Homestead mailing list

[Clansgian AT wmconnect.com]

> >That the 'oil age will not end because we ran out of oil' follows  
> >'the stone age did not end because we ran out of stones' is a non  
> >sequitur

That indeed is a tired old saw.  In thinking about wood to coal to oil, it is 
not useful to talk about the waning of the predominance of those fuels 
because we did or did not run out of them, but rather the urge to use 
something even 
more energy intensive.

Coal did not rise in popularity because wood was scarce, but rather becuase 
of the desire to use more energy intensive machinery and processes.  Likewise 
oil did not replace coal becaue coal was scarce but rather it gave rise to 
yet 
more energy intensive machinery and processes.

The things wood was betters suited for continued to be fueled by wood (bread 
ovens, for example).  And the things that worked better with coal continued 
to 
employ coal, as they do to this day.

But this is a very different situation from the one in which we find 
ourselves.  The current "demand destruction" in oil isn't because a new and 
better and 
more efficient and more powerful energy is emerging to replace it, but rather 
the uses for oil continue unabated while the availability declines all the 
while.

At the onset of the age of coal, people weren't dashing about madly trying to 
find something to use for the wood they could no longer obtain.  Likewise at 
the advent of the age of oil, people weren't scrambling about trying to find 
something to use because they could no longer afford nor obtain oil.

But now we are indeed dashing and scrambling.  This is different.


James   </HTML>