frenchpet
Posts: 587
Joined: 8/19/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: BlkTallFullfig
quote:
If American people would use just as much energy as European do (the ratio is about 3:1), this would decrease the global demand for oil by about 15%, and oil prices certainly wouldn't have reached 40$ yet Hey Frenchpet, this is a great idea really, but must tell you that I believe the only reason Europeans don't use more is because things are significantly more expensive over there, not because they are more socioeconomically or environmentally aware. So, I suppose the impossibly rising prices are a lesson for everyone. M
You're right. It's not the socioeconomically or environmentally awareness that makes the difference. The main reason is the cost of energy in European history.
Most European cities were founded 700 to 900 years ago (all villages around where I live are about 8 centuries old, most major cities are about 20 centuries old in the roman area of influence), which was a time of buoyant economical development, until the Black Death in the mid 14th century (Europe lost 30% of its population due to WMD - biolobical weapons).
Which means, at a time when energy was incomparably more expensive than now. The happy few had a horse, all the others had to walk, do most of the work themselve and sometimes with an ox. Most forest were chopped down at this period of time to build the new cities, to a dramatic level. Energy has always been a problem, except for a short period of time (roughly the 19th century, corresponding to the first industrial revolution, because there was plenty of coal) which wasn't long enough to affect the general architecture of the cities (or even the architecture of houses, always well insulated), which is the main factor of energy consumption. In short, european cities are very dense. Going from home to work needs little energy.
When America was created, the main sources of energy wasn't wood and cattle anymore, it was coal, and soon after that, oil. USA had plenty of both. Energy was cheap, space was cheap, why bother making dense cities ?
Why bother making energy efficient cars ?
Why bother building well-insulated houses ?
Why bother heating only to 18 or 19°C when you can have 23 or 24 ?
Why bother living close to where you work when you can go there by car for peanuts ?
Why bother going to (high)school / university / work by foot or by bike when you can be there in a 5 minutes ride by car ?
Why bother making efficient common transportations (with some noticeable exceptions) when everybody has a car ?
Etc...
It could be time to rethink about all those questions, because soon most of 9 billion people (expected max population around 2050) will want their car, air conditioning, post-computers etc. There is simply not enough energy on Earth for that if we don't make things more energy efficient, except if we start using coal like mad (which would not be an excellent idea). OR, if before that efficient controlled fusion is available, which only the most optimistic people believe. In Europe we also have to think how to use less energy. Using solar heating systems is very significant. The new generations of car also use significantly less energy. So do the new generations of household appliances. Etc.
But anyway, all this is about a very old problem, energy. The real problem of the 21st century is water. And THAT will be trickier. The question is always the same though : If we put an excessive stress on our environment, we're over. It was the case for the Mayan empire, for the Vikings in Greenland, for the early civilization of the Easter Island etc. All gone. The only difference is that we're now a global village, using all the resources available on Earth. If we try to use more, as the people I mentionned, we, or our children, are in very big trouble.
|
RE: Would Boycotting Gasoline work? - 
Profile
M
RE: Would Boycotting Gasoline work? - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread