From CNBC this morning: "Discussing the economy, with Wilbur Ross, Jr., WL Ross & Co. chairman/CEO; Mike Jackson, AutoNation CEO; John Hofmeister, Shell Oil U.S. Operations CEO and Robert McTeer, former Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas president"
I'm at a school colloquium in Chicago and turned on CNBC. Panelists this morning are spouting off on the advantages of cheap oil in the U.S. which keeps our gas prices historically low as a portion of our income.
Sometimes I think we are in denial. Yesterday while walking to class I saw other headlines "World Environment in Peril" with shots of melting glaciers and other havoc.
Environment aside, what are the advantages of spreading humanity out to cover up the diminishing prairies, grasslands, farms, and forests? What is the cost of the extended sewer systems? The cost of additional pollution as people use more and more fossil fuels to use those "larger and more powerful" cars as they move away? What is the social cost of kids not growing up near neighbors and adults not having friends within walking distance? What about the loss of the "neighborhood school" where people actually walk to school? The walking/busing/biking ease of getting to work? Sure, short-term economic gains can be enjoyed from the incessant need to increase shareholder value year upon year. But where are the measurements for "gross national social stability"? Air quality? Carbon footprint reduction? Oil-inspired wars?
OK, now the New York auto show is being featured. My parting thoughts are that 14 bicycles fit in a standard car parking lot space. At a fraction of the energy required to melt, build, transport, and sell one regular car.
Bicycling (and other human-powered transport), busing, and other good choices are good for health, society, and the world in both political and environmental aspects. It is apparent that stakeholders such as Shell Oil, energy investors, lobbyists, and many government leaders might need further proof to see the situation in a longer-term perspective. What do you think? What will you do?
2 comments:
To me it boils down to our over consumptive society. I can live in a large detached house. Why not one that is 2000 square feet bigger than what I need? I can drive a car. Why not one that has all the conveniences of my living room?
Unfortunately, those talking heads have a point in a way. Cheap oil has fueled (pun intended) our way of life and the vast amount of wealth this country has created. But I tend to think that we are not really that much happier despite all the wealth and prosperity. When does one have enough? Once you reach a certain level of prosperity are you really happy or is there just one more thing, promotion, accomplishment that you need to achieve to be "truly" happy. When do you hop off the treadmill? And speaking of happiness, how many people who have their big house in the country enjoy their commute in traffic every day? An hour each way is 10 hours a week of wasted time in my opinion.
Why is it that bigger, better and more, more, more is The Good?
Scott
Good thoughts, Scott. Thanks for posting, whoever you are! I like your comment about some cars having all the features of living rooms.
Post a Comment