The British corporation stands in the dock for causing the greatest environmental catastrophe in years, and rightly so. But we consumers should be standing there with them.
For more than 30 days now, oil has been bubbling up a mile deep in the Gulf of Mexico, causing an unprecedented environmental catastrophe that we’ll be dealing with for years. And for more than 30 days now, BP, the public and the politicians have been laying blame and demanding accountability. And for 30 days, a hypocritical argument has been raging as well.
The leak hasn’t been closed off yet but knee-jerk commentary has been demanding punishment and consequences nonetheless. Experts and the public demand more governmental controls, prohibitions and regulations; politicians react hastily by threatening industry. It’s hard to trump Green Party head Claudia Roth in the populist arena when she calls for a boycott of BP.
Germany cannot berate the oil companies at the same time it bases its economic strength on motor vehicles and other machinery needing fuel — and lots of it. That’s also a reason why BP drills a mile beneath the sea, taking such unacceptable and incalculable risks. Mankind has yet to master the technology needed.
Of course, the oil companies are engaged in a quest for profits needed to keep stockholders, long since accustomed to ever-higher returns on their investments, satisfied. But there’s also a world that sees oil as the lubrication necessary for the economy. Every time the pump price of gasoline starts getting close to $7.00 a gallon here in Germany, we drivers start screaming. And now we’re supposed to boycott BP? And BP deserves to suffer alone?
That’s not how it works. On the one hand, we can’t demand cheap gasoline while driving cars that get only 24 miles per gallon while we insist on keeping the other hand clean. That way doesn’t work and neither does it answer the urgent questions about the future. What will our future energy needs be based upon? What will power our automobiles? And above all, how much will we be willing to pay for it?
It’s becoming more and more difficult to produce oil because the easily reached reserves have already been discovered and, for the most part, emptied. That’s why they’re drilling on the ocean floor and in the Arctic regions. That’s why sources such as the Canadian oil-bearing sands are being opened for production. The price for all these is high and we’re paying that price right now in the Gulf of Mexico. And then we complain about the price as we get into our big cars because that’s a quicker way to our next destination than taking the train or riding a bike.
One thing is clear: BP can’t be let off the hook. The British company has to plug the leak and pay for damages caused to others. Those responsible have to be called to account. And politicians have to rethink how governments can best regulate drilling rigs to minimize the risk of a similar catastrophe in the future. But motorists and those who waste energy can’t be let off the hook, either. The only alternative: we’ll just have to get used to the horrifying images of oil-drenched birds, dead fish and filthy beaches.
Grigor, you miss the most basic measurement of personal wealth: what a person can enjoy in one lifetime. If you live seventy years and sleep eight hours a day, you get six hundred seventy five thousand waking hours. When they’re gone, they’re gone: journey’s over.
Some of that time is spend procuring needs, some spend procuring wants, and some spent enjoying relationships and goods procured by the first two.
With an automobile, we get to spend more of our time doing that third thing, “enjoying.”
The fact is, cars are expensive enough that we wouldn’t own them if there were a cheaper way TO GO WHERE WE WANT WHEN WE WANT. There isn’t, and no amount of whining about buses and trains will change that.
With a car, a half-hour dentist appointment takes forty five minutes. With a bus, it takes two and a half hours, IF THERE’S A BUS THAT GOES NEAR MY HOUSE, AND IF THERE’S A BUS THAT GOES NEAR MY DENTIST.
Germany has what, ninety million people in a land area the size of Oregon? Buses and trains make economic sense in that crowded environment, but not in, say, the US. They only make sense in Russia because the Communists ruthlessly cleared out the countryside and forced nearly everyone into cities. Are you advocating some sort of country-boy pogrom? Or are you just carping on cars but not actually advocating a solution?
I have a solution for you. Mandate that all internal combustion vehicles made after 2015 be diesel, and run them on hemp oil. To meet the entire fuel needs of, say, the US, would require 7,2 million hectares of hemp (the US has 154 million hectares of farmland, and could easily put more under tillage). Germany’s needs would require rather less. Once you’ve converted the auto and truck fleet, you go after the electric generating plants.
Hemp will grow on the most unuseable land and in quite inhospitable climates, so we’re not talking about plowing grain under to plant hemp.
What you’re advocating is simply, “Hey, everyone, be poorer! Spend more of your time doing what you don’t want to do!”
My answer, along with most of the world, is “Goetz von Berlichingen!”