This is a symptom of deep, powerful problems within Stanford, and in the big picture, within our society as a whole.

The fact that Stanford is replacing nature with nature because one’s been deemed one more ‘natural’ than the other isn’t the problem.  The fact that Stanford is paying $$$$$($?) per tree for this upgrade isn’t the problem, as Stanford has $$$$$$$$$$$ (yes, 11 digits there) lying around.  In fact, the problem is not even that the money spent on each tree could instead give one of the 10,000 people living off the street just around the corner a place to call home.

The problem is that we, as a culture, as a people, are A-OK with this disparity of wealth, this wasteful opulence, this dehumanization of those in need… directly in front of our faces, our doorstops.  Not to mention the other 3 billion who are kept out of place, out of mind.  The problem starts with those in power, those making the decisions, those who choose to push that 21.6 billion dollars toward million dollar landscaping upgrades – but it extends down to you and me, who drive by the problem every day, and turn a blind eye.  This indifference, this willful indirection, ingrained in the most powerful people on the planet is neither acceptable, justifiable, nor in the long term – sustainable.

We can, and we must, do better.

The greatest challenge we, the current generation of the American people, will face over our lifetimes is not Iraq. It is not the economy. It is not terrorism. It is not global warming! (that will hit the third world much harder) It is… oil.

Over the last 20 years, the concept of Global Peak Oil has evolved from a bunch of hippie BS to the real deal. The question is no longer if, it’s when.

• Famous Princeton Prof: 2010
• Shell: 2015
• Saudi Aramco: 2022
• Exxon: 2032+
• Reality: May 2005??

My uniformed and amorphous intuition based on what people who study these things for a living are saying, and considering their (sometimes alternative) motivations, is that total global crude production will keep bouncing around within a couple percent of its current plateau for another 5-7 years, before heading cleanly southward between 2013 and 2015. At which point, there will be a ridiculous amount of press, concern, name calling, recession, and we will be paying $10-15 for gallon for gasoline. Maybe we’ll start another war or two to try to blame someone.

So, over the next 20 years the entire global community will learn to deal with much more costly oil. The question is, who will come out of top? Will this alter the global balance of power? Well, the societies that will be least affected will be those whose economies don’t already depend on oil for the majority of daily life. Meaning, this will have minimal affect on the third world. Those currently in the process of industrializing will find themselves changing their building patterns and industrial organization to use other sources of energy (yum, dirt that burns!), thus adapting to the changing market conditions.

Who’s going to feel it the hardest? Those societies that have already invested trillions and trillions of dollars into a built environment that depends on cheap oil to function effectively. Of those societies, one stands out as significantly more vulnerable than the others. A product of our own global economic dominance over the last 60 years, the US of A has a problem. Our economy is approximately twice as dependent on cheap oil as Canada or Australia, and more than three times that of your average western European fruity nation.

If the US of A is to remain on top of the world economy in 2030, we need to be addressing our ingrained oil dependence now. By 2014, it will be too late.

Of the three major candidates running for MVP of The World, only one has managed to not make the problem worse. But even he has given this, the most important long-term issue facing our society today, only lip service.

We don’t need more fuzzy talk about ideas, concerns, feel-good legislation dictating fuel economy standards, or what could be done. We need forceful leadership pulling money away from the sinkhole that is our sprawling, unsustainable, and dare I say – unAmerican – exurban land use patterns and pushing it directly into our core cities. Specifically, this means – stop this sh*t. Pay for this sh*t. If we, the American people, continue to lead the world through the 21st century, it will be because we successfully refocused our powerful investment on our core cities – and we did so before it was too late.

About a week ago, I was watching my postman drive up and down the block, stopping every 50 feet, turning off the engine, and delivering mail to one house. It occurred to me that USPS delivery trucks would be the best hybrid vehicles ever. All they do is stop-and-go. In fact, if hybrid vehicles don’t make economic sense for USPS delivery trucks, I contend they don’t for anybody, anywhere, ever. And I’ve heard they do (make economic sense for some, that is). So, why doesn’t USPS have their act together here? Well, let’s ask them.

From: Mike Fogel <*******@gmail.com>
To: Support@USPS <uspshelpdesk@spemail.esecurecare.net>

How can I find more information about this program? Specifically, how it’s progressed in the last two years and what’s coming up?

http://www.usps.com/communications/news/press/2006/pr06_036.htm

I’ve searched all over your website and haven’t found anything beyond that original press release.

Thank you,

Michael Fogel

To which USPS replied “sorry, we aren’t allowed to click on links. What are you talking about?”

From: Support@USPS <uspshelpdesk@spemail.esecurecare.net>
To: Mike Fogel <*******@gmail.com>

Dear MICHAEL FOGEL,

Thank you for contacting us about seeking more information about our programs.

I do apologize, our systems are not able to view any attachments. In order to be assisted further, please reply with the name of the program.

If I can be of assistance to you in the future, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Thank you for choosing the United States Postal Service®.

Regards,

Jimara L

Uhm, wow, that’s impressively dumb ’security’ policy. I guess I’ll explain your own program to you.

From: Mike Fogel <*******@gmail.com>
To: Support@USPS <uspshelpdesk@spemail.esecurecare.net>

No problem. The link I sent you is to a press release from 2006, relating to the postal service doing a test run for using hybrid vehicles to do the deliveries. I’m wondering how I can find more up-to-date information about this program, or what it’s expanded into, or if it’s imploded, or…???

Thanks!

Mike

To bad! USPS forgot what they were doing with hybrids.

From: Support@USPS <uspshelpdesk@spemail.esecurecare.net>
To: Mike Fogel <*******@gmail.com>

Dear MICHAEL FOGEL,

Thank you for responding with requested information. I understand you are seeking up to date information regarding the hybrid postal vehicles. I do apologize, I do not have that information in my resources. (…)

If I can be of assistance to you in the future, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Thank you for choosing the United States Postal Service®.

Regards,

Jimara L

Wow.

All right, basic intuitive Econ 0.000001, applied to a dumb ass idea, here we go: You lower the cost to market of a commodity (like say a barrel of oil), demand will rise to meet a new equilibrium with the new cost to market. Meaning: if you get rid of taxes on oil thus lowering it’s price, people will buy more oil, thus rising the price back up. It won’t go all the way back up, but it will likely go somewhere around halfway.

But oil’s not like, say, beer. The difference is that for oil, since it’s finite, each barrel costs a tiny bit more to bring it to market than the last. Now, just like every other commodity with this structure, if you lower the price, thus increasing consumption, then because we’re consuming more, the result is that the price now rises faster than it otherwise would have. And after some number of years, we find ourselves paying more than we otherwise would have. This ain’t rocket science people… this is what our kids all should be learning in junior high.

Now, the most insulting part about this is that both Hilary and McCain understand this perfectly well. But they’re running on the assumption that enough of the American public is not an “elite liberal economist from new england” and therefore doesn’t get this “complex” stuff. Well, F-YOU! We’re not fricking bricks here, it’s damn insulting that you think the average American falls for this kind of BS.

Nobody really blinked an eye when McCain proposed this idea. It’s no secret what the business-minded side of the Republican party thinks about the social-conservative side. But Hilary? What? Why are you trying to treat me like I’m a little kid who can’t stop myself from grabbing a marshmallow? How bout some fricking respect?

If you support Hilary, you should be embarrassed by this shit. ‘Nuff said.

Manzanillo is down on the pacific coast a little south of Guadalajara. The trip from Guadalajara down to Manzanillo is mostly surrounded by fields of blue agave, aka Tequila in plant form.

It actually did rain for a few seconds along the way too – that’s one day with rain per three weeks. Not bad.

Manzanillo is now the busiest port in Mexico, passing up Veracruz a few years ago. Even so – the port looks like a little toy compared to Oakland’s monstrous shipyard. 4 big cranes in Manzanillo… maybe 20 in Oakland? Manzanillo is centered around it’s seaside zócalo with a big metal swordfish.

Manzanillo didn’t feel very gringo-friendly, I think it’s because it’s really an industrial port city at heart – and proud of it. I took off for Acapulco the next morning. 12 more hours of bus down the side of the big beautiful pacific to Acapulco. The highway was slow and windy, lots of military checkpoints, small villages lacking basic infrastructure, and… miles and miles of stunning, deserted, secluded beaches.

And Acapulco! The first thing you notice about Acapulco is the taxis. The whole city is literally covered with little Volkswagen Bug taxis.

Acapulco’s central zócalo….

The bay of Acapulco is beautiful, even if it smells bad. The mountains nestle right down to the water – a truly beautiful city (from far away).

Acapulco from up close… being blunt, Acapulco is the filthiest, most polluted, most depressing, most crime ridden place I’ve ever experienced in my life. I have a completely new perspective on West Oakland. You think you’re hardcore? In downtown Acapulco, the bums have are literally rotting away on the street. The air is thick with diesel smog. The water is brown. Sewage. Insects. The very first guy I talked to, a taxi driver in the bus terminal, was selling cocaine. Everyone up here in the Bay Area, everyone from the prostitutes in the Tenderloin through the crackheads and gangbangers up and down Oakland’s International Boulevard – we’ve still got our basic needs covered at a level that the general population in Acapulco can’t assume. We have clean water. We have clear air. We have a functional sewage system. Our bums survive. We have welfare. Social Security. I don’t want to say we’re pampered, because that implies that we’re soft, and have something to be ashamed of because we’ve managed to get our basic needs under control. But we do need to realize and remember that even though there is significant variance in the level of privilege we’re born into in the first world, from the perspective of the other 4 billion, we’re really all one and the same. There’s a lot wrong with our society in the States, there’s a lot to work on and a lot to change, but it’s essential to remember how much we’ve done that’s right. There’s a level of pride in the States that’s warranted by our successful creation of community… but yet for some reason doesn’t exist. Keep working to improve, but allow ourselves to recognize and celebrate good we’ve created! </rant>