River. It won't need to be smuggled.


On Jul 14 01:44 AM joeflynn wrote:

>
> the "trigger event" is most likely the destruction of one or two
> of our cities by a bomb smuggled into an American harbor in a ship
> highjacked by "Somali pirates". The nukes will come from Pakistan
> or Iran. The American freedoms we have enjoyed will be replaced with
> a less free society maybe even totalitarian and golbalization will
> be severly damaged.

Jul 14 01:59 AM

[snagglesnarf:]

What a load of egghead crap. (part 2)

Jul 14 02:26 AM

[Willy Walnuts:]

Someone explain to me why these quotes popped in my head reading this article...

"Why don't you get a job Spicoli?"
"What for?"
"You need money."
"All I need are some tasty waves, a cool buzz, and I'm fine."

"Well Stu I'll tell you, surfing's not a sport, it's a way of life, you know, it's a way of looking at that wave and saying, 'Hey bud, let's party!'"

Mr. Hand: "What are you, people? On dope?"

Jul 14 02:54 AM

[ariesl:]

Isn't the real problem overpopulation? I believe it is. Unfortunately, even though it's a problem that should be simple to solve, we probably won't. That's because of most of the world's peoples beliefs in religion and/or cultural traditions. I fear we probably are doomed to see starvation and disease do the job of controling the Earth's swelling population. The attendant suffering of that outcome is a far greater sin than birth control or even abortion (though I'm no fan of the latter personally).

If you look closely at China's success over the last 15 years you will see that it happened after the Government implemented their draconian but effective population control laws. It's too bad it can only be done in a totalitarian country because the results are spectacular. Compare the Chinese people's lives today with the 1980's when hundreds of millions were starving and there was no wealth or even a middle class. Compare their lives today with the people of Africa, the Middle East, or large parts of South America.

It is quite easy to have great faith in God (your choice) and still understand that we individually decide whether to have children or not.

No matter what your political leanings are, it's obvious that with a billion or two fewer people on the planet, peak oil, global warming, climate change, large scale extinctions of species, wars and starvation in the third world would be way smaller, or even nonexistant, problems!

Jul 14 03:23 AM

[Vienna:]

That is true, the problem is that we have been fixed to the growth curve, if this does not go up, no matter how high you are people will consider doomed.
E.g. Keep the population in the US stable, but it won't, cause you need growth, and one day you wake up, and polulation is as dense as in Europe, and guess what the people say here, we need growth.
Our ability to improve is also going to be our dooms fate.


On Jul 14 03:23 AM ariesl wrote:

> Isn't the real problem overpopulation? I believe it is. Unfortunately,
> even though it's a problem that should be simple to solve, we probably
> won't. That's because of most of the world's peoples beliefs in religion
> and/or cultural traditions. I fear we probably are doomed to see
> starvation and disease do the job of controling the Earth's swelling
> population. The attendant suffering of that outcome is a far greater
> sin than birth control or even abortion (though I'm no fan of the
> latter personally).
>
> If you look closely at China's success over the last 15 years you
> will see that it happened after the Government implemented their
> draconian but effective population control laws. It's too bad it
> can only be done in a totalitarian country because the results are
> spectacular. Compare the Chinese people's lives today with the 1980's
> when hundreds of millions were starving and there was no wealth or
> even a middle class. Compare their lives today with the people of
> Africa, the Middle East, or large parts of South America.
>
> It is quite easy to have great faith in God (your choice) and still
> understand that we individually decide whether to have children or
> not.
>
> No matter what your political leanings are, it's obvious that with
> a billion or two fewer people on the planet, peak oil, global warming,
> climate change, large scale extinctions of species, wars and starvation
> in the third world would be way smaller, or even nonexistant, problems!

Jul 14 06:38 AM

[enigmaman:]

So when its all said and done " we're screwed" and nothing to do but prepare for whats coming, figure how to hang on. While Im not happy to read what I believe to be true " it is what it is" sugar coating will not change the end result, unless people open their eyes and understand they are orchestrating their own demise, nailing themselves in their own coffin human nature will run its course, I always worried about the time when people feared for themselves because that can turn ugly very quickly, whether we can avoid this outcome is questionable but we can prepare ourselves.

Jul 14 07:06 AM

[James Quinn:]

I don't want Gingrich for President. I was pointing out someone who is a Boomer that the country might turn to in a time of crisis. I know I've succeeded being impartial when people think I'm supporting Obama and Gingrich in the same article.


On Jul 13 11:13 PM datadave wrote:

> gandolf and frodo ... and Newt!!!
>
> ok, I agree with the above feminine critic, Jim you lost us with
> that narcissistic pigheaded wingnut for President/Leader in 2012.
> Good luck!

Jul 14 08:02 AM

[James Quinn:]

If a company can't make a profit in the U.S. they will close up shop. That is capitalism. Deal with it.


On Jul 13 11:40 PM User 357705 wrote:

> "It will convince many companies to move operations and jobs to China
> and India where these regulations don’t apply"
>
> The obvious solution to this problem is not to reward these corporate
> criminals. Rather, make it very clear that if they move their businesses
> to another country they will be taxed at 100% forever and that their
> products will be either banned or taxed at 300% forever.
>
> Seems allot smarter than giving them grants and tax credits for moving
> their businesses offshore as is done now!

Jul 14 08:04 AM

[Tao:]

The natural gas pipes run across our part of the country and they are about an inch and a half in diameter and they are on top of the ground. That could easily be done quickly.

Besides that we have stored oil for emergencies.


On Jul 13 01:03 PM Socialism cannot compete! wrote:

> Blatant lie. Last year, during the $140/barrel oil "pricing crisis",
> Transocean's CEO testified to Congress that most new deepwater sites
> could begin production within 1-2 years, with the hardest-to-reach
> at a max of 5 years. Quit perpetuating the lies about time-to-production
> for deep-water drilling!!

Jul 14 09:18 AM

[Tao:]

The real problem is greed. I read that they want to patent medicines for 13 years longer so they won't have generics to deal with for that 13 years and can charge what they want without competition.

Most of our leaders seem to think profit is the big thing, but they need to consider quality of life, too.

Price controls are one solution but the leaders are afraid of them.

Common sense is missing in our leaders too.

The elderly need to remind the young that we paid from every paycheck into Social Security, usually about 45 years by the time we retired. We were promised we would get a monthly check for paying in.

There will be plenty of money to pay for Social Security retirement. It is the add ons they added over the years that is causing problems. People shouldn't have to work longer to draw it, the jobs are needed for the young with families.

I honestly believe this crisis is being created by Wall Street so we will have to invest in their stocks for retirement. I don't want to be dependent on them.

Jul 14 09:29 AM

[RobertsJim:]

If a Crisis is imminent, with its destructive qualities besetting us for maybe 15 to 20 years, might not technology minimize its impact and shorten its tenure? Sensible government spending programs, sustainable energy, medical advances, information assembly and transmission, transportation improvements come to mind. Admittedly, the future looks grave but, if cast as a collection of problems, solutions will be found. I am a concerned boomer, but an optimistic one.

Jul 14 10:06 AM

[James Quinn:]

I guess technology could work in either direction. We have technology that could destroy the world in a matter of minutes. Some technological breakthrough is likely to solve our energy issues. Time will tell.


On Jul 14 10:06 AM RobertsJim wrote:

> If a Crisis is imminent, with its destructive qualities besetting
> us for maybe 15 to 20 years, might not technology minimize its impact
> and shorten its tenure? Sensible government spending programs, sustainable
> energy, medical advances, information assembly and transmission,
> transportation improvements come to mind. Admittedly, the future
> looks grave but, if cast as a collection of problems, solutions will
> be found. I am a concerned boomer, but an optimistic one.

Jul 14 10:18 AM

[Emerald:]

Writers on this website who personally attack their readers (whether the responses are warranted or not) deserve to be ignored. Shame on you James Quinn.


On Jul 13 03:30 PM James Quinn wrote:

> Read the book and learn something that might benefit you in the next
> twenty years.

Jul 14 10:23 AM

[Whippet:]

Umm- no. I work in biotech, and what you did NOT read, at least thoroughly, was about follow-on biologics legislation. There is currently no pathway to licensing generic biotech products; each product is so overwhelmingly complex to manufacture that the concept of a chemical "generic" is impossible. Even if you had the "formula" for my company's Coca-Cola, you could not make it. The 13 years you read was for DATA EXCLUSIVITY, not patent life. Big difference. Essentially, toads like Henry Waxman and Orrin Hatch believe that my company should hand over not just the "recipe", but the entire manufacturing process package and clinical trial data sets to each and every prospective competitor that wants it, after 5 years of licensure. Our cost structures are for BREAK EVEN at 7 years. Way to kill an industry...
Even an Ameriken Publik Skool Ejukation would have taught you that price controls have never worked in the past, do not work now, and will never work in the future. They result in either gluts or shortages, (destroy market clearance) and necessitate rationing by measures other than price (queues, political connections, level of need as decided by a Kommissar, etc.)
I'm sorry, but you were a fool to ever believe Social Security was anything more than a Ponzi scheme. I expect to never get a cent, and never did expect to ever get a cent. I shred the ridiculous green and white letter outlining my future benefits without opening it every time it comes. It is not an entitlement; there is no fund with your name on it; it is a tax-and-transfer-payment system, and always has been. What you paid in never was yours- it never even made it to your paycheck to be removed!!!
Please wake up, folks. Use some common sense and reason.


On Jul 14 09:29 AM Tao wrote:

> The real problem is greed. I read that they want to patent medicines
> for 13 years longer so they won't have generics to deal with for
> that 13 years and can charge what they want without competition.
>
>
> Most of our leaders seem to think profit is the big thing, but they
> need to consider quality of life, too.
>
> Price controls are one solution but the leaders are afraid of them.
>
>
> Common sense is missing in our leaders too.
>
> The elderly need to remind the young that we paid from every paycheck
> into Social Security, usually about 45 years by the time we retired.
> We were promised we would get a monthly check for paying in.
>
> There will be plenty of money to pay for Social Security retirement.
> It is the add ons they added over the years that is causing problems.
> People shouldn't have to work longer to draw it, the jobs are needed
> for the young with families.
>
> I honestly believe this crisis is being created by Wall Street so
> we will have to invest in their stocks for retirement. I don't want
> to be dependent on them.

Jul 14 10:38 AM

[James Quinn:]

Telling somebody to read the book and learn something is an attack? You are free to ignore my articles.


On Jul 14 10:23 AM Emerald wrote:

> Writers on this website who personally attack their readers (whether
> the responses are warranted or not) deserve to be ignored. Shame
> on you James Quinn.

Jul 14 10:52 AM

[User 357705:]

Capitalism of the Duhmerican't kind will be dealt with as a natural progression in this crisis period.


On Jul 14 08:04 AM James Quinn wrote:

> If a company can't make a profit in the U.S. they will close up shop.
> That is capitalism. Deal with it.

Jul 14 11:05 AM

[enigmaman:]

OK so the author took the long to get to the bottom line, was interesting reading but by the end, the ending was very clear. We are in the final stage of a sequence of events that will play out to our detriment unless something is done now to stop it. Unfortunately I myself have no faith that we can change the direction we are now on, even if we could it would be like turning an oil tanker, you need to start well in advance of your destination, if you can see where you need to be then its to late, all one can do is prepare for the worst and hope for the best. Im no fatalist, just a realist, nobody wants to think or believe the worst its to unsettling, so they close their eyes and hope when they open them it will be all right. Its like taking a sip of milk finding it sour, you put if back in the frig and hope it will be better tomorrow. Its human nature to avoid reality and it bites us in the rear end every single time it gets a chance. many are to busy listening to the same Wall Street pundits for direction who have lead them astray time and again, but they come back for more. I read a great article on Alpha " No One Saw This Economic Crisis Coming?" it was very good and basically said that plenty of economist saw it coming but nobody pays attention to economists! Maybe we should be listening to physiologists to determine how they predict the masses will react to the New World Order, the New Normal we now live in. Their findings may compliment the authors assertions.

Jul 14 11:05 AM

[Barking:]

wake up...I dont think desperate folks from the north are going to be too concerned about some buck tooth hillbilly with a shot gun. it will be just like the civil war all over again...they`ll walk right over them and take what they want....


On Jul 13 03:42 PM WAKEUP wrote:

> A word to the wise, about rushing off to the southern states: The
> South is a very different kind of place, and if you ain't from the
> South, you'll find that "locusts," and other pests are not tolerated
> very well, at all. The Resistance to any group of people arriving
> in the South for the purpose of "...feed{ing} off of the new host"
> will be, to say the VERY LEAST, quite SIGNIFICANT. Be aware, OR be
> very, very (to put it, mildly) SURPRISED.

Jul 14 11:16 AM

[Boxed Merlot:]

As noted before and as your own response succintly states, though not with a specific time element attached, "permit" = geopolitical, the wild card of uncertainty and added expense.


On Jul 13 05:33 PM Turnipseed wrote:

> Nope, not a blatant lie. Here's the sequence for oil/gas production.
> Identify target - acquire target (usually by leasing) - collect and
> analysis additional geophysical data - select drill site - spud and
> complete well - build pipeline to connect to existing infrastructure.
> Of course there is all sorts of permitting that has to be approved
> along the way. Ten years is a pretty good general estimate.

Jul 14 11:33 AM

[Barking:]

Well as far as the article goes... If things start to break down badly I certainly could see that senario playing out... scary as it is...my fear is what would the 'powers to be be" do in response to a break down in world wide social order?

ask yourself.... what would you do if you were at the top?

marshall law, curfews, lock downs, troops in every city? The worlds populations would NEVER go along with that....

theres only one answer...and its terrifying...

"they" will release a deadly virus...it solves EVERY issue...no shortages, no chaos, no global warming, no more lack of anything....if 40% of the world population dies off then EVERYTHING is resolved. There will be no war over natural resources because we`ll all be at home dying or attending to loved ones who are dying...

I know I probably sound crazy....and Im NOT some nut job...

but just think it through...it really is the simplist answer and one I think "they" would use to regain control.

Jul 14 11:35 AM

[Bill W.:]

James, with all due respect, I must disagree with some of your premises regarding peak oil. Yes, we do in fact have a peak oil situation if, and it's a big IF if you believe the oil companies numbers. Why do I make such a statement? It's because I've learned to never discount my own experiences.

Let me explain. In 1975 and 1976, I was a Project Planning Engineer on working for Brown and Root at the North Slope on the Alaskan Pipeline Project. I helped plan and schedule the gathering units (the pipes running from the wellheads to pump station number one and the separation units, the purpose of the separation units was to separate the natural gas, water, and oil, the natural gas was injected back into the ground, water was discharged into Prudue Bay, and the oil was sent to Pump Station One.

While at the North Slope, I stayed at the BP Hilton, a facility that provided lodging. While there I got to know more than a few geologists from Standard Oil and BP. Anyway, one evening over a few beers I made the statement that the world was running out of natural gas and oil. Well I had these guys ROFLAO. They were amazed that I was that naive. They essentially told me that there is enough natural gas and oil to last the lower 48 states for the next 500 years.

Jul 14 12:07 PM

[Boxed Merlot:]

…Thus might the next Fourth Turning end in apocalypse – or glory. The nation could be ruined, its democracy destroyed, and millions of people scattered or killed. Or America could enter a new golden age,…

I guess technology could work in either direction. We have technology that could destroy the world in a matter of minutes. Some technological breakthrough is likely to solve our energy issues. Time will tell.



How ‘bout some practical application to this information, SA style.

“Golden” age, here again is this ubiquitous reference to the blasted yellow dung as some representation of utopia, but I digress. Some prefer Au as a play for security, a post apocalyptic seed corn to begin the next cycle of life from, but as many are aware of, it’s in the forefront of R&D in world class labs as a catalyst for the scrubbing of dirty fuel residues due to it’s intrinsic elemental characteristics. It may very well turn out that Ag is not the only commercially “consumed” precious metal after all.

And sense I was one of those cranky central valley Ca., homeowners that lost 60% of my (albeit, inflated), equity, nothing would thrill me more than to see a revival of the gold industry in my back yard.

Jul 14 12:15 PM

[Investing I...:]

great article - thanks

Jul 14 12:41 PM

[James Quinn:]

Peak oil does not mean we are running out. It means we are discovering less than we are extracting. The easily obtainable fuel has been obtained. Now we need to use tar sand, shale, and deep water wells. To even undertake those projects at a profit you need $100 oil or greater. Demand will grow. That is a given. Supply will not be able to keep up.


On Jul 14 12:07 PM Bill W. wrote:

> James, with all due respect, I must disagree with some of your premises
> regarding peak oil. Yes, we do in fact have a peak oil situation
> if, and it's a big IF if you believe the oil companies numbers. Why
> do I make such a statement? It's because I've learned to never discount
> my own experiences.
>
> Let me explain. In 1975 and 1976, I was a Project Planning Engineer
> on working for Brown and Root at the North Slope on the Alaskan Pipeline
> Project. I helped plan and schedule the gathering units (the pipes
> running from the wellheads to pump station number one and the separation
> units, the purpose of the separation units was to separate the natural
> gas, water, and oil, the natural gas was injected back into the ground,
> water was discharged into Prudue Bay, and the oil was sent to Pump
> Station One.
>
> While at the North Slope, I stayed at the BP Hilton, a facility that
> provided lodging. While there I got to know more than a few geologists
> from Standard Oil and BP. Anyway, one evening over a few beers I
> made the statement that the world was running out of natural gas
> and oil. Well I had these guys ROFLAO. They were amazed that I was
> that naive. They essentially told me that there is enough natural
> gas and oil to last the lower 48 states for the next 500 years.<br/>
>
>
>

Jul 14 01:58 PM

[six:]

Interesting too bad it is dripple.... The natural human response to any condition or circumstance is to look to history for an anwser. Our current problems bring comparisons to the Great Depression and Japan's Lost Decade. Neither is worth spit, the US is certainly not Japan and it is NOT 1929. You never step into the same river twice... If history was a good guide then real estate prices would not have fallen across all markets, it never happened before and may not again for centuries. The "cycle of cycle" baloney is just a vain attempt to predict the outcome of the current situation. There are many other likely outcomes. How does the US lose it's position as the world super power? It seems unlikely in any event in the next 100 years... we have more food and a better military than any other nation by a large margin.

Jul 14 02:36 PM

[sidinsd:]

OK, let's assume that the Author and his basis for the article "The Fourth Turning" are correct and all hell is about to break loose. What does a poor baby boomer like me do about it? Do I go out and buy guns and ammunition to protect myself from the ravaging hordes that I'm about to face? Do I sell all my stocks and bonds and buy gold bullion? It is nice to be a doomsayer, but it is even nicer to propose some sort of rational solution or course of action to protect oneself from the inevitable disaster.

Jul 14 03:30 PM

[Bill W.:]

James, you said:
" Peak oil does not mean we are running out. It means we are discovering less than we are extracting. The easily obtainable fuel has been obtained. Now we need to use tar sand, shale, and deep water wells. To even undertake those projects at a profit you need $100 oil or greater. Demand will grow. That is a given. Supply will not be able to keep up."

Thank you sir for responding. I take exception with your statement that the "The easily obtainable fuel has ben obtained". If memory serves, it took about 5 years to construct the Alaskan Pipeline. I'm sure if this nation had the political will, the oil in Anwar and the natural gas stored in the ground at the north slope of Alaska could be made available in 5 years or less. Again, if memory serves, the oil companies obtained the permits for "right-of-ways" for the natural gas pipeline when they got them for the oil pipeline. Whether they did or not does not really matter, the point being the Alaskan pipeline was built in remote areas, so obtaining permits will be no big deal.

I think what is really needed is a comprehensive energy plan, one that uses a mix of energy resources until such time that alternative energy can be phased in as our main energy source.

I do agree with your premise regarding energy that if things don't change, this country is looking at a very bleak future. That is why we need a different perspective on this issue.

James, please let me say that your writing style is enticing, you do make one think, and I thank you for that.

















On Jul 14 01:58 PM James Quinn wrote:

> Peak oil does not mean we are running out. It means we are discovering
> less than we are extracting. The easily obtainable fuel has been
> obtained. Now we need to use tar sand, shale, and deep water wells.
> To even undertake those projects at a profit you need $100 oil or
> greater. Demand will grow. That is a given. Supply will not be able
> to keep up.

Jul 14 04:14 PM

[billddrummer:]

James,

Another brilliant piece. Thank you for your insight.

I too believe that technological innovation will come to the fore as a means of solving the problems inherent in the Crisis chapter.

Unfortunately, during the last Crisis, the 'best and the brightest' were recruited to develop the nuclear bomb.

Let's hope that this time the focus is on preserving and improving human life, rather than destroying it.

But if that actually did happen, would it avert the Crisis cycle, or merely postpone it?

Your examples suggest that Crisis inevitably results in massive loss of human life. So perhaps my hope is just a wan wish, not to be expected.

I fear less than many on this thread, because I see what kind of people our youth have become. Sensitive, environmentally aware, caring, spiritual, altruistic and dedicated to a strong work ethic.

(There are always sluggards--Proverbs mentions them frequently, but the vast majority of young adults I know are as I describe.)

I tend to think that we're in better hands than our parents were.

And that, as Martha Stewart would say, is a 'very good thing.'

Jul 14 04:19 PM

[Crocodilian:]

Author has a remarkably high opinion of his prognostications and their drama-- he has distinctive names for our condition, and to let us know that these are major events, he capitalizes them, viz "the Unraveling" and "the Crisis".

Talleyrand, who'd seen and fled a "Crisis" or two, the kind that ended up with the King's head severed and millions dead across Europe, had a convenient summary, which applies to author's melodrama:

"Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose"

In other words, we've seen this before and its unlikely to be anywhere near so dramatic as author makes out. Incremental adjustments to behavior and lifestyle are all that's needed to bring our economy and environment into better balance.

No comfort to the Chicken Littles of the world, but the sky won't fall, and their promiscuous capitalization will prove more melodrama than forecast.

Jul 14 04:21 PM

[enigmaman:]

I dont know about plenty of oil for the next 500 years, I say this because China has been buying up oil reserves and companies all over the world, they have been building a blue water fleet for the purpose of protecting their oil, because they have planned for this, from what Ive read they believe that within the next twenty years oil will be scarce and it will get ugly so they are investing in their future.


On Jul 14 12:07 PM Bill W. wrote:

> James, with all due respect, I must disagree with some of your premises
> regarding peak oil. Yes, we do in fact have a peak oil situation
> if, and it's a big IF if you believe the oil companies numbers. Why
> do I make such a statement? It's because I've learned to never discount
> my own experiences.
>
> Let me explain. In 1975 and 1976, I was a Project Planning Engineer
> on working for Brown and Root at the North Slope on the Alaskan Pipeline
> Project. I helped plan and schedule the gathering units (the pipes
> running from the wellheads to pump station number one and the separation
> units, the purpose of the separation units was to separate the natural
> gas, water, and oil, the natural gas was injected back into the ground,
> water was discharged into Prudue Bay, and the oil was sent to Pump
> Station One.
>
> While at the North Slope, I stayed at the BP Hilton, a facility that
> provided lodging. While there I got to know more than a few geologists
> from Standard Oil and BP. Anyway, one evening over a few beers I
> made the statement that the world was running out of natural gas
> and oil. Well I had these guys ROFLAO. They were amazed that I
> was that naive. They essentially told me that there is enough natural
> gas and oil to last the lower 48 states for the next 500 years.<br/>
>
>
>

Jul 14 04:22 PM

[searcher:]

Goodness! Turnings and waves and periods and cycles, it's all a whirl. One thing for sure, it's always, always, been the age of the manifesto.

Jul 14 04:26 PM

[James Quinn:]

They are not the "Author's" prognostications. The terms Unraveling, Crisis, High, and Awakening are the terms used by Strauss & Howe to describe the generational turnings.

You are absolutely right and didn't even realize it. "we've seen this before". We've seen it before because history is cyclical and the period are similar throughout history.

Make a good investment and read the book.


On Jul 14 04:21 PM Crocodilian wrote:

> Author has a remarkably high opinion of his prognostications and
> their drama-- he has distinctive names for our condition, and to
> let us know that these are major events, he capitalizes them, viz
> "the Unraveling" and "the Crisis".
>
> Talleyrand, who'd seen and fled a "Crisis" or two, the kind that
> ended up with the King's head severed and millions dead across Europe,
> had a convenient summary, which applies to author's melodrama:<br/>
>
> "Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose"
>
> In other words, we've seen this before and its unlikely to be anywhere
> near so dramatic as author makes out. Incremental adjustments to
> behavior and lifestyle are all that's needed to bring our economy
> and environment into better balance.
>
> No comfort to the Chicken Littles of the world, but the sky won't
> fall, and their promiscuous capitalization will prove more melodrama
> than forecast.

Jul 14 04:36 PM

[James Quinn:]

I agree that the course could be changed. But it won't be. The current administration has absolutely no plans to drill in Anwar or off our coasts or build nuclear power plants or coals plants. The Hirsch report laid out the consequences. It will come to a head in the next few years.


On Jul 14 04:14 PM Bill W. wrote:

> James, you said:
> " Peak oil does not mean we are running out. It means we are discovering
> less than we are extracting. The easily obtainable fuel has been
> obtained. Now we need to use tar sand, shale, and deep water wells.
> To even undertake those projects at a profit you need $100 oil or
> greater. Demand will grow. That is a given. Supply will not be able
> to keep up."
>
> Thank you sir for responding. I take exception with your statement
> that the "The easily obtainable fuel has ben obtained". If memory
> serves, it took about 5 years to construct the Alaskan Pipeline.
> I'm sure if this nation had the political will, the oil in Anwar
> and the natural gas stored in the ground at the north slope of Alaska
> could be made available in 5 years or less. Again, if memory serves,
> the oil companies obtained the permits for "right-of-ways" for the
> natural gas pipeline when they got them for the oil pipeline. Whether
> they did or not does not really matter, the point being the Alaskan
> pipeline was built in remote areas, so obtaining permits will be
> no big deal.
>
> I think what is really needed is a comprehensive energy plan, one
> that uses a mix of energy resources until such time that alternative
> energy can be phased in as our main energy source.
>
> I do agree with your premise regarding energy that if things don't
> change, this country is looking at a very bleak future. That is why
> we need a different perspective on this issue.
>
> James, please let me say that your writing style is enticing, you
> do make one think, and I thank you for that.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Jul 14 04:50 PM

[James Quinn:]

Food will rot on the vines without sufficient oil to transport it to stores. Last time I checked, we didn't have solar powered tanks. Cycle theory is about how generations react to events based on their age, not about specific events. The events will always be different. Human's reactions to the events will depend on how aold they are within the human life cycle.


On Jul 14 02:36 PM six wrote:

> Interesting too bad it is dripple.... The natural human response
> to any condition or circumstance is to look to history for an anwser.
> Our current problems bring comparisons to the Great Depression and
> Japan's Lost Decade. Neither is worth spit, the US is certainly not
> Japan and it is NOT 1929. You never step into the same river twice...
> If history was a good guide then real estate prices would not have
> fallen across all markets, it never happened before and may not again
> for centuries. The "cycle of cycle" baloney is just a vain attempt
> to predict the outcome of the current situation. There are many other
> likely outcomes. How does the US lose it's position as the world
> super power? It seems unlikely in any event in the next 100 years...
> we have more food and a better military than any other nation by
> a large margin.

Jul 14 04:55 PM

[grey road:]

Ill wake you up when its all over.. one problem ,.. it won't be awakening to find its all a bad dream. it will be you being forced to pull your head out of the sand. This is the most ridiculous statement here. What ballot box in 2010? And why do you think it matters whos elected? Its irrelavent.


On Jul 13 01:53 PM hickupapea wrote:

> I have faith in the American people to correct this situation at
> the ballot box in 2010 . I do not share your lack of faith in Americans
> ability to overcome adversity . Too much crystal ball gazing in your
> article to be taken seriously. Steven King might be interested in
> your writings.

Jul 14 04:58 PM

[Roman_Fiddler:]

The article does has a bit of a Nastradamus feel to it, but I liked it a lot. I really do see things heading somewhere along this path, sadly. It's pretty ugly, and I'm sad for my kids growing up with such a hard path to follow.

Honestly, it would be best if swine flu took out a huge bunch of us and replaced the war as the 'outside threat', then we could lower the population without decimating the planet as a whole. If there were a lot less people we might actually value human life, which we really don't just now (we value one another as consumers or in a parasitic way). We are for the most part selfish and greedy, have little or no clue about how to really fend for ourselves (I don't mean how to drive to the store or fill in a food-stamp application).

The oil dependence has to change, and fast, wherever you think the peak is. Even with gas supplies to last however long, you think the people controlling it are just going to hand it out to the masses to run their cars for cheap? I don't think so. I'm not sure if oil will be the trigger, but it will certainly add to our woes along the way. The middle class is going to be absolutely pulverized.

We need to go back to pre-industrialized life and pick and choose what worked back then, and apply it to today's technology. It really could be a good thing. We need to value nature and the limited resources we have, and stop being so wasteful. We need to work harder but most of all smarter, and with an awareness that we are part of an ecological web, and that everything we do has an impact that will finally come back to affect us.

It's an overwhelming amount of change we need. It is definitely going to hurt getting there.

Jul 14 06:08 PM

[Analyste de...:]

Full. Blown. Nuttiness.
And this theoretical caca has been spammed on this site 2x, 3x before? C'mon people - outta the bunkers! :)

Jul 14 06:11 PM

[User 357705:]

Feel the love!


On Jul 14 08:50 PM James Quinn wrote:

> It is amazing to me that SA would allow a supposed investment analyst
> to claim 40% returns which is clearly a lie. It is the cheats and
> liars in the investment industry that have ruined the country. I'm
> sure your proud of all the retirements you have destroyed.

Jul 14 09:46 PM

[billddrummer:]

On Jul 14 08:50 PM James Quinn wrote:

> It is amazing to me that SA would allow a supposed investment analyst
> to claim 40% returns which is clearly a lie. It is the cheats and
> liars in the investment industry that have ruined the country. I'm
> sure your proud of all the retirements you have destroyed.

Do you think CNG is a short-term solution to our addiction?

Jul 14 10:43 PM

[nmelendez:]

I carry gold, silver and Canadian dollars. I see a crisis but only in each persons mind. Food? i go fishing. Fuel. How much coal does the US still have which can be converted? Shelter? All i need is insulation from the elements. The only thing missing would be security. Smith and Wesson. You are wrong in one sense.
There's a saying i like very much..:"Even if a bear smiles, IT'S STILL A BEAR!" US is too powerful and we have enough resources for self sustaining. There is too much work to be done...and it's time our children understood graduating from HS gaurantees you nothing. It's time to reinvent ourselves.
BTW i do not see Mexico trying to take over the US :)

Jul 14 10:51 PM

[nmelendez:]

No, but coal and Alt-E's are, including nukes.


On Jul 14 10:43 PM billddrummer wrote:

>

Jul 14 10:52 PM

[nmelendez:]

BTW, author, it's called the Kondratief Cycle and it's a proven theory. Nothing new and certainly not the end of the world.

Jul 14 10:54 PM

[James Quinn:]

I think Picken's plan to convert our trucking fleets to natural gas makes a lot of sense. We have enough natural gas to supply ourselves for decades. As usual, no political will or consensus.


On Jul 14 10:43 PM billddrummer wrote:

>

Jul 14 11:05 PM

[applecore:]

These predictions are extremely mild among peak oil doomers. With ag dependent on oil for fertilizer, a mass die off of say a few billion people are expected once the age of oil is concluded. It's a simple analysis where you take the planet back to pre-industrial populations. People then argue for alternative fuels, but that's more or less a psychological defense mechanism to help people cope. Nothing comes close to replacing oil. It's just a matter of when, where we can only hope peak oil is sometimes after our lifetime.

Jul 14 11:07 PM

[Jabalong:]

Well done, it's a thought-provoking piece.

Jul 14 11:49 PM

[Alphameister:]

Peak oil is a reality, but a phenomenon that is more political than geophysical at this date in history. Peak oil would not be a serious problem if the world (and most especially the US) made better use of other hydrocarbons. Anyone who studies history ought to understand that capitalism is ingenious at economizing and substituting as a resource becomes scarce.

The overview is very compelling, though I tried to avoid getting too involved intellectually in some of the details that understandably (to me) invite comparisons with astrology. This debate about Obama being a nomad and thus incapable of leading us during the crisis stage seems a bit nonsensical. He clearly sees himself as THE prophet (not just A prophet) and he equally clearly is exacerbating the crisis that is already here with his socialist interferences.

Obama may have a reasonably high IQ, but he is stupid in the way that all socialists are stupid. No intelligent person can study history and fail to see that free-market capitalism not only yields the greatest material wealth but also the most ethical societies.

Jul 15 12:46 AM

[Vienna:]

My personal summary: You Americans are really able to screw up everything, and the world is really glad that you are collapsing, yes you are are all goint to tell me that we are too and that the states is doing far better than the rest, you are just to stupid to understand that the world is running out of ressources, and all you think of is maximization of personal spending to move your fat asses from a to b.

Jul 15 03:30 AM

[Vienna:]

Agree, there are a vast amount of means to generate a sustainable energy program, you need to start this better now than later, some of them like the fuel from corn did not work and need to be stopped, but how many other things that you did, did not work out.
What I don't get, you are all calling for free markets, so why do you need a political will.
Because the citizens and corporations of the US can not do it by themselfs, they are fat and lazy from eating Mac, sitting on your fat asses in your cars going shopping and just complaining about everything.
You will drill down to the last oil well and suck it out and then start thinking. That is how the US works, and that is why you screw up everything.
Your post war advantage is deminishing very fast, luckily for the world.


On Jul 14 11:05 PM James Quinn wrote:

> I think Picken's plan to convert our trucking fleets to natural gas
> makes a lot of sense. We have enough natural gas to supply ourselves
> for decades. As usual, no political will or consensus.

Jul 15 03:55 AM

[long roh:]

An entertaining piece, though I don't put much stock in this type of backward-looking pattern-recognition. For all anyone knows, 9/11 and the Crash of 2008/09 were the end of a brief "Crisis" and we are about to enter the "High" because of some unforeseen technological discovery. Or perhaps we will now have a long period of stagflation where unemployment stays high enough to make a lot of people unhappy but there is no trigger for mass social unrest and the theory falls apart.

In any event, I have to take issue with the statement that "Inconvenient facts like no ability to distribute any energy created by wind and solar to the places that use the energy are completely ignored by green extremists." Putting aside whether green extremists ignore those facts (I don't care what they think), the author is positing that wind and solar are useless because of the distribution problem. I could be wrong, but I was under the impression that the distribution problem was related to the fact that our antiquated power grid can't accommodate these new sources, not that the issue is simply a "fact" that is unsolvable. In poor countries that don't have a sunk investment in a huge power grid, those power sources would seem to be more viable. Moreover, in the U.S. the distribution problem would seem to be one that is uniquely suited to a government solution. In other words, no private actor is big enough, skilled enough, patient enough or risk-tolerant enough to create a profitable solution such that the only possible solution is a forward-looking political initiative that marshals public resources for the public good (and not for profit). If a commitment to such a new grid were made, private investors could more reliably invest in making wind, solar and other alternative technologies practical and it's possible we could ultimately see dramatic, unanticipated advances as a result of such investment. I realize I may have the facts wrong here, as I'm no expert in power grids, but I wanted to point out what seemed to be an over-simplied point made by the author. The real question is whether the energy crisis has advanced (or will advance) to the point where such a public investment is a wise choice. I don't think we'll have a good read on that until the current dislocation in the economy works itself out and we understand what the "new normal" will be.

Jul 15 11:49 AM

[James Quinn:]

The theory is not based on events. It is based on how generations react to events based on the phase of their lives. The human life cycle hasn't changed. You don't react to a set of circumstances when you are 60 like you would at 20.

I didn't say solar and wind are worthless. I said they can't replace oil. I think Pickens plan to build huge windfarms for electricity to free up natural gas for trucking fleets is a great idea. He just scrapped it because there is no way to get the power to the grid.

I see no consensus or urgency to upgrade the grid or do anything which will avert a massive energy crisis in the next 5 years.


On Jul 15 11:49 AM long roh wrote:

> An entertaining piece, though I don't put much stock in this type
> of backward-looking pattern-recognition. For all anyone knows, 9/11
> and the Crash of 2008/09 were the end of a brief "Crisis" and we
> are about to enter the "High" because of some unforeseen technological
> discovery. Or perhaps we will now have a long period of stagflation
> where unemployment stays high enough to make a lot of people unhappy
> but there is no trigger for mass social unrest and the theory falls
> apart.
>
> In any event, I have to take issue with the statement that "Inconvenient
> facts like no ability to distribute any energy created by wind and
> solar to the places that use the energy are completely ignored by
> green extremists." Putting aside whether green extremists ignore
> those facts (I don't care what they think), the author is positing
> that wind and solar are useless because of the distribution problem.
> I could be wrong, but I was under the impression that the distribution
> problem was related to the fact that our antiquated power grid can't
> accommodate these new sources, not that the issue is simply a "fact"
> that is unsolvable. In poor countries that don't have a sunk investment
> in a huge power grid, those power sources would seem to be more viable.
> Moreover, in the U.S. the distribution problem would seem to be one
> that is uniquely suited to a government solution. In other words,
> no private actor is big enough, skilled enough, patient enough or
> risk-tolerant enough to create a profitable solution such that the
> only possible solution is a forward-looking political initiative
> that marshals public resources for the public good (and not for profit).
> If a commitment to such a new grid were made, private investors could
> more reliably invest in making wind, solar and other alternative
> technologies practical and it's possible we could ultimately see
> dramatic, unanticipated advances as a result of such investment.
> I realize I may have the facts wrong here, as I'm no expert in power
> grids, but I wanted to point out what seemed to be an over-simplied
> point made by the author. The real question is whether the energy
> crisis has advanced (or will advance) to the point where such a public
> investment is a wise choice. I don't think we'll have a good read
> on that until the current dislocation in the economy works itself
> out and we understand what the "new normal" will be.

Jul 15 12:06 PM

[SeekingTruth:]

There simply are not enough people with the necessary combination of courage, intelligence, energy, and proactivism in America to prevent any number of crises' from occurring.
With 81 million Americans born too dumb to anticipate the eventual ruinous policies of greed , misadventure, fraud and crime of the previous administration, certainly anything can happen, and we should be surprised by absolutely nothing.
The author has outlined only a few of the possible scenarios, which serve as food for thought and general discussion , and he has done us a good service with his efforts, but they merely scratch the surface of actual possibilities.
We should all try to drive less, conserve energy wherever we can, and reduce our dependency on foreign oil :
Nat Gas, wind , solar , biofuels, conservation ,etc. can reduce our dependency on oil at the margin every year if we just do it!
It is not necessary to eliminate the need instantaneously, but just reduce the amount by approx. 5% a year and we can work our way out of this particular mess.
It is interesting that the congressional prostitutes of the nuclear industry for adding 100 new nuclear plants seldom if ever mention Nat Gas in their discussion for the need of those nuclear plants. I actually have never heard them mention Nat Gas even once, but they doubtfully may have somewhere along the line.

The development of Nat Gas seems a much better and safer choice than nuclear to me.

Jul 15 04:07 PM

[Zmartmoney:]

We ARE the overweight, beyond prime RockStar, moving from the kitchen to the Media Room for our exercise with a beer can, setting the stage for either a massive coronary or maybe a quick stroke. If we mend our ways, we might miss the coronary/stroke and just fade away into senile dementia while reminiscing about the good old days when we could jump around on stage and make the girls throw underwear at us. We are pathetic, rudderless, and are apologetically squandering our leadership in this world to be appropriated by whomever has the energy to lean over and pick it up. Obama is our caretaker in the old folks home - promising us whatever will shut us up and make him "feel the power" that he's been so long denied in his lifelong pursuit of personal worth. He won't find it but he'll try real hard and spend the last of the petty cash and hock your children. I wonder what the price of oil would be next week if Israel took out Iran's nuke facilities this weekend. The shock events don't have to be widespread war or famine - they usually start with something that's "small", like an archduke or something. Comforting thoughts, eh?

Jul 15 04:41 PM

[Dialectical...:]

You've touched on a problem with capitalism -- not to the capitalist -- but to nations and the people in them. As a nation we are allegiant to capitalism, but capitalism is not allegiant to our nation. "Deal with it" is one option. "Change it" is another. "Replace it" is a third. I am not advocating any of these options. I'm simply pointing out that the system we love does not necessarily love us back.


On Jul 14 08:04 AM James Quinn wrote:

> If a company can't make a profit in the U.S. they will close up shop.
> That is capitalism. Deal with it.

Jul 15 11:11 PM

[boomeranging:]

The Sky is falling,,,the sky is falling

Thanks Chicken Little

Jul 15 11:15 PM

[MSimon:]

Energy is not an addiction. Energy is life.

I like Polywell Fusion to get us out of the crisis - if it works. We will know in two years.

Jul 16 01:45 AM

[Bolton Peck:]

Ride your bicycle one day a week. That instantly cuts down on twenty percent of your fuel usage. And will probably make you live twenty percent longer due to better health and well being-also less drain on whatever health care system this retarded nation happens to scrap together.

If everyone rode their bicycle just one day a week instead of driving, it would instantly reduce the need for gasoline by twenty percent. One day out of five. I fear that, for the average out of shape American, that's too much to ask. It shouldn't be. Live too far away from work to commute, more than 15 miles one way? Move closer!

Reducing the 'drive till you can afford it' ethos would help this country immensely and cost-almost nothing!! And, for all you 'people should take responsibility for their own actions and keep the government out of it' crowd-hey, can you think of a better, more cost effective, self actuated plan to save yourself and the planet a little grief later on? The government doesn't have to do anything-except build bike lanes :-)

Ride your bicycle. And chill out.

Jul 16 01:52 AM

[MSimon:]

"If the world has such ability to increase output, why didn't output increase when oil was $145? "

Because a LOT of oil is politically off limits. Plus there are lags. It takes 5 to 7 years to develop an oil field.

Oil is not like agriculture where high demand calls forth supplies in 6 months.

Jul 16 02:22 AM

[hksche2000:]

There was NO baby boom (BB) during WWII, especially not the final 2yrs of it when most young men were at war's front. But there was a GI-homecoming BB enhanced by a booming US (and world) economy that lasted into the mid 60's. I haven't read strauss&Howe and I don't want to be a quick judge. Yet, sharp authors typically don't stumble over simpletons' issues like the above?
The gloom&doom scenarios with all the aspects addressed in Quinn's original and many equally enlightened commentaries, are well taken. However, not all Americans share the sense of "inevitability" conveyed in the article. Don't count the American spirit out, ever! Americans have started saving even while their Congress is still spending. Who would've predicted that even 6mos ago? If we fix the salvageable part of the housing market by bringing mortgage rates temporarily down to 4-4.5%, probable the fastest and least expensive approach to unload the housing overhang, the economy could get well underway toward recovery. Global economies of scale (China's 7.9% GDP, Germany's pick-up in export orders yesterday et al) are showing verifiable "green shoots" and may become locomotives to us, for a change, instead of the other way around. Thermosolar energy, (not bioethanol, for Pete's sake!) is the best green technology currently available to solve our own (if not the world's) increasing energy needs. At Desertec Foundation's 7/13/09 meetg of Siemens, EON, Munich-Re et al. at Munich, predictions included that 50 % of Germany's energy requirements could be met that way as early as 2020 with thermosolar energy from Spain (AndaSol) and/or North Africa. The US itself is actually a leading protagonist in the field since the 80's (Mojave Desert Project). However, we do need a new grid to distribute the electricity to EVERYWHERE in the country including a nationwide electrical train system. Expensive, yes, but paying it's own way like FDR's Interstate Freeway System. What would we do without it?! Same is true for the grid: we've got to have it as much as our FWY's! And, compared to building the FWY system, not to mention Manhatten Project, Man-on-Moon and Space Station, this one's EZ because the technology's there. That's where stimulus money should go, to projects ready for take-off and instant exponential payback; not to banks and other black holes.
Education is the other big one that must be solved to keep/get us globally competitive, but that's a different ball of wax. The current system obviously is kaputt and money is not going to fix this one.

On Jul 13 04:07 PM James Quinn wrote:

> Again, if you read the book their definition of Boomers is those
> born between 1943 and 1960. It differs from Demographers definition.
>

Jul 16 02:48 AM

[James Quinn:]

That is profound. I can tell you are one of those deep thinkers. Do you work at Goldman?


On Jul 15 11:15 PM boomeranging wrote:

> The Sky is falling,,,the sky is falling
>
> Thanks Chicken Little

Jul 16 08:29 AM

[James Quinn:]

All of your ideas are excellent. None will be implemented. More ethanol is the solution today. We talk wind farms and solar farms, but it will amount to nothing. The fact is that we import 66% of our energy needs and do not control our own destiny. It will take the crisis of $200 oil to get the political will to do anything. That is just the way it is.


On Jul 16 02:48 AM hksche2000 wrote:

> There was NO baby boom (seekingalpha.com/symbo...) during
> WWII, especially not the final 2yrs of it when most young men were
> at war's front. But there was a GI-homecoming BB enhanced by a booming
> US (and world) economy that lasted into the mid 60's. I haven't read
> strauss&amp;Howe and I don't want to be a quick judge. Yet, sharp
> authors typically don't stumble over simpletons' issues like the
> above?
> The gloom&amp;doom scenarios with all the aspects addressed in Quinn's
> original and many equally enlightened commentaries, are well taken.
> However, not all Americans share the sense of "inevitability" conveyed
> in the article. Don't count the American spirit out, ever! Americans
> have started saving even while their Congress is still spending.
> Who would've predicted that even 6mos ago? If we fix the salvageable
> part of the housing market by bringing mortgage rates temporarily
> down to 4-4.5%, probable the fastest and least expensive approach
> to unload the housing overhang, the economy could get well underway
> toward recovery. Global economies of scale (China's 7.9% GDP, Germany's
> pick-up in export orders yesterday et al) are showing verifiable
> "green shoots" and may become locomotives to us, for a change, instead
> of the other way around. Thermosolar energy, (not bioethanol, for
> Pete's sake!) is the best green technology currently available to
> solve our own (if not the world's) increasing energy needs. At Desertec
> Foundation's 7/13/09 meetg of Siemens, EON, Munich-Re et al. at Munich,
> predictions included that 50 % of Germany's energy requirements could
> be met that way as early as 2020 with thermosolar energy from Spain
> (AndaSol) and/or North Africa. The US itself is actually a leading
> protagonist in the field since the 80's (Mojave Desert Project).
> However, we do need a new grid to distribute the electricity to EVERYWHERE
> in the country including a nationwide electrical train system. Expensive,
> yes, but paying it's own way like FDR's Interstate Freeway System.
> What would we do without it?! Same is true for the grid: we've got
> to have it as much as our FWY's! And, compared to building the FWY
> system, not to mention Manhatten Project, Man-on-Moon and Space Station,
> this one's EZ because the technology's there. That's where stimulus
> money should go, to projects ready for take-off and instant exponential
> payback; not to banks and other black holes.
> Education is the other big one that must be solved to keep/get us
> globally competitive, but that's a different ball of wax. The current
> system obviously is kaputt and money is not going to fix this one.
>
>
> On Jul 13 04:07 PM James Quinn wrote:

Jul 16 08:33 AM

[James Quinn:]

LOL. Move closer. The entire country is suburbanized and you want them to move closer. Please deal with reality. Riding a bike is great, but your view of reality is false. 80% of our food must be transported by trucks to your favorite Natural Food store - I'm guessing Whole Foods. Your organic veggies will rot on the vine without oil.


On Jul 16 01:52 AM Bolton Peck wrote:

> Ride your bicycle one day a week. That instantly cuts down on twenty
> percent of your fuel usage. And will probably make you live twenty
> percent longer due to better health and well being-also less drain
> on whatever health care system this retarded nation happens to scrap
> together.
>
> If everyone rode their bicycle just one day a week instead of driving,
> it would instantly reduce the need for gasoline by twenty percent.
> One day out of five. I fear that, for the average out of shape American,
> that's too much to ask. It shouldn't be. Live too far away from work
> to commute, more than 15 miles one way? Move closer!
>
> Reducing the 'drive till you can afford it' ethos would help this
> country immensely and cost-almost nothing!! And, for all you 'people
> should take responsibility for their own actions and keep the government
> out of it' crowd-hey, can you think of a better, more cost effective,
> self actuated plan to save yourself and the planet a little grief
> later on? The government doesn't have to do anything-except build
> bike lanes :-)
>
> Ride your bicycle. And chill out.

Jul 16 08:37 AM

[Swashbuckler:]

"Ride your bicycle one day a week.That instantly cuts down on twenty percent of your fuel usage." This may in fact be the most ill-conceived reader post that I've ever read on SA. And I've read thousands. To begin with, there are seven days in a week, not five. So your 20% figure is bogus. And you want to have everyone in the country who doesn't live within 15 miles of work to simply sell their house and move closer. Yeah, let's have these people uproot their families, potentially take a hit of tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of dollars in today's market(or any market), in order to relocate closer to their workplace so they can ride a bike one day a week to save gas. Then you infer an increased life expectancy of 20%, since to you, riding a bike one out of seven days equals 20%. If you are not employed with the government, you have missed your calling.


On Jul 16 01:52 AM Bolton Peck wrote:

> Ride your bicycle one day a week. That instantly cuts down on twenty
> percent of your fuel usage. And will probably make you live twenty
> percent longer due to better health and well being-also less drain
> on whatever health care system this retarded nation happens to scrap
> together.
>
> If everyone rode their bicycle just one day a week instead of driving,
> it would instantly reduce the need for gasoline by twenty percent.
> One day out of five. I fear that, for the average out of shape American,
> that's too much to ask. It shouldn't be. Live too far away from
> work to commute, more than 15 miles one way? Move closer!
>
> Reducing the 'drive till you can afford it' ethos would help this
> country immensely and cost-almost nothing!! And, for all you 'people
> should take responsibility for their own actions and keep the government
> out of it' crowd-hey, can you think of a better, more cost effective,
> self actuated plan to save yourself and the planet a little grief
> later on? The government doesn't have to do anything-except build
> bike lanes :-)
>
> Ride your bicycle. And chill out.

Jul 16 09:59 AM

[James Quinn:]

If I could give you 10 thumbs up, I would.


On Jul 16 09:59 AM Swashbuckler wrote:

> "Ride your bicycle one day a week.That instantly cuts down on twenty
> percent of your fuel usage." This may in fact be the most ill-conceived
> reader post that I've ever read on SA. And I've read thousands. To
> begin with, there are seven days in a week, not five. So your 20%
> figure is bogus. And you want to have everyone in the country who
> doesn't live within 15 miles of work to simply sell their house and
> move closer. Yeah, let's have these people uproot their families,
> potentially take a hit of tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands
> of dollars in today's market(or any market), in order to relocate
> closer to their workplace so they can ride a bike one day a week
> to save gas. Then you infer an increased life expectancy of 20%,
> since to you, riding a bike one out of seven days equals 20%. If
> you are not employed with the government, you have missed your calling.
>

Jul 16 10:53 AM

[Bolton Peck:]

You know, as soon as I posted it I realized I should have said 'one WORK day a week. ONE out of FIVE days in a WORK week. I'm sorry you couldn't figure that one out.

I shop at Safeway just like you-it is 6.8 miles from my house. it is also a couple of miles away from a local railway station. We could, even using only our extant (broken down, badly managed) railway system to remove a great percentage of truck based shipping-at least the long haul highway portion which accounts for the majority of the diesel fuel usage. Save the fuel for the short hops, rail station to stores.

To call my post the worst conceived ever on SA is a bit of a stretch. Judging from your remarks about how I must shop at Whole Foods, the overall condescending tone of your post, you obviously think I'm some sort of wacko green extremist-which I'm not.

I'm sorry I didn't take this one post to suggest that people's places of work be much more evenly interspersed with housing, that we make much greater use of railways versus trucks for shipping, that we use more open spaces for local food production versus shopping malls etc.-in other words, that we change our program to be more frugal overall with energy usage.

For the simple: My suggestion was to take matters INTO YOUR OWN HANDS JUST A LITTLE. Use a little less energy every week. That was all I was trying to say.

You can get back into your great big luxury SUV, which only you occupy for most of that 50 miles one way commute, and which you must replace every two years so you can show your neighbors how much better you're doing (than they are) and forget I said anything.

On Jul 16 09:59 AM Swashbuckler wrote:

> "Ride your bicycle one day a week.That instantly cuts down on twenty
> percent of your fuel usage." This may in fact be the most ill-conceived
> reader post that I've ever read on SA. And I've read thousands.
> To begin with, there are seven days in a week, not five. So your
> 20% figure is bogus. And you want to have everyone in the country
> who doesn't live within 15 miles of work to simply sell their house
> and move closer. Yeah, let's have these people uproot their families,
> potentially take a hit of tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands
> of dollars in today's market(or any market), in order to relocate
> closer to their workplace so they can ride a bike one day a week
> to save gas. Then you infer an increased life expectancy of 20%,
> since to you, riding a bike one out of seven days equals 20%. If
> you are not employed with the government, you have missed your calling.
>

Jul 16 03:21 PM

[Swashbuckler:]

"Judging from your remarks about how much I must shop at Whole Foods"---at least read my post before offering your lame rebuttal.


On Jul 16 03:21 PM Bolton Peck wrote:

> You know, as soon as I posted it I realized I should have said 'one
> WORK day a week. ONE out of FIVE days in a WORK week. I'm sorry
> you couldn't figure that one out.
>
> I shop at Safeway just like you-it is 6.8 miles from my house. it
> is also a couple of miles away from a local railway station. We
> could, even using only our extant (broken down, badly managed) railway
> system to remove a great percentage of truck based shipping-at least
> the long haul highway portion which accounts for the majority of
> the diesel fuel usage. Save the fuel for the short hops, rail station
> to stores.
>
> To call my post the worst conceived ever on SA is a bit of a stretch.
> Judging from your remarks about how I must shop at Whole Foods, the
> overall condescending tone of your post, you obviously think I'm
> some sort of wacko green extremist-which I'm not.
>
> I'm sorry I didn't take this one post to suggest that people's places
> of work be much more evenly interspersed with housing, that we make
> much greater use of railways versus trucks for shipping, that we
> use more open spaces for local food production versus shopping malls
> etc.-in other words, that we change our program to be more frugal
> overall with energy usage.
>
> For the simple: My suggestion was to take matters INTO YOUR OWN
> HANDS JUST A LITTLE. Use a little less energy every week. That
> was all I was trying to say.
>
> You can get back into your great big luxury SUV, which only you occupy
> for most of that 50 miles one way commute, and which you must replace
> every two years so you can show your neighbors how much better you're
> doing (than they are) and forget I said anything.
>
> On Jul 16 09:59 AM Swashbuckler wrote:

Jul 16 03:58 PM

[Swashbuckler:]

Bolton---Be careful with that "extant" railway system. I've heard those "extant" railway systems are tough to deal with. Polish up that resume and forward it on to Uncle Sam.

Jul 16 04:09 PM

[Bolton Peck:]

Webster's Universal College Dictionary, (c) 1997 Random House-Page 283, second defined word from the top:

extant: adj: still existing; not destroyed or lost: only three extant copies of the document.

Extant is a word which means 'still existing' which is what I meant to say-our current, still existing railway system.

Why are you on my case for this? I did actually have to look it up, to make sure I was using the word correctly-and I was.

However, you got me. I stated my case badly, OK? I apologize also for lumping you in with the other guy who made the whole foods comment, that was wrong. I screwed up. Maybe you never did.

Although it is strange how he talked about fuel usage and how my organic produce would rot on the vine without trucks to move it to me. True, but wouldn't there be more fuel available for those trucks if car drivers used less of it?

Anyway, given that much of this thread is about oil, energy use, etc. and how excessive consumption has badly damaged us as a country-would you agree that any positive change which results in less consumption on a personal level, with no government mandated intrusions, is a good thing? And as an added bonus, I think you could agree that there are lots of Americans who, frankly, could use the cardio. Riding your bike regularly does make you healthier. The 20 percent figure I mentioned was meant to be tongue in cheek, but it clearly didn't come across that way.

I have no desire to work for the government, although it would result in my having health insurance, something I currently lack.

Jul 16 06:24 PM

[Swashbuckler:]

Bolton--I would agree that any positive change which results in less consumption on a personal level, with no government mandated intrusions, is a good thing. And riding a bike is not all bad. Best to you.

Jul 16 07:11 PM

[mgcolin:]

I'm about as pessimistic as they come, and found your article fascinating and thought provoking.

But on the question of natural gas and on some of your oil comments you're just wrong on the facts. If there are sustained $140+ oil prices a couple things would happen. Natural gas, which pretty much everyone now agrees is very plentiful in the US, could become a very significant contributor as a transportation fuel very quicky, say within 5 years, not 20. Building NG Infrastructure is very straight forward, and standard vehicles can easily be built/retrofitted to run on natural gas (see Brazil). You really think society would shut down before people would reallocate enough resources to make the switch to NG in less than 20 years?

And there is also more oil out there if substitutes are expensive enough to make even $150 oil economical. Production of the 'not so easy' reserves takes time, and producers have to have high confidence the price will justify the costs....for now there is still enough 'easy oil', and demand is lousy so equilibrium price is $50 or so.

To me, despite such a fine article, you lose credibility where in one comment you say "if it's so easy to find more oil then how come production didn't increase when oil was $140?" And in another post you comment that sure, deep offshore reserves might exist, but it would take a long time to develop them. YES it would take a long time and that's why production didn't increase instantaneously during the 3 week period when oil spiked to $140.


On Jul 13 11:22 AM James Quinn wrote:

> Your easily recoverable thesis is a crock. It takes 10 years from
> discovery to extract the oil in deepwater. Natural gas needs to be
> transported by pipelines that don't exist. Cars and trucks don't
> use natural gas today. It would take 20 years if we had consensus
> today to convert transportation to nat gas.
>
> Everything is so easy in theory. Little things like the fact that
> geologists and experienced oilmen are retiring with no one to replace
> them may have an impact. How about no refinery capacity. How about
> the energy infrastructure rusting away and needing a $10 trillion
> upgrade that no one is willing to make.
>
>

Jul 16 07:23 PM

[PD Quig:]

Obama is definitely leading us into the Crisis. He took a bad situation and has exacerbated it dramatically by drowning us in debt, inserting government into our private lives as never before ("You want to have what kind of medical procedure done? I'm with the government and I don't think that's a good idea...). This regime--yes, I meant to use that word--seems intent upon grinding into sand the few remaining shards of liberty and self-reliance left in this country.

There will be blood.

Jul 16 10:49 PM

[Vienna:]

Hipi Jury Cowboys - Europe isn't that bad as you all have predicted, and you keep on predicting what is going to happen, you are all laying wrong, consider this when investing , e.g. China

Jul 17 12:57 AM

[Bolton Peck:]

Please show me where in the new health care plan it says this. Seriously, not being snarky, I want to know. Because right now, it's my HMO (if I had one) that would be saying the exact same thing. This old chestnut has been thrown around ad nauseam about the evil socialized medicine. I suppose it's true sometimes, but i don't know. I sure get plenty of it under the current system-when I have expensive insurance at all!

We should all be marching in the streets. banks get trillions while old ladies die in the street outside brand new hospitals. It's a crying shame. When the ex-CEO of Cigna health care comes right out and says that a sensationalist like Micheal Moore 'hit the nail on the head' then you know there's a problem.

I'm OK with there being blood. I'm poor-so it'll probably end up being mine.

Jul 17 01:06 AM

[James Quinn:]

Do you really think there is the political will and ability to switch our entire nation's gasoline and diesel infrastructure to natural gas in 5 years. Pickens wanted to build the windfarms to supply the energy previously supplied by NG so that our nation's trucking fleets could be converted to NG. No way to get the wind farm electricity to the grid. You can't poo poo these small details away. Do you know what it would cost to convert every car, truck, and gas station in America to NG? Who pays for the conversion? Frankly, your credibility is called into question.

I


On Jul 16 07:23 PM mgcolin wrote:

> I'm about as pessimistic as they come, and found your article fascinating
> and thought provoking.
>
> But on the question of natural gas and on some of your oil comments
> you're just wrong on the facts. If there are sustained $140+ oil
> prices a couple things would happen. Natural gas, which pretty much
> everyone now agrees is very plentiful in the US, could become a very
> significant contributor as a transportation fuel very quicky, say
> within 5 years, not 20. Building NG Infrastructure is very straight
> forward, and standard vehicles can easily be built/retrofitted to
> run on natural gas (see Brazil). You really think society would shut
> down before people would reallocate enough resources to make the
> switch to NG in less than 20 years?
>
> And there is also more oil out there if substitutes are expensive
> enough to make even $150 oil economical. Production of the 'not so
> easy' reserves takes time, and producers have to have high confidence
> the price will justify the costs....for now there is still enough
> 'easy oil', and demand is lousy so equilibrium price is $50 or so.
>
>
> To me, despite such a fine article, you lose credibility where in
> one comment you say "if it's so easy to find more oil then how come
> production didn't increase when oil was $140?" And in another post
> you comment that sure, deep offshore reserves might exist, but it
> would take a long time to develop them. YES it would take a long
> time and that's why production didn't increase instantaneously during
> the 3 week period when oil spiked to $140.

Jul 17 08:32 AM

[James Quinn:]

We turn our eyes to Austria for guidance. Your banks didn't make any bad loans to Eastern Europe, did they? 50 to 1 leverage is an extremely smart thing to do. We seek your guidance.


On Jul 17 12:57 AM Vienna wrote:

> Hipi Jury Cowboys - Europe isn't that bad as you all have predicted,
> and you keep on predicting what is going to happen, you are all laying
> wrong, consider this when investing , e.g. China

Jul 17 08:35 AM

[bobbobwhite:]

As I age and grow wiser from more life experience, I am increasingly convinced that everything in physical existence operates on the Bell Shaped Curve principle. First, whatever it is is conceived, starts to grow, continues building, peaks, maintains for a time, then starts to decline, then rapidly declines, then begins to collapse, fully collapses, then.............ceases to exist. All things. Everything, even the universe.

All natural, including human, history can be traced on the BSC. Nothing has ever changed, and it never will. It cannot. This is a physical world and all existing things eventually end, and new things start, and they end, and......................

Jul 17 10:15 AM

[mgcolin:]

No, I don't think "there is the political will and ability to switch
> our entire nation's gasoline and diesel infrastructure to natural
> gas in 5 years". That is not what I said.

I said that with $150+ oil, and with that price deemed sustainable and going higher by the market, NG could become a significant contributor to transportation within 5 years, and there will be other alternatives that will come into play including oil that is more expensive to recover. Brazil is in the midst of making NG a significant contributor as a transport fuel, and 5 years ago they were nowhere with NG.

Peak oil may be correct, but the whole point is that there are substitutes (including efficiency and conservation) that come into play at various price levels. Sure there will be pain, just as there was pain when oil was deemed no longer viable as an electricity generating fuel and power plants switched to NG and coal.

I agree with you - the US is a basket case, the future is terribly bleak for a million reasons. But people are not going to let society completely collapse because cheap oil is gone.

And what is your point on Pickens? This wind farm power transmission issue has nothing to do with the viability of using NG as a transportation fuel. His plan had two initiatives, one of which he failed on - the wind part. If oil were still $150 and he weren't so old, I think he'd be working harder on the transmission issue.

Pickens had one plan, a shot. His plan didn't work out - so your point is that the game is over and we're doomed? It will take 500 plans like his, and a combination of them will result in a solution that might not provide dirt cheap energy like oil did, but society is NOT going to collapse because we burned through one source of cheap energy. Gas is already double the US price in Europe, they survive.


On Jul 17 08:32 AM James Quinn wrote:

> Do you really think there is the political will and ability to switch
> our entire nation's gasoline and diesel infrastructure to natural
> gas in 5 years. Pickens wanted to build the windfarms to supply the
> energy previously supplied by NG so that our nation's trucking fleets
> could be converted to NG. No way to get the wind farm electricity
> to the grid. You can't poo poo these small details away. Do you know
> what it would cost to convert every car, truck, and gas station in
> America to NG? Who pays for the conversion? Frankly, your credibility
> is called into question.
>
> I

Jul 17 10:37 AM

[James Quinn:]

I don't think we are doomed. Peak oil doesn't mean we are running out. It means we are discovering less than we are using. There are hundreds of years of various sources in the earth. They will be more expensive to access and convert. At a high enough price, many things become viable. I'm 100% for transitioning to NG. I think we should build 100 nuclear reactors. I think we should build new refineries.

Matt Simmons says that saltwater can be converted into ammonia, which could power cars. I believe we will come up with a solution. I don't think the solution will be developed until a true threatening crisis forces the issue.


On Jul 17 10:37 AM mgcolin wrote:

> No, I don't think "there is the political will and ability to switch

Jul 17 11:20 AM

[Bolton Peck:]

I drove by a ton of wind farms in eastern Washington State a few weeks ago. They all seemed to be connected to the grid, turning, and making energy just fine. They were doing it in northern California in the 1980s. The argument against wind power seems here to be that it can't be put on the grid. Might I ask why? Our current power grid is heavily loaded, but couldn't a coal plant be placed off line to make up for a wind plant going on line? I don't believe an argument that wind turbines can't be wired into the electrical grid. Wind turbines generate alternating current which can be transformed to any required voltage, just like any other alternating current.

Jul 17 08:49 PM

[James Quinn:]

Picken's plan was to build them in the corridor from Texas to North Dakota. The connection to the grid would need to be built. It isn't that it can't be done, it is that no one is willing to do it. If oil prices are $50 and coal is cheap, no one will make the investment in wind and solar. High prices for oil will cure that hesitation.


On Jul 17 08:49 PM Bolton Peck wrote:

> I drove by a ton of wind farms in eastern Washington State a few
> weeks ago. They all seemed to be connected to the grid, turning,
> and making energy just fine. They were doing it in northern California
> in the 1980s. The argument against wind power seems here to be that
> it can't be put on the grid. Might I ask why? Our current power grid
> is heavily loaded, but couldn't a coal plant be placed off line to
> make up for a wind plant going on line? I don't believe an argument
> that wind turbines can't be wired into the electrical grid. Wind
> turbines generate alternating current which can be transformed to
> any required voltage, just like any other alternating current.

Jul 17 10:46 PM

[john s. gordon:]

bolton p. -

it's not as simple as you think.

the grid requires that all connected generators be synchronized, otherwise (large) portions of the system will trip out as as happened in northeast ohio a few yrs ago. the standard in north america is 60 hz. in other parts of the world the standard is 50 hz (this is why when you go to europe your electric shaver seems so slow). back around 1950 ontario hydro operated @ 25 hz.
because wind speeds are variable, synchronization of all the units in a wind farm (to say nothing about all the wind farms) poses problems. to get around this problem, a wind turbine running thru a gearbox turns a DC generator (technically, a dynamo). the output of the dynamo is then fed thru an inverter operating synchronously with all the other elements in the system to create the AC which can be transmitted.
> jack

Jul 18 03:10 PM

[ERCaptain:]

"...now at last we are beginning Chapter One of the Great Story which no one on earth has read..." C. S. Lewis

On Jul 17 10:15 AM bobbobwhite wrote: ....
> has ever changed, and it never will. It cannot. This is a physical
> world and all existing things eventually end, and new things start,
> and they end, and......................

Jul 20 05:18 PM

[Strangewalk:]

The US has by far the largest deposits of both coal and oil-shale of any country. And from everything I'm reading the technology exists to utilize it as an energy source while producing very little pollution. There has to be some kind of power-money-political game going on with oil--maybe some people understand it, I don't. The following is from Wikipedia:

Royal Dutch Shell has announced that its in situ extraction technology [of oil shale] in Colorado could become competitive at prices over $30 per barrel ($190/m3), while other technologies at full-scale production assert profitability at oil prices even lower than $20 per barrel ($130/m3).[43][55][56] To increase efficiency when retorting oil shale, researchers have proposed and tested several co-pyrolysis processes.[57][58][59]...

A 1972 publication in the journal Pétrole Informations (ISSN 0755-561X) compared shale-based oil production unfavorably with the liquefaction of coal. The article portrayed coal liquefaction as less expensive, generating more oil, and creating fewer environmental impacts than extraction from oil shale. It cited a conversion ration of 650 litres (170 U.S. gal; 140 imp gal) of oil per one ton of coal, as against 150 litres (40 U.S. gal; 33 imp gal) of shale oil per one ton of oil shale.[27]

Jul 21 11:44 PM

[Strangewalk:]

It should be mentioned that the coal and oil-shale deposits in the US contain the equivalent energy of all the oil that's ever been extracted in history and that are projected to be used in the next century combined.

Jul 22 12:01 AM

[James Quinn:]

My limited understanding is that its extraction requires massive amounts of water. Shell is working on the technology, but won't have a conclusion whether to plow ahead until 2010. Too late to avert a crisis.


On Jul 22 12:01 AM Strangewalk wrote:

> It should be mentioned that the coal and oil-shale deposits in the
> US contain the equivalent energy of all the oil that's ever been
> extracted in history and that are projected to be used in the next
> century combined.

Jul 22 10:45 AM

[susansong:]

Nice work.

Aug 12 11:10 AM