Your FEEDBACK 

What do you think of what's said in the Culture Change Letter? Join the discussion!  Email us at info@culturechange.org.  Give your comments on U.S. energy & transportation habits, sustainable living, peace, climate change,  Arcata...  We edit letters for brevity.  The most recent letters come first and are grouped into the specific Culture Change Letter and its topic. 

Letters on plastics - section below

General and Humboldt County, California -oriented letters are at the bottom of this page.  Read Transportation justice - "Yeah, but..."

CCL #100 End-time for USA upon oil collapse / A scenario for a sustainable future - on our new website where we will have a bulletin-board/forum system for letters (so poor Jan doesn't have to paste them in and format them anymore!).

CCL #99 Keeping a lid on the twin unravelings

CCL #98 Burning furniture: future urban energy source / Collapse of the system and infertility ahead

CCL #97 A critique of pure liberalism / The System's opponents are not liberals 

CCL #96 Goodbye American Dreamland: Congress hears quote by Jan Lundberg on peak oil

Jan--
Go get 'em. You're doing a great job.
 Jim Kunstler
Author of
The Long Emergency: Surviving the End of the Oil Age, Climate Change, and Other Converging Catastrophes of the Twenty-first Century (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0871138883/104-4172501-0705502?v=glance)

Jan Lundberg responds:  Look who's talking, Jim -- YOU'RE doing a great job. Like, those car/booze/"music"-targeted kidz in Rolling Stone got to hear some real stuff for a change thanks to you.
Jan

Hi Jan - just wanted to say nice work and keep it up. 
Steve Mosko
Campaign Against the Plastic Plague

Jan. Jan. You think Bush doesn't *know* about peak-oil? Hah. Cheney's probably known about it for 30 years, or at least as long as he's been in the oil business. Why do you think he fought so hard to keep the records of his meetings with oil execs private? Because it's a sure bet that peak-oil was the main topic of discussion, and Cheney doesn't want that to be a public discussion. Not yet. Maybe not ever. 
These guys all know about it. Whether they really understand what it means? That's another question, and a good one, because if Jay Hanson is right, they can't really get their heads around it. No-one can, because we are not wired for it. We can't accept it. Humans cannot accept that a crucial resource is irreplaceable. It's like telling a christian there is no god. They can't accept it. They won't. They'll kill first. 
It takes years and years of work to even begin to understand what peak-oil means. You know that. Most people are too damned lazy to even begin the work. They'd rather blame someone. 
That's the danger. Not that the word won't get out, but that people will start the killing once the word is clear. 
Charles Andrews
"What concerns me is not the way things are, but rather the way people think things are." - Epictitus

Dear Culture Change:
No oil needed. A 3600 sq. ft. building at Parkman, Maine survived on $66 for energy this past winter because of: Good insulation Radiant floor Solar window, no ceiling lights anywhere, not needed. Sun raised interior temp by 25F when shining. Special boiler/furnace cost only 37 cents per day, with coldest temps down to 32 degrees below zero F. Previously I had driven a UK Reliant Robin (1976) from Maine to Oregon on 64 gallons of gas, whole continent! We need to be motivated. Our survival is possible, but we will probably wait too long to act. It would take 17 years to replace existing automotive technology. Insurance industry is blocking innovation in vehicles. The Mercedes Smart Car is in Canada already but not in the USA. Small trucks, like the ACE from India's Tata Motors should be allowed in for study. But it isn't. 
Charles E. Mac Arthur, 
curator Wilkinson Institute Research Museum 
Parkman, Maine 
www.seatosea2003.org

Jan Lundberg responds:  Your research museum sounds like a fun visit. Maybe I'll get out there.
As to "no oil needed," it's a petroleum infrastructure we're talking about, and many of the renewable energy components are made with and of petroleum -- so, how can hundreds of million of people switch to renewables when we just sit on our hands and wait for technological miracles? It won't happen. When it's not possible to do anything else, slashing energy will come into vogue. And my position will be popular: we don't even need the energy because the technogizmos are superfluous and harm the Earth.
Thanks for writing,
Jan

[reply to reply:] Passenger car tires. Are being made from petroleum. No hydrogen tires likely, Same for the nuclear tire. Digging up old tire dumps may be THE growth industry in the next decade. I have worked with wood chip gasifiers for small tractors, but even if that could be widespread, there is still the tire problem. We need to restore the small family farm to every neighborhood. Fidel's Havana grows half of its food within city limits, but then he doesn't have the frost problem Our cities are vast concrete and asphalt deserts, with absolutely no resources of their own, no water, no food, no energy, nothing, and about 90% of Americans live there. I hope you have a little soil to till. I am 77, with 70 acres. The big problem with that is that the "haves" will be descended upon by the "suddenly have nots". And the difference between civilized and savage is having missed nine consecutive meals. The grasshopper and the ant? Was that Aesop? 
Cheer up. The earth as St. Matthew Island certainly has its up side..
Charlie 

Mr. Lundberg, 
I much admire your work and your "Culture Change" letters. I saw Roscoe Bartlett on C-SPAN, and had to look twice to confirm that this was really a Republican. He gave a good account of the problem we face, but was short on solutions. The speech, with graphs, is available at his website: http://www.bartlett.house.gov/SupportingFiles/documents/energyspeech.pdf . My modest efforts regarding this issue can be found in my "The Oil Trap" (August 2002) www.igc.org/gadfly/eds/envt/oiltrap.htm and "Last Chance for Civilization" (currently at The Crisis Papers and several progressive websites) www.crisispapers.org/essays-p/last-chance.htm . 
What is your take on Amory Lovins' report, "Winning the Oil Endgame"? It seems too good to be true. However, as I said in "Last Chance," even if Lovins' science is right (the good news), it seems highly unlikely that our politics will allow a solution (the bad news). If the solar-hydrogen-biofuels solution is worked out, it will almost certainly take place abroad, whereupon the USA will descend to it's well-deserved third-world status. It's been my good fortune to live during the golden age. Apre nous, le deluge. 
Ernest Partridge
Co-Editor, The Crisis Papers

Jan Lundberg responds: Thanks for writing and sending the link.
Sounds like you're covering the bases with your writing.
As to Lovins, I'm less than impressed -- increasingly so as years go by.  I commented on his recent study at http://www.culturechange.org/e-letter-technofix.html
Enjoy.

CCL #95 More traffic congestion is funded / Alien American dream changes the Earth

Your encouragement of a car-free, less consuming lifestyle is very much appreciated!  Thank you for your sensible messages.  It is hard to go against the tide that says spend, spend, spend. 
Jean Bellinger Lake Forest, CA

CCL #94 A culture of torture: out of control? -  Pepperspray via Q-tip, war, ecocide, etc.

CCL #93 Depaver Jan's Petroleum Tour: Earth Day reality check

CCL #92 Fasting for healing and inner peace

CCL #91 Activists and hipsters without territory or a plan  part 1: the problem / part 2: the solution

Hi Culture Change -

"Activists and hipsters without a territory or plan" is moving in a very very good direction.  I like it - parts of the analysis are deeply accurate.  Definitely lots of work in bridging the enviro / sustainable and other progressive movements. 

In NYC I certainly don't feel like I have a territory outside my own apartment - and a very few virtual connections.  And I'm wondering when I have to leave the city to escape the consequences of peak oil, and where I will go.  Perhaps to a more rural place where the community you describe can be more easily created?  I hope that future issues will speak more to this. 

Regards and thanks, 

Dan Miner

Queens, NYC

I've never liked ANSWER's shrill, sectarian approach.  It would be nice to have them watch Monty Python's The Life of Brian.  They don't inspire, they are a broken record saying the same things over and over and wondering why the "masses" don't respond.

Those who offer practical solutions to the crises upon us will have more influence in the years to come than those who offer mere rhetoric.

Hey hey, ho ho, hey hey ho ho has got to go!

There's also the problem that lots of foundation grants are ultimately tied to petroleum profits ...

Lots of liberal media, eco groups, etc. are dependent on these oil profits laundered through foundations

The peace movement blew it by letting Bush & Cheney get away with 9/11

http://www.oilempire.us/denial.html and http://www.oilempire.us/gatekeepers.html

 

Do you know of any eco group with paid staffers that is making a serious effort to figure out how we can ensure that Peak Oil results in a "permatopia" type scenario (ie. Powerdown by Richard Heinberg) and not neo-feudalism or dieoff?

- Mark Robinowitz

Culture Change,

 

I think that's a good column you sent, with many

fine ideas.

I'll add one more, that those who support sustainable

growth should support or start a daily newspaper that

is ad free and fair.

I think a news voice outside the ad-driven mania would

help a lot.

Keep up the good work,

 

Tom Hendricks, ed. of Musea

the 13 year old monthly art/media zine.

http://musea.digitalchainsaw.com

Hi Jan,

The following are notes i came up with for a 10 minute monologue starting off my modest tv talk show here in Eugene

It is as your current essay suggests, connecting  personal choices to

affluence and militarism.  To blame bush and the corporations is not being honest.

What drives corporate globalization and war on humans and war on nature is affluence.  People make choices [most of the time not even knowing it] and of curse, egged on by billions in advertising.  The

distraction/entertainment culture is very effective in neutralizing common sense, integrity and even self interest

jan

Mr. L.,

 

I've enjoyed receiving your essays.  Here are a couple of recent hand-drawn pieces I made to pass out to the locals here in Waco, TX. (see home page, www.culturechange.org)

Question:  Without this computer and internet, I would not have ever learned about culturechange.  Yet, I've come to learn about the toxic nature of computers, the methods used to extract the ingredients of computer microprocessor chips and other components, the oppression and exploitation of peoples who perform the work to extract these ingredients, the pollution of environments, the probable final resting (dumping) places of computer trash (plastic, components, etc.)--i.e., in third world countries, and, of course the energy/electricity used to run these damn things..., etc.  Can you tell me how you justify the contradiction of the use of this specific technology vs. the sustainability of our planet?  Certainly, I, nor anyone else, will ever be able to rid ourselves completely of other such contradictions in how we live, but doing so--making lifestyle changes to regress to self-sustainability--is something that I try to do (as well as educating others about making such change) more and more everyday, due in part, to your and others' wisdom.  For the past couple of years, I've been wanting to totally quit using email and internet, and, if possible, even word processing on computer (I'm also a writer).  But by doing so, I feel I'd miss out on everything I've thus far benefited from by using a computer!  Yet, my elders live 100% computer-free (of course, with the exception of the myriad of technologies that surround them in household items, infrastructure, etc.).  Please help me out.

thanks,

Ruben P. Salazar

Jan Lundberg responds: I'll bet I hate computers as much as you or anyone does!  Let us remember that some of us are fighting fire with fire.  So, we must use tools we ordinarily I think the solution is SHARING.  If ten computer users did not have ten computers, but only one instead, this would help a lot to decrease resource use and foster a "new" way of relating to one another in this cooperation-challenged culture.  As for myself, I aspire to go computer-free and do my website work from libraries, Kindo's, friends, etc.  Buying a new computer is a cardinal sin when we can get a used one or rent one. 

Jan,
Thank you so much.

Sustainability is the key.  The motivation is self-reliance.  It is not taught in school.  It is off the radar of politicians and unions, and the general society.

Have a great day.

Tony Pereira, ME, EIT

UCLA ME PhD Candidate

Please visit one of Tony's Website at:
http://www.lafn.org/~bk931

Culture Change, 
I think we should start an immediate, worldwide boycott against any company involved in extracting oil from Alaska. How can we get the list of companies?
- Mike Vandeman

Hello Jan,

Just a few items for your info and perhaps comment:

1.  from truthout: The Green Dream: The Man Who Invented Ecotopia
http://www.truthout.org/issues_05/032505EB.shtml
. Having Tim Holt in Fort Bragg on 5/13 to speak and perhaps kick off a secession effort (community based).

3. Having George Lakeoff in Fort Bragg on 5/6 to begin focus on a serious campaign for community focus.

4. Planning a Bohemian Grove action 2nd/3rd week in July to kick off a.... revolution?  NorthCoast Green coalition sponsorship with a bit of state assistance. Paul Encimer and Don Eichelberger are involved as well as Greens from Sonoma and Napa. (Paul reported a great turnout from Eureka for the 19th - 2000 folks for the second anniversary of Iraq slaughter.)

5. Kicking off a web Green Accord Forum development effort organized by community to bring local coordination tools to bear on preparing the way to the future. 

Peace,

~Bernie Macdonald, Mendocino County, California

Dear Jan, 

The reason what you are suggesting won't work is that our society has become "dis-sociated" from our earth  system.  Dis-sociation is a "pathology" -- a dis-ease.

Our "dis-sociation" has caused us to create an "aberrant" social system which has no social or planetary consciousness.

While we go around acting in a seemingly "normal fashion" we are anything but; our collective dis-ease manifests itself in things like "overconsumption."  Causes us here in the U.S. to use 40% of all of the world's illegally produced drugs and goodness only knows how much of the world's legally-produced drugs with only 5% of the world's population.  Causes us to use approximately 40% of the world's resources with only 5% of the world's population.  

The problem is, we have a "pain problem" not a drug problem. In reality, we have a "denial problem" not an over-consumption problem, or a pollution problem, or a problem with any of the other ways that this dis-ease manifests itself.  

The "mis-diagnosis" causes many to treat the problem incorrectly as

you have done in this essay. 

Were we a "healthy" society, the treatment you spell out here would work. But we are not healthy -- we are "dis-eased." 

So first, we must treat the "dis-ease" and do it on a mass scale.

 The healing must come before we can enact social transformation.

Please try to understand this. 

 Read the attached papers  I am sending you. 

With love and in peace,

 Eco

Culture Change, 
It is really hard to believe that ANSWER did this, but i have heard other stories, like from Tikkun.  You must understand, though, that ANSWER, though very good organizers, have many revolutionary Marxists among them who tend to be very talented organizers. David Corn and others have written about it. but, you cannot judge the entire face of antiwar protest by ANSWER.

Given though NO BLOOD FOR OIL is the dominant mantra -- how else would they explain our consumption of oil? since they are anti-capitalists, why would they object to boycotts or reduction of consumption within a suspect industry?

The failure of a real renewable energy initiative from our leaders is a sure sign they are not willing to search for alternatives to war.

How could ANSWER justify avoiding such an issue? 

Nonetheless, you cannot diminish the success of the latest antiwar protest. two years ago -- more people protested the war globally than any time in history. it also has brought diverse people together in a way not accomplished for awhile. and ANSWER was not the only organizer of those huge protests and rallies.

"The hoopla about 'Earth Day', like the pious rhetoric of fast-talking solar contractors and patent-hungry 'ecological' inventors, conceal the all-important fact that solar energy, wind power, organic agriculture, holistic health, and 'voluntary simplicity' will alter very little in our grotesque imbalance with nature if they leave the patriarchal family, the multinational corporation, the bureaucratic and centralized political structure, and the property system untouched."

                                          Murray Bookchin

- Sandi Brockway

CCL #90 From the northern redwoods to Berkeley Babylon

GREETINGS!  I WANTED TO WRITE AND LET YOU KNOW HOW MUCH I REALLY ENJOY THE SITE AND THE MAILS I GET - TRULY OUTSTANDING, LEAST NOT OUTSPOKEN!!  YEAH, YOU ALL HAVE HEARD THIS 2000,000 TIMES, BUT IT'S SO TRUE!  KEEP DOING WHAT YOU'RE DOING! 
PEACE! 
ZAYT TAYLOR

Again, much appreciation for sharing your perspective which I found thought-provoking even in this early morning hour.  The awakening process of the disturbed, desensitized, and exploited masses will take creative approach and strategy I'm beginning to understand...while feeling also the weight of moments of doubt, despair and loneliness walking among those contributing to a conspiracy of silence without even seeming to know.

Much encouragement to you~

Amy Struloeff

CCL #89 Ways to end car culture along with the globalized trade godzilla articles by Jan Lundberg and Julian Darley

With the price of gasoline soaring and other costs increasing relative to wages and salaries, I am shocked and amazed by the continuing domination of our land by large, expensive vehicles.  I remember well the gasoline crisis in about 1973.  And with the increased stress level in our society arising from the hectic pace and "need" to overachieve to pay for the high cost of "prosperity" why don't people recognize the truly high cost of motorized transportation and the urban sprawl?  Life was so much better 50 years ago before rampant suburbanization.

 

Jean Bellinger 

Dear Culture Change:
Oh man. Talk about fantasy!

 

For someone who is as intelligent as you seem to be, who writes as eloquently as you do, you should probably know that you come through as a complete fanatic and have lost all credibility with anyone who may have wanted to help you with your causes. Quite frankly, you're starting to scare me, a liberal, vegetarian, pro-ecology tree hugger! I don't know what you and your colleagues are smoking but you really need to stop it and get real. Put down the pipe man! Cars are not going to go away in this country. People really do NEED them. It seems to me that you want to send civilization back before even the dark ages. That is way too much even for someone like me. You do know that you're wasting your time, right? If not, let me be one of the many that will tell you that you are wasting a brilliant mind with these utopian concepts. These ideas are YOUR utopia. Not mine nor anyone else's that I know. I work with many people who are moving towards a more sustainable environment. Surely you understand that working and playing well with others requires compromise, something you seem to have little or no appetite for. You need to broaden your understanding and find some sort of balance or you're just going to always be another freak crying out in the wilderness.

 

What is wrong with global trade? It makes the civilized world go around. We don't live in a bubble. What is wrong with clean cars? They don't pollute. What is wrong with buying new cars? Old cars can be recycled. The industry creates many jobs that people need to feed their families so they can live and grow. Real families who need financial resources to exist in this country, what to say in the world. Maybe you don't care about that but you are in the extreme minority. The only concept of yours worth talking about is a paving moratorium. We can certainly use more trees and less roads in this country but what is the problem with clean cars running on the roads we already have? Why not use your time, energy and intelligence to strive for that instead? It is certainly a more realistic objective and will help clean the environment up tremendously, despite what you think. The Earth is more resilient than you give her credit for. The only way you'll ever see the kind of world you envision is if a couple of asteroids hit the planet and wipe out civilization all together. Then, there will be no need for cars nor anything else for that matter.

 

You may know something about ecology and environmental sustainability but you don't know jack about humanity and your scientific method is questionable at best. Get the facts and get with the program!

 

You lost me,

Alfonse Pinto - New York

Jan Lundberg responds: You say people NEED cars.  But does nature need cars?  Can the climate handle cars?  How many cars?  Since less than half the air pollution associated with the automobile (including from the mining, manufacturing and disposal of the car) comes out of the tailpipe, "clean" cars aren't clean.  Is slaughter from crashes okay, and did the victims need cars?  Those are facts, and the truth can be our only program.

Dear Editor:
While I enjoy the overall theme of your work, you use too many attacking and labeling words and phrases to sound very alternative. Your notions that anything short of life exactly as you determine it should be are inferior and ought to be dismissed are fairly alienating, my friend.  Is there a way to write in an inviting manner that might be more adaptive?

 

yours for a nonviolent future,

Tom H. Hastings

Director, Peace & Nonviolence Studies track, Conflict Resolution 

Portland State University

Portland OR USA

Jan Lundberg responds: It is indeed vital to promote peaceful thoughts, although exasperation and action regarding the violence of the car are justified and people need to get pissed.  I suppose I am outraged because I am paying attention.  (Bumper sticker: "If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention")  If words bother you, what do you think of action?  The violence to the Earth by industry and consuming is difficult to state adequately with mere words.  The attack on the Earth is what to confront, for the sake of a nonviolent future.  There is such a thing as self defense of one's (our common) home, but I'm just a writer and songster.  Your criticism prompts me to toss back this analogy: One might dislike depaving because its forceful and radical, but the paving was the real and violent problem that needs to be cured in like fashion.  The way I write is the best I can do as a nonviolent person who is sounding an alarm bell. I believe you're onto something good when you voice your concern, and I urge you to keep pursuing this standard while upholding the ideals of truth and rational response to a deadly threat.  Please consider sending us some writing on this topic.

Dear Culture Change:

perhaps the current wealth redistribution from the poor to the rich may have an unintended effect... cooperatives... people working together, sharing and saving...

 

Rand

reDemocracy http://www.autobuyology.org/car15.html

Dear Jan: 
I, of course, totally agree with the no such thing as a clean car (I'm bored, actually irritated with watching supposedly enviro groups telling everyone to buybuy and writing on it (see www.asphaltnation.com) and don't have a car.  Already established, and quite workable, are the zipcars, less a cooperative than the placement of shared/rented (for an hour or whatever) and running from here in Boston to Oregon (of course).

Hereabouts, moving in my carfree life is by foot, rail i.e. Acela (the high speed AMTRAK east coast train) for long trips, and streetcars for hereabouts and, now and again, a cab or borrowed car to visit my mother. But I must say the New Dream and McKibben sorts drive me nuts pimping for "clean" cars...carry on...
jane holtz kay

CCL #88 Here comes the nutcracker - Peak oil in a nutshell

Mr. Lundberg,

     Thank you for your scary but informative article at BlueGreenEarth.com (which I first saw reprinted at EnergyBulletin.net).
     I would venture to guess that there is probably little we as individuals and small groups can now do to change the basic dynamics of what will occur as prices begin to rise. Politicians are simply not going to acknowledge the threat, and even if they did, the possibilities for planning are probably limited.
     It would be nice to think that governments would figure out how to manage the remaining supply -- and, of course, they MIGHT surprise us and do so -- but there is probably no good way to predict, in detail, what kind of management and allocation will actually work until the event begins.
     However, the Bush Administration, always ready to make a bad situation much, much worse, may resort to the use of nuclear weapons in a vain attempt to control the oil supply.
     Therefore, I think it makes sense for individuals and groups to concentrate NOW on trying to head off the use of nuclear weapons in this context. Such use would have truly unknown consequences, including possible damage to the atmosphere, which might reduce the human population to a far worse condition than would the effects of "ordinary" resource collapse.

     Some humans (out of around 6 billion) are sure to survive almost any catastrophe. But in what circumstances will the survivors be forced to live?
     If we CAN prevent the use of nuclear weapons, the result will be just one more sad day of reckoning for humanity, though of course on a new scale.
     If the world's population subsequently drops by 50% or more, I will be crying with everyone else, but at least some humans will survive in reasonable shape to begin a new way of life.
     On the other hand, if we let Bush use the weapons, the same basic scenario MIGHT still hold, but it seems far less certain. There is no good way to estimate how much overall damage a nuclear war might do.
     I say STOP BUSH NOW.
     That task is likely doable, assuming the application of significant

organization and a lot of hard work by people who care about our world.
Regards,

 

Ralph Dratman

http://newsfare.com

CCL #87 A survey on trends and outcomes from a long, personal perspective

Jan

Just to say that i appreciate your comments in e-letter 87.  You probably know that I have been putting material for global educators to use at http://www.arts.unsw.edu.au/tsw/

 

My outlook is quite pessimistic but I have no doubt that The Simpler Way could solve the major problems...if people wanted to take it.  I am attaching an item that might be of interest.  (Readers may write to him at the address below or email him regarding his Word Document "Thoughts on The transition to a Sustainable Society" (highly recommended by Culture Change),

 

Ted

--

Ted Trainer

School of Social Work,

University of New South Wales,

Kensington. 2052. Australia.

02.93851871  Fax: 02 96628991

Email: F.Trainer@unsw.edu.au

CCL #86 A spear through the global warming beast’s heart? - In defense of islands, the Arctic, ourselves

Dear Jan,
right on...the "clean" car thing fries me...
jane holtz-kay

Jan:
I cheerfully invite you to attempt car-free living and see how your life goes.  To be true to that concept, you may not hitchhike, carpool, borrow, rent, or use a common light personal road vehicle (e.g. car, SUV, RV, pickup or minivan), or incur the use of such by others, in any way. 

You won't live very well unless you replicate, in effect, those who have gone to the wilderness in Alaska or whatever, built their cabin, and live off the land, and claim to have given up the techno civilization they sought to escape.  Those folks, of course, are vulnerable to my classic question: "Where did you get your ax?" (or nails, gun, ammo, traps, saws, radio, medical emergency service, medicine, eyeglassses, pencil, clothes, pot & pans, etc etc). I insist that those who sneer the tech that supports us are really left no choice but to make grandiose, romantic claims, while in fact depending upon the culture that they claim to despise to supply them with their essential needs.  They are rather like the inhabitants of a space station. , "independent" very temporarily, but at heart dependent on the activities of society. 

At the same time, while recommending car-free, etc, the car-free and other champions of de-techery dodge any responsibility  for the obnoxious aspects of such dependence.  I speak from experience, sir!  The only hope i see is to use less stuff, to avoid materials and procedures that are wasteful or dangerous (especially in the long run),  and to arrange our affairs as far as possible, through design, to  recycle, regenerate, and operate in the manner of the nature in which we are imbedded.  This does not mean living like a beast of the field; there are too many of us for that now. And, in my opinion, living as a human donkey on a farm is no better a use of humans than is living as a cog in the machine.
- Jay Baldwin

Jan,

 

I know no renewable energy advocate who does not also advocate dramatic increases in efficiency.  We need to stand on both of these legs.  In our work at Climate Solutions, we advocate a dramatic increase in production of clean electricity and clean fuels.  We also advocate cleaner, more efficient cars, and redesigning human settlements to make other modes of transportation more feasible. We advocate increasing windpower, solar power, biomass power, geoheat power, and are looking into ocean power.  We also

advocate efficiency as the quickest way to reduce greenhouse emissions. (The Northwest, where we focus, has saved two Seattles worth of electricity in the lat 20 years and aims to save at least one-half a Seattle more by 2010.)  This is not "technofix" v. conservation.  It's both.

 

Will it be enough?  Good question.  I don't know. I do know, from studying energy technology, that the $200 billion spent on the Iraq War would have been a huge downpayment on a new energy system.  If society decided to make it a priority, it would be done.  Plant the Great Plains with drought-resistant prairie grasses instead of irrigated grains and set up a biomass to cellulosic ethanol system.  Build the trasnmission network to deliver the massive windpower potential of the plains and coasts.  Deploy a fleet of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (85% less liquid fuel consumption).  Develop solar windows, roofs and sidings.  Build super-efficient green buildings.  Create a smart electrical power grid that can manage millions of small-scale generators and energy storage units. 

 

All these are technology-driven, but they are not technofixes, and here's why - Technology does not exist in a vacuum.  Decisions to develop and deploy technologies are embedded in a political economic framework.  To make these technology solutions happen requires change in the political and economic realm. That is why I grow quite concerned at what I think is a false dichotomy between rapid technology advance and conservation.  A great deal of social and political will must be summoned in coming years for what

must be a major societal project to transform our energy system, from production to end use.  A new Apollo or Manhattan Project has been mentioned.  Personally, I think the scale is more like World War II.  And, yes, peak oil will probably drive it.  As will, I hope, the dawning realization we are about to plunge into an utterly catastrophic climate change.  It will not be either-or, but both-and.

 

Patrick Mazza

Climate Solutions

JL responds:
Dear Patrick, of course I would have liked the $200 billion that was wasted on genocide and ecocide in Iraq to be used for anything sensible.  That waste, however, does not mean there is an equation that works for substituting petroleum with any mix of renewables.  Where is the model that says it is possible, with today's population size, with the infrastructure already all petroleum oriented, and depleted resources?  That's still assuming the Earth can wait for a transition when it needs immediate relief. 

Still, you are advocating good things.  So is Rhys Roth.  He admitted to me after we got back from Kyoto in '97 that the economic growth vision for the Pacific Northwest that he was advocating via renewable energy really won't do the job considering the population, resources and pollution all considered, but he said that his advocacy was at least in the right direction and didn't do any harm.  That was my first email debate with anyone.

I would like to see you advocate no cars as the way to go.  Even cleaner cars will still take their driver only 5 mph, as Illich found, and they will still kill and require pavement, plastic, tires, etc.  And more than half of the pollution to the air is NOT out of the tailpipe, according to the Environmental Forecasting Institute in Heidelberg.

I also believe that we must distinguish between the increases in efficiency and actually letting the air out of the tires - or whatever - so as to stop the pollution machinery.  Efficiency is not synonymous with conservation.  Please don't pretend that the mainstream technofixers really want radical or serious conservation; if they did want it why don't they say it?  Answer: funding and corporate acceptance are important.

Note: In the Culture Change Letter #86 there was a refinement of the technofix section.  Thanks to Charles Komonoff who challenged my premise that Bill McKibben had not advocated conservation in his pro-technofix opinion piece in the New York Times, I have made a correction and clarification:

"However, he said absolutely nothing in his piece about avoiding the need for using energy – an approach we can call radical conservation:  "Right now, the choice is between burning fossil fuels and making the transition, as quickly as possible, to renewable power," he claims. 

One of Mr. McKibben's statements can be interpreted as advocating conservation: "Just to slow the pace of this rapid warming will require every possible response, from more efficient cars to fewer sprawling suburbs to more trains to – well, the list is pretty well endless."  But his short list does not spell serious conservation, when stopping our purchase and use of machines is much more crucial than building and buying more efficient ones.  Car-free living and halting any new roads construction are overdue "innovations."  His examples are not energy-slashing measures that will cut the global warming beast off at the knees.  Does Mr. McKibben mean that fewer sprawling suburbs should be built, or that some should be depaved and turn into ecovillages?

Dear Jan: (Patrick Mazza responds to above)

In the past couple of years I've been treated to presentations on world energy growth from WRI and coal plant growth from NRDC that have caused me to metaphorically throw up my hands.  I acknowledge what a sisyphean task it seems to be to stabilize the climate under conditions of economic growth as usual.   I have far from a full answer.  It is clear that as North Americans we are in a poor position to tell the Chinese, Indians and Brazilians to radically conserve. They've been doing it and now want the goodies we've flaunted.  And even if we became a voluntarily simple pure Ecotopia we'd still be swamped by world economic growth.  So all I can see to do, other than eating, drinking and making merry because tomorrow we fry, is to move as quickly as possible to create and deploy the leapfrog technologies that allow the developing nations to improve their material standards without making our mistakes, and that help us to clean up our mistakes and set a better example. Both clean energy production and radical efficiency technologies.  Yes, some people like you need to be in there raising the hard questions about economic growth, and absolutely right that's not the most fundable message.  I do think we're going to hit tough spots in coming years that will make openings for some pretty fundamental re-assessments of our civilization.  I only hope it won't be too late.

 

Meanwhile, Limits to Growth 2004 is on my reading shelf for a little later this year, along with a couple of Herman Daly's newer works. 
Patrick Mazza

JL responds - 
I appreciate your points, and I believe we want the same thing.  I don't think there need to be millions of entropy boxes such as refrigerators, so maybe we differ there.
I don't object to "leapfrog technologies" or any decent reforms and regulations as long as they make a solid dent in the global warming beast, and as long as the adherents of the technofix push for fundamental change.  The problem with the funded environmental groups is that they don't advocate fundamental change or, therefore, serious conservation that would end the cycle of massive pollution. The real question might be How to stop the global economy, when you observe that making an Ecotopia in the U.S. might not make other nations alter ecocidal policies.  Real defense means protecting the global ecosystem, but in the U.S., "defense" is about offense against the ecosystem and anyone actively opposing the corporate juggernaut.

Dear Jan,
McKibben both practices and passionately advocates for energy conservation.

 

Are you miffed that McKibben didn't say "conservation"? If so,

maybe you could cut him some slack? Maybe you could allow that

perhaps in this piece he was trying a different line of rhetoric

-- using code words for conservation as a way to get past

readers' (or editors') indifference/hostility to the word.

Maybe you could acknowledge that in 650 words you can't say

everything, partic'ly when you're trying to get past the

gatekeepers of the NYT.

McKibben isn't NRDC. He's one person trying -- and he's been

trying for a long time -- to make a difference. Why sharpen

the blades for him?

 

With all due respect, your criticisms seem petty and, to me

anyway, just diminish your excellent points. To what end, Jan?

 

  -- Charlie Komanoff
of KEA, consultants on transportation and energy.  See Komanoff's co-authored road pricing study from a Climate Solutions webpage.

CCL #85 The awakening of the downtrodden  — Are you the downtrodden?

Jan: I always wonder at the perverse (d)evolution of schemes and

programs: the income tax, for example, started out as a progressive system to get very rich people to pay for those who weren't. Now, the extremely rich and corporate conglomerates are having a field day avoiding everything from income and estate taxes to underwriting social safety nets. How much wealth is ever enough? And where is the right wing's Christian compassion for the poor? As society degenerates, gated communities won't stand against

the downtrodden awakenings you describe, let alone microbial onslaughts that don't respect income or status, 
Margaret

Dear Jan,

I've been thinking that what we really need is a WORD for what's happening: the slow but constant erosion of the rights and circumstances of the ordinary citizen (the "little guy," the downtrodden).

 

We'll never be able to talk about what's happening if we don't have a word--or at least a phrase--to refer to. We can't say "Bush trodded down again today..."

 

I thought maybe you'd be in a position to hold a kind of contest, calling for entries.

 

Thanks for considering this. Thanks for your musings, which always seem right-on.

Kay Sather

Dear Jan:
My deepest appreciation for the subject line!  As well as the content of this letter!

 

My heart yearns for reconnection, for kinship, for the natural way of existence from which we come, but who do we trust? The tools for cultivating our unique and personal intuition, instinct, awareness, and the ability to discern manipulative and deviant intent were not taught some of us...after taking more abusive treatment than we should, we retreat in isolation, disconnection, and despair sadly thinking this some sort of protection.

 

I am grateful for the lesson realizing this protection is only temporary; that the deeper need for community and fellowship will give one the courage to seek healing and reconnection.

 

"Grievous abuse and deprivation at the hands of the greedy and deviant"...How debilitating for those of us who experience this treatment, this hatred within our own 'family'...How refreshing it is to read the words of truthful observation and personal knowledge and experience purposefully kept silent.

 

There seems to be a deep fear of naming things as they are. The desensitizing conditioning  and distractive tactics have created madness within the minds of those who refuse to acknowledge the truthful intentions of this destructive and exploitative system they either directly or indirectly support by their lack of understanding, resistance and genuine concern. My lesson has been facing the fear of re-entering society in order to seek those of like mind with effort to unite and resist the mass force against those who do not embrace the hypocritical and self-hating ways of this society.

 

Currently I'm a full time student here at Seattle Central Community college, putting energy into one 13 credit course this quarter titled Art and Anarchy. The reading material has been heavy with such titles as The Moon Is Down by John Steinbeck, We by Yevgeny Zamyatin, and Black Rain by Ibuse Masuji. Yesterday I absorbed "Barefoot Gen" an anime about the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Words cannot describe my feelings or reaction.

 

I am only now becoming fully aware of the power of this justification of perpetual war...power through the continuous use of certain words playing on certain emotions of those hearing and viewing the necessary supportive philosophy, propaganda, and empty rhetoric.  My heart is heavy with understanding. My eyes are opening to the reality of what we face. And with this understanding I feel responsibility in offering my energy and knowledge in aiding others in reaching this place of purpose giving a desperately needed sense of purpose, camaraderie, and validation for the ancient rage some of us are aware of inside of us refusing to allow us to remain in retreat.

 

For one who has chose withdrawal, fearing betrayal, not yet knowing how to fight back in wisdom, it has been a path of continuous awakening and absorption. I am learning to understand the intent and self-justification of the war machine, analyzing the power of the conditioning and manipulation tactics, sick aggression and force, ignorant greed and endless desire for power and possession...This self-hatred. Because I want to resist and help others know their own power and right of resistance I must know how to counter with words and creative expression as we discuss reasons why people give up without even knowing they are doing so.

 

I yearn to understand and to fight against a system that is destroying my daughter's-all of the children's-futures. We live as if exchanging labor for pay and acquiring material wealth is the only validation of our existence. We are disconnected, some choosing consciously and selfishly to remain isolated in their individual pursuits, being bought by the distractions and entertainment constantly surrounding us. We refuse to acknowledge there is a time to say no! Enough! I have enough! No more, thank you! We live as if we can never get enough of anything...never ending desire...

 

It is always refreshing to read your words. The encouragement I've been given through your thoughts, experiences, and insight has been sustaining when the words from the majority of mouths speaking around me are empty with their actions contradicting what they are saying.

 

Many of us take the horrific abuse and exploitation 'lying down" or in shameful retreat because we were taught we were NOT strong enough to defend ourselves, that we are "ill" if our goals aren't material wealth, self-validating careers, property, ownership, dominance and control...we are taught that what we feel ISN'T real, that the truths of our perception are actually lies, that we could not possible KNOW ANYTHING unless we are taught it by another!!! For some of us the very effort towards healing while attempting to survive is an accomplishment in itself.

 

The "lying down" are actually those walking, carrying weapons, whether they are guns or credit cards...these are the ones who are "taking it" only denying that fact in their disillusionment. Those actually lying down in the depths of despair only need to be shown gentleness, some compassion...understanding for who they are, where they are in their lives, and why. We need to hear words of encouragement, to be woken up and reminded of our innate human dignity, of our inner intuitive knowledge, our unique beauty and purpose in being, and the powerfully validating connection to all life! The negative, self-separating word conditioning and isolation (nuclear family) we've experienced our whole lives have replaced the stories, songs, lessons in understanding and sense of a unified tribe we come from.

 

Thank you for reminding me to ask that question of myself again: why do we give up.  This is what they need and want, and we must see this and refuse.

 

Being from a small farm, the Seattle is quite stimulating. But the reminder of the reality of the plight of my brothers and sisters on the streets and in the desolate neighborhoods keeps me keenly aware of why I feel something is greatly wrong, why I'm here, and that my energy is needed. Also, my experience with small town usa is that there seems to be a greater concentration of sexism, racism, homophobia, and classism saturating the atmosphere for those who are aware, with less support for those who are 'non-haters'.

 

Please accept my apology for the rant...no offense intended:)

Again, my deepest appreciation.

 

Amy Struloeff

CCL #84 The David Brower Memorial Parking Garage is on a head of steam (a greenhouse gas)

Dear Jan,
this is @#$%^&*() unbelievable. I will have to put it in my global warming book, or something. It sounds like your basic "Let all ye who enter here be damned."
carry on, etc....jane holtz kay
(the writer is architecture review editor for The Nation magazine)

Dear Jan,
The irony is ovewhelming...
Mark Robinowitz

(Sent to Berkeley, California city hall:)
Hello,
I am so glad to hear that this project is becoming a reality. It is a great day when the leaders of the environmental movement are honored in name and in deed.

 

The David Brower Center is to be a leading center for the environmental preservation movement and from what I have recently read, the center planners are considering nearly DOUBLING the number of parking spaces on site. 

 

This, instead of working to double the amount of public transportation to the area, is an insult to the memory of David Brower and the many fine environmental activists that have followed in his footsteps. 

 

For the center planners to play into the hands of the lowest common denominator - car transportation- in this day in age, in a leading city like Berkeley, in memory of one of our greatest leaders, is more than shameful. 

 

Please rethink this plan, using the good sense and principles of the Sierra Club.  More pavement is not the long-term solution that any of us believe in.  Be a leader and lead through your actions, like David Brower taught us to do.

 

Sincerely,
April C. Virk (nee Richards)
(the writer was employed at Alliance for a Paving Moratorium -- now Culture Change -- in 1998) 

CCL #83 Bangladesh Strife: Crimes against children, women, and minorities

CCL #82 War on plastic  -  Rejecting the toxic plague

CCL #81 Materialist culture and the ego: expendable artifacts?  

 

Dear Jan,

      I was delighted to read your explanation of the reign of ego today and a hint of Eastern spirituality in your reference to Yoga and "union" in Sanskrit. I hope you bring more of that to your reading public.

Doret Kollerer
Justice Xpress magazine

Dear Jan,

      Thank you for such a wonderful letter. You've really hit on what I believe is the core of our collective problems here on planet earth. No amount of ridiculous democratic politicking will amount to anything unless individuals begin to see through the samsara of our egos.
Michael Schacht

ear Culture Change,
      Fromm wrote a book TO HAVE, OR TO BE -- back in the '60s and several others on similar topic such as ESCAPE FROM FREEDOM.

      There is a difference between NARCISSISM and a HEALTHY EGO -- or self respect. I think psychology refers to a "super ego" for the more narcissistic superficial entitlements. The ID, the primitive survival instincts.
      One thing that surprises me about many progressives is the lack of knowledge regarding psychology. I often remind others that the reason why we are still at this level of understanding and progress is the failure of a real men's awareness movement, and the death of feminism. Very very few understand what I am saying. But, humans seem to be very addicted to polarization. Americans are still clinging to the Cold War and misogyny -- artifacts of narcissism that create very negative consequences.
      It is a matter of completely creating new role models. But how now that we have destroyed feminism and created a reactionary men's backlash?
      BTW, there are times efficiency is compassionate. But, it would be great if we understood when it was not.
Sandi Brockway

p.s.:   I am afraid narcissism is going to be humans' undoing -- and dissociate disorders due to the speed in which we traumatize each other.  If the core does not hold... - SB

Hi Jan

       I think this is an important analysis.  I have been contemplating an essay along these lines: Ego is our primary stance in the world.  The infant is in a blissful state where their ego _is_ the world. Maturation from child to adult depends on the process of differentiating one's self from the rest of the world - meaning both the social and the physical environment.  Success in this process depends on realising that one's self-hood is a part of, not antithetical to, the rest of the world.  Aberrant maturation may lead to attempts to control the immediate personal environment by (over)ordering it (as in obsessive compulsive disorder, OCD), by manipulating it or coercing it (as in sociopathy) or suffering it (as in paranoia).  In these psychiatric states the individual is broadly alone.  There are other states where the poorly developed ego finds community with other egos in a similar state, and their community then exists within the world as a subset, bearing traits of OCD, sociopathy and paranoia, and manifesting as cults, racist and fascist groups - or indeed as oligarchies.  We must confess that our own green groups are not necessarily innocent of these traits.

       The question is, what is the optimum stance?  It is to feel our place as an ego in relation to a world/environment which is a system that is essentially  positive and beneficial.  After all, the gaian system has produced life out of materials, and consciousness out of life.  Within this consciousness there is a thread of rationality and goodness.  Who knows, time and the right conditions - which perhaps includes a nudge from the right memes - rationality and goodness might displace the ego-bound, destructive monkey mind that dominates the present world and emerge as the guiding motif.

       Which would be nice.

       Thank you for stimulating this line of thought.

      Speaking of ego-bound monkey mind, have you been following the Votergate story?  I have an intro page on

http://www.greenhealth.org.uk/PolBushFraud.htm

      Best wishes

      Richard Lawson
      http://greenerblog.blogspot.com/

Hey Jan,
      Beautifully and powerfully written -- thanks!!
Peace, Love, and Light,
Skip Londos

CCL #80 Collapse of the petroleum delusion / Rise of the DIY movement 

Jan 
There is much sense in what you say in your latest e-letter and DIY should be encouraged as it can make a contribution in the difficult times emerging. I am puzzled, however, that you do not mention that the current level of consumptive society is due to the exuberant use of exhaustible natural resources, particularly oil and, in some regions natural gas, water and or fertile soil. A consequence of this unsustainable use of natural resources has been the irreversible degradation of the environment by waste production. That is, these human activities have resulted in the draw of the net natural worth even as the population has expanded. This is unsustainable. Recognition of this fundamental fact would foster means of alleviating the decline, like DIY. 
Denis Frith 
Melbourne

CCL #79 After the latest mistake, it's up to us  Assessing our movement's strength after the reelection of Bush and seeing so much energy put into electing a Democrat

Nov. 8, 2004
Please remove this address from your e-mail list. I've endured enough of your venom over the last year that I'm sure I must be immune to any snake bite out there.
Sincerely,
Tony Flynn
managing editor, Skagit Weekly Group

JL responds: I finally thought of something to say in response:
What snakes out there should you worry about? Apparently you're not bothered by the corporations and war monger politicians. I must have insulted you too much over Kerry if you endured a year of Culture Change Letters (subject lines only?), but I'll grant you that Kerry may not have been a real war monger, in his quest to rattle the sabre to pass the red-white-and-blue test.

Nov. 8, 2004
I don't consider this campaign or the election a mistake. I believe that Bush won this election by fraudulent means. Because of that, I find your statement "after the last mistake" to be very insulting and misleading!!!!!
Christine Simpson

Nov. 8, 2004
I don't see my work on the Kerry campaign as a mistake at all. He almost became our President, and that would have been so much better than the Bush regime. There is no other realistic alternative at the national level.  If we want to get a decent president anytime in the near future we need to keep putting energy into electing a Democrat for president. 
     Organize a radical opposition movement? Yes, of course. We need it, but  to then suggest that the movement will elect someone at the national level is folly. It might result (one would hope) in a more left leaning candidate nominated in the Democratic Party, perhaps a Howard Dean or a Dennis Kucinich. But that is as far as it would go in the short term. 
     As for smashing the "System," what exactly does that mean? Are we talking about non-violent resistance that would somehow sweep away the current system? Or are you referring to a revolutionary movement with guns and killing in the streets? The violent stuff was tried in the 1960's and failed miserably, leading, in part, to the sweep of conservative thought that we currently suffer under. Radical reform, yes, but taking out the system? Maybe, but what would you replace it with? European style democracy with numerous parties that can form coalitions? I could support that. 
-Ron Sundergill
ecoleader.org

Earth has no more time for electoral mistakes (JL responds:) When people are in the streets in great numbers -- and I clearly stated it should be nonviolent (although the police can initiate violence in order to intimidate) -- there can be such pressure as to change policies radically, no matter who is power whether Democrat or Republican. Voting alone does not cut it. After all, where has it gotten us so far? 
     In case you missed something, do you want to re-read my original piece? I shall clarify further: I am not against someone voting for a lesser evil, nor campaigning to get such a candidate nominated, but the real work would have to begin after such a politician got into power. Power concedes nothing without a demand, and the so people must take power to keep rulers in check or replace them along with their system. Trouble is, people sit on their asses watching the propaganda box, except to vote once in a blue moon. 
     Reform is fine if it moves toward a worthy goal. The leaders of the mainstream environmental movement have not really done so, when none of the groups over a ten year period would support a paving moratorium or advocate serious conservation such as car-free living. As the limited-reform approach is insufficient, and could not even get a Kerry elected despite the amazingly bad record of Bush, it is time for activists of the limited-Democrat approach to stop hogging the activism stage and begin advocating a change in the system -- from the streets and overflowing the jails. Look at history for the successes; the power-elite never relinquishes power or changes the status quo voluntarily. There needs to be a Martin Luther King, Jr. eco-leader, don't you agree? MLK Jr.'s later writings had it down, man! Thanks for writing.

CCL #78 Teresa Heinz Kerry for First Lady White House election endorsement

CCL #77 On "greening the petroleum economy" The technofix isn't. 

Oct. 26, 2004 - Dear Jan,

I just read your latest writing and was very pleased to see you have taken Amory Lovins to task.

 

I returned from Cuba last night after a 10 day study on local communities. Your last sentence "Then, we can and must recreate society that features a return to cultural values of sharing, saving, cooperating with and celebrating our families, communities and the ultimate source of life: wild, untrampled nature." is well underway there.

  

Pat Murphy

communitysolution.org

Oct. 25, 2004.- Dear Jan,

In Washington state a lot of wheat straw is burned. A certain amount of that burning is a called for every few years, as part of a strategy for managing certain insect and other blights, though that is probably also a result of industrial agricultural methods.

 

Like virtually everything, the range of issues surrounding the use of what some people think of as agricultural waste streams is complex. Years ago I was in a meeting of leaders in the area of forest preservation - it was actually a follow-up strategy meeting after a group of foundations held a funders' briefing on forest preservation through wood demand reduction. I presented at the briefing on alternatives to wood for construction and the barriers to those alternatives. There were people there talking about all wood uses and alternatives to wood so it covered pulp and paper, construction, pallets, furniture, fuel, and miscellaneous uses. 

 I was sitting next to Donella Meadows and listening to various people talk about the various yet to be recovered "resources" available for their particular interest area, and when it came to straw, it struck me that we were all using the same USDA statistics on the quantity of straw available and each talking about what we could do with 100% of that supply - the pulp and paper folks, the bio-fuels folks, me - talking about straw bale construction and straw panel products... as if it all was available to each sector that wanted to use it.... I mentioned this to Dana and she said I was right and that it was a common problem.

 

And there are other problems that some of us see quite clearly, a big one being the problem of technological optimism as a way of avoiding the need to reduce consumption, especially in the developed countries (or overdeveloped countries as we like to call them). I think we need to be cautious and skeptical when it comes to new technologies or miraculous solutions that sound too good to be true. At the same time, we need to guard against knee-jerk pessimism and rejection of anything that sounds positive, because I know of a number of excellent technologies and systems to do things like clean up contaminated soil that have been fought and killed by environmentalists who couldn't believe that there could be a company that had integrity and a better technology that worked well.