[Paleopsych] FYI re $3/gallon and rising
Paul J. Werbos, Dr.
paul.werbos at verizon.net
Tue Mar 29 23:05:42 UTC 2005
>Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 07:37:22 -0500
>To: support at abcnews.go.com <support at abcnews.go.com>
>From: "Paul J. Werbos, Dr." <paul.werbos at verizon.net>
>Subject: ABCNEWS.com EDITORIAL
>Cc: pwerbos at nsf.gov
>Re Ned Potter's story on "an unlikely coalition" on ABCNews last night --
>GREAT start, but you missed half the story.
>You mentioned an "unlikely coalition," but you missed half
>the coalition. Since I have been coordinating the other half, de facto,
>I hope you'd be interested in the other half. You interviewed
>the neoconservative hawk half in depth, but the technology and environment
>is what makes it all real.
>Suppose you were reporting to a hungry man in front of you.
>The full story is: "You are about to starve to death, but there is food on
>the table right behind you." To avoid imposing too many words on the poor
>fellow, someone shortens your story to: "You are about to starve to death."
>If no one reports the second half, he will die. But the "he" who is about
>is you and me and people in general.
>The neoconservatives you cite are being coordinated by IAGS,
>They have done great work in waking people up to negative trends which
>add up to something ten times as big as the Iraq War, current nuclear
>proliferation and $3/gallon
>all combined. But they have only just
>begun to talk about how we can actually SOLVE the problem realistically.
>Thus it is not surprising that your consultant, seeing only half the
>up saying "we really can't do much here and now." That WAS true. It IS no
>There are new technologies and new information which the lawyers and
>social scientists generally
>do not know about.
>To explain the full story, the "whole" coalition -- friends of IAGS (like
>environmentalists (NRDC) and TECHNOLOGY PEOPLE
>(IEEE, the world's largest professional society, 300,000 engineers,
>and related groups) -- organized a joint briefing on March 17
>at the Rayburn Building. Press was invited -- but that day there was
>more interest in drug use in baseball,
>feeding tubes for corpses and Michael Jackson's sexual behavior ...
>When people are desperate, I guess they like to escape from reality a bit ..
>but it's really a shame that there couldn't be coverage of a new
>strategy to actually solve the problem. I was VERY thrilled that you have
>to address these concerns... but the payoff only comes if you look at the
>In fact -- there IS a way we could reduce oil dependency as much as IAGS
>(a factor of three or so in 20-40 years), AND ALSO reduce carbon dioxide
>a similar amount -- enough to possibly prevent the melting of the Arctic
>Ice Cap -- without
>reducing economic growth one bit. (And no, it's not a matter of just
>throwing $300 billion
>mindlessly into a coalition of pigs at the trough.) A FEW elements of that
>strategy are in the
>"Setting America Free" document at <http://www.iags.org>www.iags.org. But,
>as your consultant observed,
>those elements are incomplete. For a more complete grand strategy, see:
>Some key elements behind the strategy:
>Economists ALONE and engineers ALONE would have no hope of charting a
>viable course through
>these complex waters. It requires a kind of crossdisciplinary effort,
>grounded in understanding of the
>nuts-and-bolts technical realities, able to see past the biased technology
>advocates of all stripes,
>but also grounded in economics. That's why no one has really seen a viable
>strategy here before --
>until the leading experts in ENGINEERING linked up to expertise in energy
>Barriers to communication between engineers (reality?) and social science
>(lawyers, policy types)
>have been a growing problem in the US lately. Interviews with Nobel Prize
>Winners (who typically know
>more about DNA than about cars and electricity) do not solve the problem,
>though Rick Smalley has helped a bit
>Even the brightest people can get nowhere -- spin in useless circles like
>a dog chasing its own tail --
>if they ask the wrong question. Lots of people have focused all their
>energy on the quesion: "What can we
>do that gets used here and now, with technology and options that are 100
>Asking that question only leads to stuff like endless time debating
>drilling in Anwar, the Kyoto treaty,
>the bulk of the current energy bill -- all of which adds up to maybe 15%
>of the problem, NOT ENOUGH
>TO GET US OUT OF THE HOLE. Lots of energy and thought, but no solution.
>Other people have asked: "How can we visualize the utterly perfect
>CO2-free world of the future,
>devoid of all the dirt and grime of today?" Thus we get the purest version
>of the hydrogen economy,
>with cars carrying hydrogen in liquid form or in cryogenic tanks, with
>righteous displays of
>concern about someday making it real but not any kind of realistic
>(and no prospect of one).
>We and IAGS have worked hard to ask a different QUESTION: "What could we
>do to minimize
>the expected waiting time between now and the time when we cut oil
>dependency (or CO2 emissoins) by a factor of three or four?"
>That's the question we need to ask, if we want to get large enough results
>before the problems
>all kill us. And it does have an answer!!!!
>And folks -- "kill us" is not an exaggeration. If nuclear proliferation
>multiplies more than ten-fold
>in places like the Middle East, and competition for the last remaining oil
>ten-fold -- well, let's just say that my role here was motivated by some
>very realistic geopolitical scenario
>work I saw in the summer of 2003. We need to take the time to try to stay
>and get the job done. Going through the motions would not be enough to
>I do hope you can help provide the missing necessary links in this chain.
>Best of luck,
>Dr. Paul J. Werbos
>P.S. As it says on the slides at
>these are my own personal views and not the official views of my employer,
>the US National Science Foundation. But I did my best to vet the slides
>for accuracy, by asking for feedback from a WHOLE lot of people
>before giving the talk at Rayburn. There is a World Bank URL
>on solar thermal farms which I found out out about late, which I'd like to ad,
>but it doesn't change the basic story.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the paleopsych