bjj: Yep. Any way you slice it USA consumption is coming down (soon).

THE DIALOGUE HAS NOT EVEN BEGAN

Todd,

Since Bob has not yet given you his reply, and you have asked a few questions that are fascinating, I want a shot at them. Since you admit to using Jerome's post to persue your issue, if you will be so kind, I would like to use your post to persue the questions you ask, very good ones indeed:

Note, this is in no way an attempt to engage in conflict, I don't want to annoy a guy with a large scale PV system, as you are someone I may be wanting advice from on that subject! :-)

Now, as for the purpose, goal, actualization and partners for the peak oil dialogue, I just can't resist, because this subject is at the core of why I come back to TOD again and again, and what I consider the absolute reason of the dialogue we have here: Exchange of information, and sharpen our arguments, and our knowledge of EVERY kind of energy production and consumption to a razor sharp edge.

Now as far as dialogue with those outside the "peak community....
Purpose of dialogue: To convince groups who are in control of money, technology, and policy that (a) there is a potential emergency confronting the world and the U.S., (b) that the situation is in need of what they control and what they can do (i.e. apply money, technology and policy in a different way) to assure not only their own security, wealth and survival, but also the same for their nation and the world (c) that the problem is managable and may even provide the possibility of great improvement in environment, safety, stability, and security if correct action is taken as soon as possible, meaning now.

Who the dialogue is with:
Bankers and investors, brokers, local, state and government agencies, businesses, universities and colleges, health care providers and hospitals, writers, architects, artists and designers, and intellectual leaders, civic groups and churches, and the customer, the man and women in the cubicles of America to name a few places to start.

Now the tough part, the question you asked,
"Tell me what the goal(s) is. Tell me how the goals of this dialogue will be actualized."

This is also the controversial part, because it asks us to CHOOSE sides. We must ask ourselve some hard yes or no questions, that seem simple at first, but are not:

(a) Do we REALLY believe a major emergency is coming unless we do something big and do something now? Not just do we argue and say it to get people's nerves on edge, to be a kind of hip intellectual dark and moody type, but do we actually believe it? (you may smirk at this, but it is not uncommon, the "man in black", the gothic young, the nihilist artist type has always had it's appeal as a stylish icon, hip in their dispair, from Goethe's young Werther to the moody and brooding James Howard Kunstler, detesting, and snarling at all the culture around them found enjoyment and value in, all the while sharing in the very prosperity and luxuries they curse)

(b) Do we REALLY believe that anything can be done to make things better? This is the cutting edge of the doomer vs. technology debate at TOD, and why it is fought with such a vengeance. Because if we believe, REALLY believe that nothing can be done, that it's a forgone conclusion, then of course, dialogue is pointless. Do you want to go to a banker with an alternative energy plan, and say "this will save millions and millions of wasted kilowatts, but of course, it won't matter, the whole system is doomed, it's really a done deal"?

Most observent and thoughtful people know that those who say that nothing can be done about the Peak Oil crisis are the biggest friends of the status quo, and the best friends the current energy industry ever had. They may not intend to be, but they are.

That is why we make the fight, and stand our ground, that there are things that can be done, that will work and that can break the gas/oil monopoly. It is not, as some would try to humiliate the supporters of alternative technology by claiming, that we believe in "miracles". We beleive in investment, in hard thought, in trial and error, in failure, learning from failure, and then trying it again, slightly differently this time, and the next, and the next...it is the miracle of EFFORT and THOUGHT in the face of long hard odds, fought out in the labs and the shops of America and the world, gaining 1% at a time.

"Tell me what the goal(s) is. Tell me how the goals of this dialogue will be actualized."

The goal is that 1% gain, then another, and another. Gain in efficiency, reduction of waste, gain in energy produced by renewables, gain in freedom, gain in options. Remember the power of the "exponential function" we talked about the other day on TOD? Small differences at the front end mean huge returns at the back end.

The dialogue will be actualized this way....

"Have you noticed that solar is really becoming close to being economically competitive with natural gas?....by the way, did you notice that California has banned power from coal plants? Hmm, guess that leaves you guys at the mercy of the nat gas companies....remember what happened to Calpine? And those blackouts when Enron, Calpine, Duke, Dynergy, Aquilla and the others were in control....Even though that solar option might not be exactly competitive per penny, you have to assume natural gas is going up in price, the way the demand will increase....and the LNG program proves even the government doesn't think we can produce enough....by the way, did you see the NPC Report, right from insiders in the industry....here, I have a chart, showing how we will be 3 or more times more dependent on OPEC in only a few more years....say your on the school board, aren't you? Have you noticed all that flat roof on the buildings.....

"Look, let me give you a website, these guys will check and see if there is potential there, they can do the whole thing turn key....you get some nice tax rebates, and increntives, and the "green" press to really make it make a bit of a publicity maker....I know, it seems radical now, but helll, Walmart is getting into it, with big banks even working out the financing, like a lease deal....read up on it, show it to some of your friends on the board....I mean, somebody got the ball rolling back when you installed computers and educational TV in the classroom, right.....I will send you sme more links....even come with the guys who do this for a living, so you'll have somebody there you know..."

Those are the conversations that will take place, that ARE taking place, one at a time, all over the United States....do we really need to worry about energy...what can we do about it....show me some options....which make sense....do we have any support on this....or will we sound like quacks....look, let's make it professional, get one of the pro outfits to help make a presentation....

1% at a time. That is what the dialogue is about. Make no mistake, this is a propaganda war. The entrenched energy industry is using every tool at their disposal to fend off the alternatives, to ease the concern, to protect what they have. That is why as Jerome himself pointed out in the keypost that even the rather frank NPC Report downplays the renewables and the alternatives.

But even they are now having trouble hiding the truth. The "hard truths" that the NPC released are from an industry that knows this hardest of all truths:
if the nation goes down, they go down with it. Do you think for a moment they would get away with what they get away with in most other nations? They would be nationalized or regulated in a heartbeat. Look at the British government tax BP right into the face of declining production. Look at the way Putin handles Gasprom, or Saudi Arabia handles Aramco for a lesson.

So the NPC gave us a warning, What we didn't like was the conclusions the warning led too, which can be stated loosely as: "Give us what we need...access to areas to drill, tax and incentive plans to help us, and stay off our backs....or your in for some bad trouble." But that does not reduce the validity of the Report. The evidence they give is valid. The potential for big problems are valid. And in the end, to get to where we need to be, we will probably have to give the oil and gas industry at least some of what they want and need.

But they stayed away, as Jerome so rightly pointed out, from the big alternatives, the major changes. The NPC Report is valid and valuable, but it is still very much a part of the propaganda war, right there with the API "blog" festivals, and the new Shell answer man Hoffmiester running around the country...they still want to control the terms of the dialogue.

Gail Tverberg gives a fascinating, (astonishing actually) quote from the recent API blog call. She quotes the head of the Technology portion of the NPC committee Rod Nelson as saying in reply to a question about conservation:

"I do think – the way you phrased your question, you know, kind of made me nervous because what we – we made a distinction between conservation and efficiency."

A Freudian slip that! The use of the term "kind of made me nervous" exposes a real weakness (even fear) on the part of the decision makers and planners in the oil industry. Remember, they have SO MUCH more to lose than most of us. Recently one of the wacky commentators over at Huffington's bit of weirdness of a website actually said something very clever..."the oil industry only fears the one thing they don't yet think we can do and that is reduce our consumption."

That is what the "dialogue" is about. The oil industry is now, just like the peakers, selling an emergency. But the oil company is controlling the debate..."in the end, oil and gas are the only game in town....it's us or nothing, you have to play our game." The cliche' that is the classic "doomer", I know it is an overused term (the "anti-technologist" or "neo-Luddite" might be better) who attempts to shoot down any and all possibility of any alternative is, like or not, one of the greatest allies of the oil industry.

The goal of the "dialogue": Let us propose that there is more energy on and coming to Earth than oil and gas. Let us propose that it can be captured in great volume. Let us propose that even renewable clean energy should NEVER be wasted for the sheer sake of wasting it. Let us assume that if we support efforts develop elegant and truly modern design, efficiency engineering, and advanced renewables, they will surprise us to the upside. Let us put some in place, and see how they work, and see if they can be improved. What do you have to lose? If the emergency is catastrophic, and all is lost anyway, we will have made the bid. Why not at least use the tools we now have in the toolbox. Conservation, YES, we will need that....redesign of city layout, YES, we will need that, a different midset about energy YES we will need that, but that does not preclude the renewables and advanced cleaner and more efficient design."

To win the dialogue against an entrenched and wealthy adversary, we will have to know our stuff: Solar, what kind? PV, CIGS thin film, concentrating mirror, solar thermal hot water....wind, what kind? Newly advanced rotors, lighter and smaller systems to run in slower wind, wind turbines for pumping, compressing, storage systems, CAES Compressed air storage, batteries, what kind? Sodium Sulfur, Nickel Metal, Lithium Ion, on and on and on....hybrids, what kind....gas electric, Diesel electric, plug hybrid, hydraulic hybrid, Fuel Cells, what kind, what material, what cost? Electric rail, how will it be designed, what cost? Bio-fuels, what kind, from what feedstock, can they ever return more than is put in, how? Combined with solar, combined with wind? Methane recapture?
Nuclear? What kind at what cost? Is fusion an option? When and at what cost? What is needed? Would more money help, or would it be wasted?

To win this dialogue, we have to be able to meet them on any issue, argue that gas and oil are only one set of options, a very narrow set, when it comes to producing energy....and hold our ground, back it up, show real examples, and win in the eyes of the public. We have to sway the intellectuals as well as the Joe Sixpack in the stands.

That is what the dialogue is about, it's purpose, and how it will be actualized.
The Hirsch Report, the NPC Report on Natural Gas in 2003, the GAO Report, the Army Corps of Engineers Report, and now the NPC Report on Oil and Gas are just the opening salvos in what will be one of the greatest battles for the hearts and minds of the world's people since the Cold War.

The Peak Oil Community seemed beside itself with glee to be recognized after all:
http://www.energybulletin.net/32279.html

But recognition is only the first part of the battle, and the smallest part.
We now must win the hearts and minds of the people to this cause, we must say:

Something can be done. Oil and Gas are NOT the only ways to produce energy, perhaps not even the best ways. Alternatives can work if they are supported, if we make the effort. Do NOT allow the young to be dissuaded.
There are advances to be made, careers to be made. They must decide:
Do they want to accept the slavery of staring a mule in the ass down in the hovels, or do they want to help develop the most advanced energy system, and with it culture, the world has ever known. Tell our young THE TRUTH:
Even if they accept the idea of becoming humble serfs and peasants, the young in the rest of the world WILL NOT. Even if our young will give up the idea of cars and transportation, and comfortable houses, the young in the rest of the world WILL NOT. If we and our young assume that there is no alternative, there is no chance at a better world, at a modern world, a world with technology, WE HAD BETTER BE RIGHT. Because if we are wrong, the nations with peoples of courage and imagination will go to a higher place, will maintain the power that modernism and technology brings. Can you count on them to use it fairly, and to treat your humble peasant children well?

The overlord smiles, and replies...."take comfort....we will be as kind to you as you have been to the nations and peoples you held technical advantage over for so many years."

Thank you for your time.
Roger Conner Jr.
Remember, we are only one cubic mile from freedom

Alan Drake,

You've got the best, most practical method of securing a safe future. I support your rail electrification plan 100%. And you're right, big oil is a charter member of the Iron Triangle.

But, their position is changing. It looks to me like they are cutting the American auto industry loose by encouraging more strict CAFE standards than the administration, and cutting the coal industry loose by acknowledging the necessity of addressing carbon concerns.I know some of you think I'm delusional, seeing changes where none exist like patterns in the grounds in the bottom of a tea cup.

They still haven't addressed the base of the problem-exponential growth in population and energy use. I expect reality will soon address the increasing energy useage in the world. We cannot let up on our message!
Bob Ebersole

"Enhance science and engineering capabilities" = tech solution, in the name of Big Corp.

"long-term opportunities" = only 20 years (as opposed to sustainable)

"in all phases of the energy supply and demand system."
To me, this appear so "we want to control both supply and your consumption (and keep it high)" hidden between the letters. This is what makes me fear that sentence.
That's perhaps the apparent "double talk"?

I would have preferred "Research activities funded by the state to look at efficiency gains, and how these can be accepted by the consumer, as well as researching how a sustainable and secure energy supply system can be developed for the period 2050 to 2100 (which include decentralized energy prodution, renewables as well as CO2 free fossil fuels, for the advantage of the citizen and stability of economy". Is there not a slight difference?

(although whats best for both citizen and economy has been debated since a few thousand years :)

I rented Being There about 3 months ago, and Shirley MacClaine is still sexy and funny. It's a wonderful satire, and really exposes the mindset of the establishment. I wonder if Chance the gardener gave them the idea for the mindless Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush? Peter Sellars is one of the funniest guys I ever saw. Incredible physical control-like all the best commedians, he almost dances.
Bob Ebersole

I rented Being There about 3 months ago, and Shirley MacClaine is still sexy and funny. It's a wonderful satire, and really exposes the mindset of the establishment. I wonder if Chance the gardener gave them the idea for the mindless Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush? Peter Sellars is one of the funniest guys I ever saw. Incredible physical control-like all the best commedians, he almost dances.
Bob Ebersole

ThatsIt,
Let's break the frames down into their basic components:

1. Enhance science and engineering capabilities

The "enhance" word implies that all the necessary "capabilities" are already in place, that the ONLY "capabilities" we need are those of the science and engineering kind; and now we merely need to make some slight adjustments by "enhancing" those capabilities. All hogwash. We need major breakthroughs of the cold fusion kind in order to mitigate the energy crisis facing us. We need social/market capabilities for spreading the new breakthroughs. "The Market" as it currently exists is incapable of marshaling together a Manhattan Project or an Apollo Project as some dreamers would have us believe.

(Image to the right represents an interface enhancement to a software product. If only energy were that simple.)