My Comments on:

Judith Apter Klinghoffer

Why Tom Friedman Is Wrong on Russia and Wrong on Energy



http://hnn.us/articles/53694.html



HNN, before Aug. 25, 2008

Andrew D. Todd

 a_d_todd@rowboats-sd-ca.com 

http://rowboats-sd-ca.com/




(My Responses)

(08/27/2008 10:27 AM)



Yes, It's The Oil-- But Not Quite the Way You Might Think.

Electricity is in the ascendant, and the oil industry is in long-term, fundamental decline.  Almost any reasonable  modernization of the energy and transportation sectors would tend to increase the  role of electricity at the expense of oil, and this has been known for many years. The energy and transportation networks, however, have been stagnant, because no one could see the logic of putting  much money  into them. The administration's energy independence policy, such as it is, works out in practice to a desperate search for a non-existent technology which would preserve the status quo ante, approximately defined as the  gas station affiliated with a major oil company, with a big refinery in the neighborhood of Houston.

Let's play a silly little game. Let's construct a narrative about 2001, of the type which historians construct about Spring, 1861 and August, 1914. Such narratives are about how the social order lost its ability to contain untoward events. The assassination of the Empress Elizabeth did not lead to a European war, nor did the  more ambiguous events at Mayerling. By the day of Sarajevo, something had shifted. In the military sphere, a critical mass of generals on both sides had moved to the idea of "better now than later."  The better practitioners of this kind of history rope in the Irish independence movement, the  British Suffragettes, and even the  French president's mistress. Naturally, they deal with the Austrian general  Conrad von Hotzendorf, and his participation in  the "Wagnerite"  movement, and with the logic of  mobilization timetables, etc. Now, let's try to construct that kind of narrative about 2001.

In 2001, the technological basis of society was changing rapidly. There had been a long term movement to electricity, but during the 1990's, on top of this, speculative capital  had funded a wholesale overbuilding  of the telecommunications system. This fueled the rise of the internet. The internet fueled the rise of open source software, and  of blogs.  There are two threads  leading out of this. One leads to electric cars. The other leads to  telecommuting. 

In the 1990's, General Motors  launched a project to build an electric car. There were a number of reasons for this. Under the rule of  Roger Smith, GM had attempted to modernize itself by purchasing an electronics/aerospace company, Hughes Aircraft, and a computer services company, Electronic Data Systems. GM had an inferiority  complex vis a vis the high-tech world, and was attempting to work it  off.  GM acquired partners, Southern California Edison, the State of California, and the Clinton Administration. The rationale for the electric car was air quality, a sensitive topic in California. An electric car could be powered by a coal-fueled generator in Arizona, on the  other side of the  mountains, and thus, it  would not contribute to the smog situation. None of the partners had the serious commitment necessary to carry an  electric car to fruition, but they were able to go through the  motions fairly inexpensively,   and they could energetically publicize what they produced,  playing down the differences between what was in effect a kind of engineering student's thesis project and a mass-production vehicle. It was a game, in short, a silly little game, in the same sense that  military field maneuvers are a game, with blanks instead of live ammunition. However, from the  point of view of the oil industry, not looking too closely,  it  had certain scary  elements. The partners proposed-- in a hypothetical sort of way-- to put an electric charger into every parking place, so that electric cars would be picking up power whenever they were  not  moving. These chargers would of course be plugged into the electric grid, leaving the oil companies out of the picture. The oil companies panicked, briefly, before they realized that it was only a silly game.

In  the long run, to make electric cars work, you have to build electric power into the  road, so that the cars can continuously replenish themselves while rolling along. This was the big commitment which GM and its allies would  not undertake. It was the fear of the oil companies that  electric roads would somehow get  financed.

In the wake of GM followed Toyota, with the hybrid car. Japanese don't go in for the sort of amateur theatrics which  Americans do-- they are very polite to someone, until the day they decide to  kill him. The hybrid car used electricity internally to use less gasoline and produce less pollution, while not  having the weaknesses of the pure electric car. It simply brought the automobile up to the level of electrical modernization found in a diesel railroad locomotive. One competitor after another eventually moved to adopt the hybrid system. The eventual result would, other things equal, have been to reduce the gasoline  market by somewhere between a third and a half.  Cutting wages by between a third  and a half is usually a formula for an extremely grim strike. Why should the oil companies have been any different?

The next step was Enron, the oil companies attempt to deal themselves into the wholesale electric business. Enron failed, on the eve  of 2001.

On the other  side, the telecommunications industry was taking  off, not in terms of profits, indeed, but in terms of  output. The successive bankruptcies of overambitious firms dumped cheap communication circuits onto the market, and people began doing more and more things "over the wire." One of the most alarming ideas that that of open-source, the idea that one could run a technical organization doing important  business by the same quasi-anarchist methods  by which colleges were traditionally run. A "man of authority," such as Dick Cheney or John McCain, either in government or  in big business, had traditionally not  had to take seriously the kind of bearded long-haired professor who was not in the habit of applying for grant money. Suddenly, the rules were changing. The long-haired professor could recruit students, working at their own expense, and go from there. One might read Jane Smiley's novel, _Moo_, as a parable. Something similar  was happening with blogs. Traditionally, it had been possible, to a degree, to control a limited number of journalists representing national media outlets  by offering them special privileges. But there were too many bloggers to be  bribed.

There was a "green-techno nexus," in the sense that high-tech, computer-related, industries tended to favor ecological restrictions which they could meet, and which the older "smokestack  industries" could not.

Finally, computers and the internet were undermining  the recruitment basis of the military. The American military does not want to be a foreign legion. The military recruits young people by offering them job training and college money. It does not  like to recruit from places like New York and Los Angeles, because there are so many other opportunities in  these cities, and someone who is still available is likely to be a  professional loser. The military prefers to recruit from small towns where there is literally nothing to do, because they can get a teachable sort of young person there. However, the internet transforms geography, so that, in a manner of speaking, everyone lives in the San Fernando Valley, or, alternatively, everyone can take the train into  Manhattan. The kind of person who goes into the military to get job training and college money is the kind of person who, if he winds up overseas, will learn a bit of Vietnamese, or a bit of Arabic,  out of a sense of necessity. An army composed exclusively of Watts and Compton gangbangers would not only be deficient in technical skills, but would also be low on cultural sensitivity, and, by its very nature, would tend to provoke desperate indigenous resistance.

The 2000 election was between George W. Bush, representative of the oil industry, and Al Gore, representative of the technology industry.  Gore came very close to winning, even despite the normal "throw the bums out" sentiment an administration in office attracts, and if he  had won,  he  would no doubt have pushed for  hybrid car mandates, and for accelerating the deployment of the internet. And he might even have found the government money to pay for electric roads.

Thus the whole setting for  September 11, 2001 was an administration with  an ongoing sense of persecution, and a sense of "needing to have its war now, rather than later," before  the whole country  became like California.
---------------------------------------------------

Michael Schnayerson, _The Car That Could: The Inside Story of G.M.'s Revolutionary Electric  Vehicle_, 1996







  Index   Home