solutions

Instead of doing what the writer says, come up with a real alternative to using oil that will work other than reducing the world population to a few million hunter gatherers or moving us back into the dark ages.

Climate Polluter walking tour, with Zombies -- today!

How timely, given that Zombie armies are rising today all along the west coast!

Climate Polluter Lunch Hour Walking Tour, with Zombies! -- endorsed by Occupy Vancouver.

Join our band of ghouls and zombies on a lunch hour walking tour of some of Vancouver's biggest corporate climate polluters. Let's shine a spotlight on these monsters -- it's their special day!

Zombie face painting @ 11:30 at Burrard Skytrain (on Burrard), tour starts @ Noon @ RBC (Burrard & Georgia)

http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=295875970441916

Zombies rising in Portland as well, to take on Bank of America -- the US's biggest coal financier.

the sun

There are many alternatives to the rapidly dwindling oil supply. Oil should be kept only for the most important uses (unless of course you could care less about future generations) and not wasted on Humvees and other mechanical monstrosities like WAR. The reason the sustainable alternatives are not more popular, like sunshine, is due to the fact that the Multinational Greed Corporations have not yet positioned themselves to dominate the sustainable energy marketplace. But they are working on that little problem! Where are those zombies when you need them.

Problem solved

Nuclear power is the practical solution for a quick switch off fossils and imported oil.

A worldwide investment in 10000 mass produced nuclear reactors paid for by ending expensive fossil fuel use, would eliminate most air pollution saving millions of lives annually, end the global warming/ peak oil problem within a ten year time frame, provide a huge job producing boost to the economy, and require only a small part of our industrial capacity. All this at a 40% annual rate of return on our GDP.

Nuclear electricity and steam would be used to replace natural gas in generation, and residential and industrial heating applications. The freed up natural gas would be used for CNG auto fuel and NG derived methanol and dimethyl ether would replace ethanol in current E85 flex fuel vehicles and in diesel in trucks and locomotives.

As we switch to electric vehicles, and enough nuclear capacity is available off peak nuclear produced methane or methanol would fuel non electric vehicles.

http://energyfromthorium.com/2011/10/29/nuclear-ammonia/

Big Oil is terrified that folks will find out that it is feasable to replace their sickening pollution spewing economy wrecking product with mass produced nuclear power.

They've purchased Big media our politicians to make sure it doesn't happen.

I enjoy Tyee artciles on many topics, but

Any time it comes to the environment you get needlessly over the top, jump to conclusions, make statements without proper backing and basically call large swathes of reasonable people idiots on the basis of your own ideology which is also coloured by outside influence, namely that of activist groups which are also known to exaggerate to get 'the point across', even when exaggerate can often be interpreted as an outright lie, and since calling a protest group out on their bullshit is generally frowned upon it tends to go uncommented on. What the Vancouver Sun is doing, though bias, atleast has as much backing in truth as anything Tides or Dogwood or Greenpeace spouts.

What political party would that be ?

"Volunteer for a political party that actually cares about the future."

How about the Green Party ?

Of all the parties, it is the one least connected to vested interests, and it is showing an increasingly sophisticated interest in promoting well-thought out economic policies. Take a closer look.

small steps

There are a lot of things we can start with to reduce oil consumption, starting with something most obvious to those that sit at computers all day: the computer/spin cycle/treadmill that powers a battery that powers the computer. What I wouldn't do for some exercise as I sit here figuring out databases, and other sedentary activities involving the buttwidening device. There is an entire gym that is powered by their cardio machines. One good place to start--human energy into appliances. If we find a lot of small ways to cut energy use, we can use a lot less.

Matt Price's worst article

This is without a doubt Matt P's worst article. Uses little rational argument,just disjointed outpourings, not sure what point he's trying to make. Almost as bad as most of Yaffe's ramblings.

In Answer to Your Question

Which one would that be? Any party but the Liberals. I enjoyed the article. It does get discouraging trying to put up any kind of resistance without being steamrolled by "Big Oil"

I thought it wa s a quite humourous article

all in all. We are zombies, in large part. Thinking independently of the rhetoric is damn near impossible, and it is always a challenge demanding us to repeatedly revisit what we take as common knowledge.

Of all the things capitalism has brought us, good and bad, it is the commodification of our thoughts and consciousness which is most interesting.

Zombies, indeed!

What Corporate Zombies Really Want

Grr. Arrgh*. Monnnneeeeyyyyy....
(*thanx, Joss)

Oil zombies? EORI

I've read about Peak Oil and the alternatives to inexpensive carbon derived fuels for 3 years now. I think that all who insist on "alternatives" need to gain a strong understanding of EROI; http://www.eoearth.org/article/Energy_return_on_investment_%28EROI%29

If you begin to study the physical reality of energy inputs to outputs, you'll soon realize the fantasy of believing we can maintain anything like our current lifestyle or population. May I suggest 3 books? " Empires of Food", by Evan D.G. Fraser and Andrew Rima (because, after all, without food, we do not live), "The Long Descent, A User's Guide to the End of the Industrial Age", and "The Ecotechnic Future: Exploring a Post-Peak World", by John Michael Greer. ( because the fantasy of believing we can "have it all", is destroying our ability to survive as a species. The Earth WILL survive, whereas, we may or may not. At 60 years old, I may have 10-30 years left, and I'll certainly see the change from a modern North America to a more world normal economy and lifestyle. ( think 3rd world) Those of you who are 40 and under can expect a far less consumptive life. My wife and I are trying to live more simply, gardening, animal husbandry, building community with others, even as I use this internet to communicate. But this digital system is going to pass away as most of petroleum based life will.We need to have communities who stand together through local water supplies, food supplies, power supplies, libraries/education, and healing modalities. Relearn the mostly forgotten technology of pre-petroleum times.

Technofix fantasies are the dreams of those who aren't willing to know the fate of all past civilizations. Our descent will not be an instant crippling fall, but it IS a slow demise of a thousand cuts. Many parts of the globe will suffer badly, while others will relearn ways of living that are satisfying, and even joyful, though physical labor will become more intense. Study those who live successfully in 3rd world conditions, and take their knowledge to heart.

When did I ever deny global

When did I ever deny global warming, Mr. Old Dirty Bastard, that is not what I was referring to. In my recent research for example I have found environmentalists often purposely misquoting, cherry picking and misinterpreting comments from all sorts of parties when it serves them. Sure that's just the nature of arguement but it is disheartening to see they are just as filthy in their methods as the oil companies they protest, if not more so. And what does this article say? It backs up none of its claim with any kind of evidence, it's a plain old directionless tirade based on pre-established ideas that may or may not be fact. For example, while I do believe in global warming, I don't believe that we are anywhere near reaching "Peak Oil", something many arguments against energy projects take as a given before they even start speaking.