James Howard Kunstler warns of an impending global energy crisis, or "The Long Emergency," driven by U.S. peak oil in 1970 (10M barrels/day down to 5M), depleted major fields like Prudhoe Bay and the North Sea, and oil companies’ 44% profits without reinvestment. He predicts economic collapse within 36 months—Walmart failing, railroads abandoned—due to unsustainable reliance on cheap oil, despite $80B+ Iraq War costs and $1.8B Amtrak debates. Climate change will worsen food shortages, while hydrogen and biofuels prove impractical, leaving society unprepared for systemic shifts toward localized survival. [Automatically generated summary]
From the high desert in the great American Southwest, I bid you all good evening, good morning, good afternoon, as the case may be across this great land of ours and well beyond.
Every single one of those time zones covered by our program goes to close a.m.
I'm art on.
It's great to be here.
It's a Sunday, Monday morning, and what a night it's going to be.
You may recall not too long ago, I read an article from The Rolling Stone, which was so damn good about oil, called The Long Emergency by James Howard Kunsler.
And Kunsler, I guess it is.
Kunsler, okay, Kunsler.
Anyway, it was so good about oil and about where we are with oil in the world that I read damn near the whole thing on the air.
And he obviously heard about it.
And now tonight he's going to be a guest, The Long Emergency, James Kunsler.
So that'll be in the next hour.
We are in the midst of another, yet another free Streamlink weekend, which means it's free.
Wherever you are in the world, you can listen Frio Charge.
Now it runs through 6 a.m. Pacific Time Monday morning.
So right up until then, then debuting on Monday is our new Streamlink feature, Podcasting.
That is the latest in the world, Podcasting, which automatically will download the MPEG-3s.
It is now included with the regular subscription price, which we have not raised as we continue to add new features.
So now you can just put it all on a pod.
Pretty cool, actually.
My webcam photo tonight, ladies and gentlemen, is very interesting.
The webcam photo is of an area between Baker, California, and here in Prump.
And of course, we took a ride, I don't know, a week or so ago to California and on the way back.
This is our desert.
What you see in that photograph is water.
And that water is perhaps two or three inches, maybe in places deeper, but it's miles and miles of water.
Out there in the middle of the desert, what is usually a dry lake bed is not so dry.
And when the winds come up, and believe me, they're about to, in fact, we have 45 mile an hour winds forecast for tomorrow, Monday.
When the winds come up, that water can shift miles.
It's an amazing, amazing thing out here in the middle of the desert.
You've got to remember, I'm 20 miles or so from Death Valley, California.
And so this is an unusual, very interesting part of our United States.
And so there it is.
That's two or three inches deep water that literally goes on for miles.
And that's what's in my webcam tonight.
And now, I can't resist doing this.
I'll keep it very, very short, but I am so proud of this I could squeak.
This, again, is going to be sort of a demo for amateur radio operators out there of this incredible new thing called ESSB.
And being a ham, I've been experimenting, and I think those of you with good, sharp ears are going to hear the difference big time.
I added a recording of yet a further audio advance within the limitations described last week.
So what you're going to hear is recorded hundreds of miles away, almost a thousand in fact.
And it's two different recordings.
The second recording represents the big advance.
I'll just give you little pieces of it.
Here's the standard 2.4 type sideband Donald Duck sounding audio that you hear that hands have always had.
Here it is.
No, that's the wrong CD in there.
That's my break music.
Boomba, which I love, by the way.
I'm still complaining about that show dying.
Anyway, here's the first demo, 2.4.
unidentified
All right.
This is W6OBB in Prompt, Nevada, with a brief recording at standard bandwidth of 2.4.
Yay, W6OBB in Prompt, Nevada, near Las Vegas, and we're doing a sound and audio check on some new software.
Hello test 12344321.
The new 9000D is sitting here sparkling in front of me and working quite reasonably.
All right, that's the new 9000, Yesu 9000D radio that I'm very privileged to be testing, and that was the audio coming from it recorded at 3.6.
So there you are.
It's a giant advance, gigantic advance in amateur radio.
Those of you curious about learning more, wanting to know more, go to the site NU9N.com.
Nancy United NU9.
Is it NU9?
How did I just get that screwed?
NU9N.com.
That's it.
NancyUnited9Nancy.com.
And you can go to the MPEG-3 full-down menu and listen and hear some stuff even better than I have done.
But I'm getting there.
And that was pretty good.
All right, let's look around the world a little bit.
Changing the tone from tough talk to friendship, President Bush and Vladimir Putin went out of their way to take a united stand on Middle East peace and terrorism Sunday after sharp words in recent days about democratic backsliding and post-war Soviet domination.
A smiling Putin even put Bush behind the wheel of his prized 1956 Volga, a pristine white sedan, and let him take it for a spin around the grounds of his private compound 25 miles west of Moscow.
North Korea, it would seem is considering exploding a nuclear device as a demonstration.
They're now thought to have perhaps five or even six, as many as five or six nuclear weapons, and they may just let one of them off.
And if they do, of course, that would be at least a partial ding-ding for Major Ed Dames.
Whether it's used in anger or not, I guess, would be subjective.
I don't know when you set off a friendly nuclear device.
An explosion of insurgent violence killed seven U.S. service members in Iraq over the weekend, even as the Shiite-dominated parliament approved four more Sunni Arabs to serve as government ministers.
One of the four Sunnis rejected the post on the grounds of tokenism, tarnishing the Shiite premier's bid to include the disaffected minority believed to be driving Iraq's deadly insurgency.
A deadly aircraft accident in Afghanistan, kind of a dumb thing in this case, said to be the result of asking for an exciting flight on an otherwise dull mission demonstrating for visiting dignitaries how troops are sped into battle.
So I guess they said, let's, you know, everything's kind of dull out there.
Let's make this flight really exciting.
And I guess that's a little too much excitement.
The seven-story freak wave that slammed into the cruise ship Norwegian dawn last month apparently wasn't so freakish after all.
Rogue waves are much more common than people realize, and scientists are starting to predict when and where they're going to strike.
Government wave forecasts generally are about as accurate as weather predictions.
Wave forecasts made by the U.S. deal with data grid points that are 15.5 miles apart, which misses the fine points crucial to boaters.
Now, a Texas A ⁇ M University scientist, Vijay Pejang, I believe it is, of Galveston, and his associates say they can now actually predict the daily height of any waves anywhere off the coast of the United States for the next 48 hours across spaces as close as get this 500 yards apart.
People who live in coastal Maine are already using his forecasts when he proved his point by comparing his model output with measurements made by buoys.
His predictions frequently show waves as high as 30 feet, even in close in coastal waters, sometimes as high as 100 feet.
And of course, when this one hit that cruise ship, it broke windows, threw furniture across cabins, that kind of thing.
more in a moment Anybody out there want their own personal supercomputer?
You can get them now.
They've just gone on sale.
A personal computer that packs the processing punch of a miniature supercomputer has gone on sale here in the U.S. The DC-96 computer was developed by Orion Multi-Systems in California here in the U.S. and is aimed at scientists and engineers who routinely carry out computationally intensive calculations about the size of a small refrigerator.
The DC-96 contains a cluster, get this, of 96 interconnected low-voltage microprocessors, each of which is capable of running at 1.2 gigahertz, or 1.2 billion cycles per second.
Together, these processors give the machine a peak computing power of 230 gigaflops, or the ability to carry out 230 billion complex mathematical operations per second.
The machine also comes with a massive 192 gigabytes of memory.
Such computer power does not come cheap, however, as you might imagine.
And one DC-96, in case you're about to run out and try and get one, is $100,000.
But Orion Multi-Systems claims the DC-96 offers an alternative for those who normally have to share supercomputer power within a laboratory or a company.
So there you have it.
You can now get your own, your very own personal supercomputer.
Of course, you spend your $100,000 and then next year the 97 will come out or something.
A franchise is a store or a restaurant, you know, kind of like the Gap or Kentucky Fried Chicken, that you can find in every town in the U.S. and often abroad as well.
Now, space pioneer Burt Rutan says travel agents that can book you on a space travel vacation will soon be as common as fast food franchises.
This is from unknowncountry.com, Whitley's website.
He plans to build spacecraft with large cabins where you can walk around just like you can in a conventional airplane.
That is, once the initial takeoff is completed, or blast off, if you will, with large windows through which passengers can get an astronaut-style view of the receding Earth, the Moon, and perhaps even some nearby planets.
Passengers will float around the cabin during four or five minutes of complete weightlessness.
Kelly Young writes in New Scientist that Rutan's company, Scaled Composites, has been hired to build five spaceships for Virgin Atlantic.
Oh, I'm sorry.
That's quite a change.
Not Virgin Atlantic, Virgin Galactic, a division of Virgin Airlines.
Rutan sees the future of space travel as just another version Of McDonald's, as you will, with a tourist operator who arranges these trips in every mall.
In the first year, he says he can book trips for 500 people.
A decade after that, the number could reach 100,000.
Space travel will no longer just be for astronauts or the super rich, but Rutan thinks excessive government regulation may end the personal spaceflight industry before it even gets going.
In February of 2005, the FAA issued strict guidelines for space tourism, which do not bode well for the future.
Elon Musk, CEO of Space Exploration Technologies, is planning to build small, reusable spacecraft called Falcon 1 and Falcon 5 to ferry tourists into space.
He also complains about too damn much government regulation.
Why do you suppose the government would not want people like Berg Root 10 and other companies ferrying the world's population outside of our orbit?
Could there be something they, well, don't want us to see?
What do you think?
The Army is bringing to the battlefield flexible plastic sheeting that get this, converts light into energy, technology that could someday find its way into the casing of laptops or even clothing to power portable devices.
Conarka Technologies Inc.
has signed a $1.6 million contract with the Army, which it hopes is going to lighten the load for troops who must lug around batteries.
You know, batteries are very heavy, and they power everything from night vision, goggles, to GPS units, you name it, for the modern Army.
Troops instead could recharge devices by simply connecting them with energy-converting plastic sheets, replacing disposable batteries, and easing logistical requirements in remote settings.
I wonder if this includes nanotechnology.
As you know, there's quite a bit of nanotechnology on the horizon that would allow people to paint houses with this stuff and draw energy from it.
Well, you probably heard this headline last week, I would imagine.
What a story.
Four-month-old pup survives after its ears, eyes are all glued shut.
Glued shut.
Brittany Garcia heard her four-month-old puppy howling with pain, ran to its aid.
What she discovered astonished Des Moines police, angered the veterinarian who has cared for the dog.
The dog is named Precious.
This occurred last Sunday.
Someone used a strong, fast-drying glue in an attempt to seal shut the puppy's mouth, nose, eyes, and other body parts.
The veterinarian said it just dumbfounds you to hear about it, but it's even more shocking to see it.
Precious is a papillon-poodle mix.
Garcia said she heard the dog yelping outside her home near Grandview Municipal Golf Course on the city's northeast side.
She said he started to scream when I touched his ears, and I thought, what is this?
She rubbed a moist towel across the puppy's eyes, and they slowly began to open moisture, you see, around the mouth and nose, prevented the glue from sealing tightly in those areas, using medication and general anesthesia to dull the pain.
The glue was removed from the ears, eyes, and other parts of Precious's body.
He said when he paused to take a break, Precious would offer an appreciative lick.
Luckily, the puppy is doing great.
We managed to revive most of it.
It's amazing what people will do.
I think there is a...
Very special place.
I can only imagine what it would be like.
Absolutely unbelievable to me.
All right, we are going to take some calls now and sort of do open lines and anything you would like to talk about between now and the top of the hour.
And once again, at the top of the hour, we're really going to have quite a time of it.
This is a topic that, well, for example, most of you, I think, commute.
You drive a car, certainly.
And you've been buying gas lately, and you know what the price of gas is like.
It's up and way out of sight.
I mean, it's ridiculous.
I saw today CNN headline news was touting a big two-cent drop in gas prices nationally.
Isn't that great?
Two cents.
We go up 10 or 20 cents, and then they back off two cents, and we collectively go, whoo, boy, that's better.
Two cents.
And we forget about the 18 still left that, you know, and then it goes up another 20 cents.
Then it drops two or three cents.
And I think that is the strategy of the oil companies, frankly.
Ridiculous raise in prices, followed by two or three cents to make us all feel better.
If we recognize we're going to get a big shift in global weather patterns, we can begin to shift where we do our agriculture, slowly shift it, and kind of prepare for it so a lot of people don't end up starving to death.
unidentified
That's true, but the actual damage that's been done is irreversible at this point.
It's going to take the Earth itself to heal the damage that we've inflicted upon it.
But I think it's more than just us.
I think it's fallen in line with coming in line with the galactic center.
There could be all kinds of reasons for the weather change, including, of course, the cycle of the sun itself, the cycles, the Earth, big cycles and smaller ones.
The Earth itself goes through.
We have plenty of evidence of all of that from coring that's done.
We know these cycles come and go.
And so we could be in the midst of one of those changes or at the precipice of one of them, beginning to notice it right now.
But there is no question, the weather is doing some pretty odd things.
And so we're battening down the hatches here in the desert as the West Coast takes the brunt of yet another big storm.
When it gets here, the pressure difference that we're going to experience is going to cause incredible winds.
So we're in the midst of tying everything down here in the desert.
But all across America, if you look at the central portion right now, they're getting some pretty vicious storms, producing, I might add, plenty of static on-the-short wave bands.
From the high desert, I'm Hartfeld.
unidentified
Get it in writing with the After Dark Newsletter.
Subscribe by calling 1-888-727-5505.
Abomba.
I feel a soap, a little bit more.
Abomba.
Oh, my God.
Can you hear my heartbeat in this condition?
Do you know that behind all these walls Like the deep desire that I'm in there?
Well, then it's not working because you're obviously not oblivious, nor am I. Well, I saw the movie, What the Belief Do We Know, and that's got me conscious to the mind over matter control.
Yes, well, as I mentioned toward the bottom of the hour, sir, what they do is they raise the price of gas 15 or 20 cents.
We're all in a horrified mood.
The economy begins to tank.
Then they lower it two or three cents, and we all go, yay!
unidentified
That's right.
They're going to level it out at $2.39 a gallon, I heard.
As I mentioned, I drove down to L.A. and went through Baker, California.
The price of premium in Baker was $319 when I got through.
unidentified
Oh, man.
Yeah, they really got us.
You know, the patents on these lesser energy, environmentally, you know, better sound things should be more mandatory in our society rather than what's going on here.
We had a Manx cat, and it had two little kittens in the corner of our closet, and the next morning, the kittens passed away.
Well, my children were horrified, and the mother cat, for the next 24 hours, was pacing up and down in the basement, underneath the couches, just looking for her kittens.
She would not stop.
Well, our neighbor happened to have a barn, and they had a litter of kittens two weeks earlier.
So I had the bright idea, and I asked him if we could have a couple of their kittens, which also were makes.
So I took the two kittens, which were two weeks older, so they were twice as big as her newborns.
I put them back in the closet and rubbed them around in where her original kittens were born.
And I let Portia outside before I did this, and the kittens were upstairs in the closet.
And as soon as I opened up the door, she came in and started looking around, and then she just froze.
And then she just jammed upstairs, and she found the two kittens, and it had all the scent of her little kittens in it, and she was purring.
And the opposite of that story I had to read in the last half hour.
That's incredible.
She was so happy, I guess, just to be involved in motherhood.
She probably knew, but it probably didn't matter.
You're on the coast to coast AM with Arbell.
unidentified
Hi.
Yes, Mr. Bell.
I'm going to give you an explanation of why the so-called global warming is occurring.
Instead of just letting you and all your liberal listeners attack our glorious oil companies, our great American oil companies, our glorious oil companies?
Yes, they have done wonderful things for this country and have built us up into a wonderful powerhouse of economics.
But don't try to get me off topic here.
I'm going to tell you what is happening with global warming.
It is because hell is becoming hotter, Mr. Bell, as more filthy souls are cast down into the center of the pit of hell.
The boiling fires, the boiling pits of sewage of hell are becoming hotter every day.
And it's because of the pornography industry, the pornography industry, who is a so-called industry, which is not really an industry because there's not enough people to buy that kind of filth.
And how do you know that you're not going to be down there stoking the fires yourself?
unidentified
Well, I'm not going to be down there burning in the fires, but if God asks me to go down and turn up the heat a little bit, I certainly will help him out and do that.
But anyway, I'm talking about what I was going to tell you about is I just heard on Grudge that the government has just put out these little planes, and they've got remote-controlled cameras, and now they can spy into everybody's house.
Oh.
This is going on.
Uh-huh, and the police department's in on it, too.
So if you see a little airplane hovering or buzzing by your window, it's your government at work.
Looking right in.
unidentified
And the thing is, this goes against our Constitution, and I think that we need to get the people together in this country to start fighting because they said when you do anything that goes against a country's constitution, it's treason.
A lot of your individuals that get on the show and talk about various religions and philosophies and spirituality and all of these things, my question has always been, I thought prophecy was prophecy and that it is something that might manifest in the future and there's no guarantee that it will.
I just find it interesting that humanity as a whole seems to want to make all of the revelations of the Bible, the mark of the beast with RFID chips and all this kind of stuff, become manifest as a reality.
Do you think, in other words, you believe that we're causing these things to start becoming true ourselves, and we're trying to manifest what the Bible says will happen.
We're causing all this to happen ourselves.
unidentified
Well, basically, if you look at society as a whole and you look at how the government's doing things and how private industry is doing things, it's all in the name of Homeland Security.
And my personal observations is if you believe that the terrorists were the only ones who participated in 9-11, then you're uneducated.
That's my own observation.
But as far as my comment, most people don't challenge things that are written in various books, such as the Bible.
When Adam and Eve were in the garden and the Lord God, not God, but the Lord God said, if you eat of the tree of knowledge, you shall become like one of us to know good and evil.
Well, how was there a difference if God was supposed to be the omnipresent being of all goodness?
Why is there a separation?
Why is there a parallel or a paradox?
So a lot of people that call up and preach all this spiritual stuff, which I believe in the Creator, but not in the sense that man has put the connotations on it.
I think and feel that we manifest these things as an excuse to make these realities come true because we can't see the forest through trees.
And if you really apply that to society as a whole, I mean, you know, like the senators and everything passing the Homeland Security Act, and none of them read it, or the Patriot Act, and none of them read it.
Yeah, I understand why you're upset with all of these things, and I don't think any of us accept them without being somewhat nervous.
But if you were a senator or you were the president and you had to react to what happened on 9-11 and the ongoing terrorism threat that we face, what would you do?
Wait, wait, let me finish.
Let me finish.
unidentified
What would you do?
I'd make sure I had all my ducks in a row and all the information was valid and I had real proof that these things were real.
He, of course, thinks that the 9-11 thing was aided, abetted, if not committed by our own government.
As you know, I don't agree with that position at all.
And I think the terrorism threat that we face is absolutely real.
I don't think it's cooked up.
And I think that if you or I or any of us were in charge, we'd have to do some of the same things that have been done.
And I don't accept them without some nervousness and trepidation about our own constitutional erosion, the amount of erosion taking place in the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
That's occurring without question.
But to not react would not have been acceptable either.
And another seemed was a little bit more wild, but I think it was a guy that George talked with, little stickers that you put on either your windows or your gas tank and have interesting vibrational effects on them.
I guess my thought was, is there any follow-up on that, and have these things been either confirmed or challenged by either people in your world or the Coast audience?
Well, the theory is that some of them are standard jetliners just using modified fuel, and you can see them landing and taking off every day.
unidentified
Well, the theory I was getting at was with, because some of them are unmarked, and we don't see unmarked planes taking off and landing and or refueling, and there's so many people involved.
Maybe, sir, it's because they land and take off from engines.
unidentified
Okay, well, my thoughts were, they're not really aircraft, but they are whatever they're spraying is, well, of course, we don't know what they're spraying, but what possibly it is, they are actually UFOs, look like airplanes, only to throw us off.
So in other words, ETs that are doing something to this planet, and so we don't see that they look like sauces or cigar shapes or any triangles or whatever.
Do you think they're spraying good things or bad things?
unidentified
I would guess that I wouldn't have a guess on that.
I would imagine what they're doing clandestinely is probably not for our good.
And I don't know.
But if they are what I'm thinking they might be, because there's so many of them, where do all these planes come from?
And now, and they're spraying, and whatever they're doing in disguise, if they can have craft that defy gravity and defy conventional aerodynamics, they can certainly have them look like aircraft.
Nobody would suspect that they are unconventional aircraft.
If there are ETs, are their motives benign or malignant?
And I think the odds are just about an even call for either one.
They may not be the fuzzy little creatures depicted in close encounters of the third kind.
In fact, they may be quite malignant.
We don't know that.
from the high desert in the middle of the night where we do our best work this is coast to coast to a m the the
unidentified
Be it silent, sand, or the smell of the touch, there's something inside that we need so much.
The sight of the touch, or the scent of the sand, or the strength of an oak leaves deep in the ground.
The wonder of flowers to be covered and then to burst up through tarmac to the sun again.
Or to fly to the sun without burning a wing, to lie in the meadow and hear the grass sing, and all these things in our memories hold the user to come to home.
Yeah!
Fight!
Fight, fight, my soul!
Take this place, on this trip, just go me!
Fight!
Take a free walk, and through my eyes, I'm gonna see, it's our freedom!
Wanna take a ride?
To talk with Art Bell, call the wildcard line at area code 775-727-1295.
The first-time caller line is area code 775-727-1222.
To talk with Art Bell from east to the Rockies, call toll-free 800-825-5033.
From west to the Rockies, call 800-618-8255.
International callers may reach ART by calling your in-country sprint access number, pressing option 5, and dialing toll-free 800-893-0903.
From coast to coast and worldwide on the internet, this is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell.
You may recall a short time ago on this very program, I read an article called The Long Emergency.
It was quite a long article in my you know from Rolling Stone by James Howard Kungler and I read the whole thing.
Or just very nearly the whole thing.
Well, it's magic.
Tonight, James Howard Kunfler is my guest.
James Howard Kungler graduated from the State University of New York Rockport campus.
He worked as a reporter and feature writer for a number of newspapers and finally, as a staff writer for the Rolling Stone magazine.
He's lectured at Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Dartmouth, Cornell, MIT RPI, University of Virginia many other colleges has appeared before many professional organizations such as the AIA and the APA, the National Trust for Historic Preservation.
Koezer also is the author of several books and regular contributor to the New York Times, Sunday magazine and op-ed page, where he's written on environmental and economic issues.
His latest book, The Long Emergency, describes the changes that American society faces in the 21st century.
We're actually starting through those changes right now.
in a moment james howard kundsler the Oh, I forgot to put up that photograph.
I'll do that, actually, as I'm speaking with James Howard Kunzler, and he is here right now.
Well, you know, I got into this after writing several books about the destiny of suburbia.
And however you look at that, it's very hard to avoid a reflection of what our energy future is.
And if you look into what our energy future is, you very rapidly come to the conclusion that we're having a problem with crude oil and natural gas.
And that can be described as the global production peak.
Some years ago, an American geologist named Marion King Hubbard, who came out of the oil industry itself and eventually went into academia, Columbia University and Colorado School of Mines, developed a model for predicting how much oil remained in the United States.
And he said, and this is in the 1950s, he predicted that the United States oil production would peak about 1970, that it would reach a certain point and that we would never produce more, and after that our production would decline.
We were producing 10 million barrels a day in 1970, and now we are producing 5 million barrels a day of conventional crude.
And that fact brought on the disruptions of the 70s, the economic problems and the geopolitical power shift from the United States, which had controlled the oil industry and its pricing mechanisms since forever, which shifted then in the 1970s to the OPEC nations.
I remember driving down to New York City at the height of it to see a girl, because I was, you know, 25 years old, and being the only person on the New York State Thruway and thinking, you know, something has really changed here, Mr. Jones.
But anyway, you asked me to characterize this thing.
The lung emergency really deals with the implications of the global oil production peak, which we are now either near or approaching.
And what this means is that at a certain point, the world will produce the maximum amount of oil in a given year that it will ever produce, and thereafter we will begin heading down the arc of inexorable depletion.
And I believe there are things that exasperate, make even that worse.
In other words, the second half of the oil after the top of the bell curve is going to be much more difficult and expensive to extract than the first half.
Yeah, the first half of the oil, you know, we started drilling for oil in about 1859 here in America, and we got an industry pretty well cranked up by the 1880s.
And that was all the oil that was easy to get.
It was closer to the surface.
It tended to be the lighter crudes that were easiest to refine.
And after 150 years of sucking that stuff out of the ground and using it and burning it, we're now left with the oil that is harder to find, the oil that lies in more forbidding places, or the oil that belongs to people who hate us, or the oil that is not as good quality.
A lot of the oil, to make a distinction, there's this substance called light crude, and then there's a substance called heavy crude.
There's sweet crude and there's sour crude.
Sour crude tends to have a lot of sulfur in it and is harder and more expensive to refine.
Yeah, now, a few years ago, just a few years ago, there was a lot of excitement around the idea that the Caspian Sea region of Central Asia had a huge supply of oil, and it was going to save us from this predicament.
And it turned out that they had a lot less oil than had originally been thought, and that it was mostly high-sulfur sour crude.
And so that sort of dampened a lot of people's enthusiasm.
But as we approach the global oil production peak and then cross over into it, there will be tremendous effects sort of thundering through our economies and our societies.
And a lot of systems that we depend on for our complex modern everyday life are going to start wobbling and destabilizing as a result.
Let's take care of a couple of very strong rumors that are out there right now and see what you have to say about them.
One is I've been getting emails from certain groups who, for some reason or another, believe that some oil fields, if not most, if we would just check, are magically refilling.
Somehow or another, magically refilling from beneath or that the theory that the Earth is generating continuous amounts of oil and these oil fields are just refilling and we should notice.
Well, that's a group of people who believe that the Earth has a creamy nougat center of petroleum.
People like Peter Huber, the author.
Well, I think the fact is, if you actually look at the situation, there is no instance of an American oil field in Texas or Oklahoma or California or anywhere else spontaneously refilling.
Well, what I say is that a lot of these oils, which are in the older producing areas in Texas, Oklahoma, and California, you know, places that have been pumped for going on 80, 100 years, these wells were capped because they were producing so poorly.
And they probably do have some oil left.
And there is a belief that if you go back in there with new technology like horizontal drilling and bottle brush drilling, that you will extract enough oil to make it worthwhile.
That said, it doesn't mean that the fields will not then deplete entirely, or that the oil that comes out won't be a tremendous amount.
It'll just be a bit.
And there are all kinds of bottom feeders in the oil industry who can make a living extracting small amounts of oil from played out wells.
Well, the North Slope, which we began drilling very heavily in the 1970s and 80s, was a great productive field.
And it was one of the world's last great discoveries.
And it is now officially past peak and in depletion, and is producing fractionally a few percentage points less every year and will continue to until it is finally depleted.
So it had a good run of about 30 years, which is about normal, it's about what the geologists expect.
That would be Prudhoe Bay and the fields associated with it.
It came online around the same time as the North Sea over in England and Scotland and Norway.
And the discovery of those two gigantic fields were two of the really last significant oil-producing regions that were ever found in the world.
And they pretty much did save our situation back in the early 1980s.
And they allowed us to sort of go back into our sleepwalking mode for the next 15, 20 years.
Well, Ronald Reagan said it was morning in America, but a lot of people thought he meant that you could sleep another six hours.
And that's exactly what the United States did.
So, you know, the tremendous production coming out of Alaska and the North Sea kind of equalized the pressure that was coming from OPEC and allowed the price of gas to stay relatively stable for about a 15, 17-year period.
Well, I was just on my way back from California about a week ago, stopped in Baker, California, and the price of premium there was $3.19.
I took a picture.
I just put it up on the website, folks, if you want to see it.
And just about $3 for even just regular gas.
So though that's slightly unusual, you know, we're paying a lot of money now for energy, whether it's gas or propane or whatever kind of energy you use.
It's beginning to cost a lot of money.
And I've noticed they raise it 15, 20 cents, go back two or three cents, and we all go, yay, we're happy.
And that was the great lesson of the 1970s was, you know, the oil price doesn't just exist in a vacuum.
Once that goes up, all of a sudden you get tremendous price inflation in all your household goods and all the necessaries of everyday life.
And, you know, back then the economists kicked back and scratched their heads and wondered what they were seeing.
And they pronounced the phenomenon stagflation.
In other words, stagnant economy with inflation.
And they were baffled by it.
It didn't fit any of the models they had created, which says something about the limitations of highly conventionalized economics, because it was really quite clear what was going on.
An eight-year-old child could have figured it out.
And the conventional wisdom is you see it in the rearview mirror a few years down the road because that's when the production figures actually come in and you know how much was produced, how much was actually produced.
That was certainly the case in the 1970s when the U.S. peaked in 1970.
And that event was signaled by the Texas Railroad Commission, an obscure little agency which had the task of regulating the pumping quotas for Texas oil.
And in 1970, they basically sent a message out to the oil producers and to the world, which was, you guys can now pump 100%.
They told them you could open the valve to 100% from now on, and that's all fine.
What that meant was that they could produce as much as they could possibly suck out of the ground.
What that also meant was that they had reached their production limits, their final capacity.
And in fact, if you looked at the production data a few years later, you saw that the United States never produced as much oil again as it had in 1970, that it began going incrementally down after that.
So the world is now in a situation where we have reason to believe we may be at or near the peak.
We're also seeing the automakers wobble a little in the U.S. I mean, this most recent price hike in the price of oil has...
I don't know if it's true or false, indicating that the bonds of some of the automakers were derated by at least one agency that derates these kinds of things.
Is that really going on?
I mean, the fact they're producing all these SUVs, are they that hurt just by this little price hike?
But it certainly isn't going to help them that they are all tooled up to produce nothing but large SUVs, and there are going to be fewer and fewer people asking for them.
And of course, as we know from our last go-round in the 1970s, you know, when you tool up these enormous factories and these systems to produce a certain kind of product, it takes quite a bit of change and time to retool the factories to bring out a different kind of product.
And, you know, we're talking about a 30-year process.
And I think it's pretty clear what happened, is that after the mid-1980s, when the price of oil started heading way down again, when the North Sea and the North Slope of Alaska came into full production, Americans sort of lost interest in economical cars.
And General Motors, you know, slowly but surely, and Ford, started producing large SUV type cars based on their truck chassis, their pickup truck chassis.
And they were popular.
They were a big hit.
And what really sealed it for them was the fact that they made a much, you know, whatever profits they were making at the time, they were making much higher profits off of these large vehicles than they were off the little vehicles per unit.
And so back then, they decided that it was in their interest to do this.
And they've just been sort of sleepwalking through the car industry the same way that the public's been sleepwalking through the last 10 years of American life.
The Iraq War was an attempt to set up a police station, an American police station, in a very unstable and very strategically important part of the world that we were desperate to stabilize.
I believe every American president of recent vintage, historically, has said we would, if necessary, go to war, meaning even nuclear Conflict to protect the access to and from the Persian Gulf, right?
Jimmy Carter defined this doctrine, which said that declared that the Middle East was an important strategic area to the United States, and that we would do what was necessary to secure its stability.
And that's pretty much exactly what we did.
Secondarily, the Iraq war was prosecuted to moderate and influence the behavior of the states adjoining Iraq, namely Iran and Saudi Arabia.
Syria.
Yes, Syria too, the Emirates, all the states down there, but principally Iran and Saudi Arabia, because they're two of the most important oil producers in the world.
I hasten to add, whatever the polls say, it does not alter the strategic reasons for our being there.
And one of the things that the American public, I think, struggles with is the notion that whether they approve of things or not, whether those things are necessary.
And, you know, it was a desperate attempt also to keep life in the United States stable because we had this enormous kind of economic system cranked up that depends utterly on reliable oil production from that part of the world.
And for how much longer do you think that's going to remain reliable, either way you look at it from a political point of view or even just how much oil is really left and at what price, more importantly?
There are a couple of things you'd have to look at.
One is, of course, what we were just talking about.
How long, how many years can the United States occupy unfriendly nations and how many can we occupy at a time?
And how successful can that venture be?
Obviously, we're not having an easy time of it in Iraq, and sooner or later, we're going to have to get out of there one way or the other, you know, whether we establish this successful democratic regime or not.
All bets are off, really, for Saudi Arabia.
Anything could happen there at any time.
You know, somebody could walk into Prince Bandar's office with a cell phone loaded with plastic explosives, and that would be the end of a large percentage of our oil imports right there.
There's also no telling what will happen with the infrastructure of oil, namely the wells, the terminals, the refineries, the pipelines, all of this rather delicate, soft, these delicate, soft targets that are all over the area that so far have not been destroyed, but could be fairly easily.
They are buying back their own stock and using their profits to buy other companies and merge with them, which, by the way, has the result of eventually getting rid of a lot of employees.
So they're not making any new investments in trying to find new oil.
And the reason that they're not trying to do it is that we have good reason to believe that most of the great discoveries have been made and that very little remains to be discovered in places where it is economically recoverable.
We know that the United States has been searched up and down.
It may be counterintuitive, but The fact is that the former Soviet Union, now Russia, and even China, have been relentlessly and remorselessly searched by their respective state oil companies because they didn't have to justify it economically.
You know, they could drill wherever they wanted.
They didn't have to report back to stockholders and tell them whether it was worthwhile or not.
So they drilled relentlessly in all these remote parts of Asia, including Siberia.
And they found what they found.
But it isn't likely that they're going to find any major new strikes.
And that's really where we're at now in the oil industry.
Well, they did pass Japan last year as the world's second largest consumer of oil.
They don't have that much of their own.
They have, I think, slightly less than we do.
And they are cranking up this enormous oil-based economy.
I tend to refer to it as the last great industrial economy.
They've started relatively late.
You know, a lot of people regard China as the coming great giant dragon of the 21st century, and I have reservations about that.
They are a nation, for all their current power and the great leaps that they've made in the last 20, 30 years in cranking up their economy, they are a society which is afflicted by tremendous ecological problems by orders of magnitude greater than anything we have here or can imagine.
You know, tremendous problems with fresh water.
Their water tables in the grain-growing regions of North China are retreating by about 10 feet a year, and their grain crops are, their crop yields are heading south at a substantial rate.
So they're going to be net importers of food very soon, if not already.
So they have tremendous energy needs and problems.
And you have to ask yourself, of course, you know, when does China start reaching out for energy resources?
And I think the answer is they have been very quietly and carefully reaching out over the last couple of years.
They've been making contracts with nations like Venezuela and Canada.
And they are doing civil engineering projects all over Africa and the Middle East, trying to curry favor with the various nations there.
And, you know, to a certain extent, it's just sort of a practical business thing.
A point may come when a nation like Saudi Arabia will say, well, you know, we've had all this trouble with the Americans, and they try to control us, and we have these cultural problems with them, and these religious differences.
And here come the Chinese, and they want to buy as much oil as we can sell them.
Why don't we just sell them our oil and not have these cultural problems we're having with America and political problems?
I think that you could say it another way, too, is that, you know, China is very close geophysically, geographically, to many of the oil-producing parts of the world.
They can literally walk into places like Kazakhstan.
And you have to ask yourself, will they do it?
Or will they even just extend their influence there?
Or how far will they seek to extend their influence?
Might they invite some of the Arab states under the protection of their nuclear umbrella and say, look, you guys were protected by the Americans for 50 years.
Why don't you try being protected by us now?
We have weapons that are very potent and we'll be good customers for you.
So come under our tent for a while.
And I think that that's sort of the expectation for the next 10 years.
God, I hadn't thought of any of this, but I'm sure to the Saudis the Chinese would be considerably, I don't know, a more comfortable sell if they're going to get the same money and virtually the same protection, then you're right.
Yeah, well, it also brings us back to this question of the United States.
And realistically, how long can we afford to continue to occupy physically these countries where they're trying to blow up our soldiers every day and succeeding?
And it's costing us $80 to $100 billion a year to do it.
How long can we do that?
And if you think about it for a while, it's hard not to come to the conclusion sooner or later that America may have to withdraw back into the Western Hemisphere sooner or later.
We're talking about the book, his article in Rolling Stone, The Long Emergency from the High Desert in the Midst of the Night.
I'm Mark Bell.
Stay right where you are.
because we don't even need a fortune teller to tell you your future I can't survive
unidentified
I can't survive I've defeated you all
before Waterloo Promise to love you forevermore Waterloo Couldn't save me if I wanted to Waterloo Knowing my fate is to be you Waterloo Finally crazy my boy
My boy I tried to hold you back but you were stronger To talk with Art Bell, call the wildcard line at area code 775-727-1295.
The first-time caller line is area code 775-727-1222.
To talk with Art Bell from East of the Rockies, call toll-free at 800-825-5033.
From west to the Rockies, call ARC at 800-618-8255.
International callers may reach Art Bell by calling your in-country sprint access number, pressing option 5, and dialing toll-free 800-893-0903.
From coast to coast and worldwide on the internet, this is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell.
The Long Emergency, a book by James Howard Kunzler, who is my guest right now.
That long emergency being just about to begin.
James, China, before we leave the subject of China, how likely is it, as you pointed out, they have a massive number of nuclear weapons, fully capable of really putting us in a mess if it got down to that?
How likely is it that as the pinch gets really severe, we could end up in a conflict with China?
And in fact, Robert Kaplan has a very interesting piece on that in the current Atlantic Monthly magazine.
Although I don't happen to agree with his view, Kaplan's view is that we're going to see a kind of renewed Cold War with a new Cold War partner, so to speak, and that all the action will be in the Pacific region.
And I don't really see it that way at all.
I actually see the world becoming a somewhat larger place.
As we were talking before the break about whether the United States could indefinitely occupy these Middle Eastern nations to keep the Middle East stabilized, to sort of police the region.
And my conclusion is that sooner or later the U.S. is going to bankrupt itself or exhaust itself militarily just in that policing duty.
And that sooner or later we will have to withdraw into our hemisphere.
But you know, and there's every reason to believe that there's going to be mischief over Taiwan.
And we have treaties with Taiwan that oblige us to protect them.
But when you really get down to it...
Well, when you really get down to it, I wonder whether we would do a very quick re-evaluation on what our true interests were.
And I'm not sure that we have an enormous interest in keeping Taiwan as an independent entity from the greater Chinese nation itself.
I can't see the U.S. getting into a nuclear exchange over that.
So that remains to be seen.
I differ from Kaplan.
I think that we are with the United States Navy.
But it raises the question for control of what?
Well, I think the answer is for control of the sea lanes where the oil is transported.
And the Chinese want to make sure that they can defend those transportation routes.
But, you know, oddly enough, we now have these very important economic relations with China which involve this pipeline of manufactured goods, you know, of all the stuff that fills up the Walmart and the Kmart, which has been coming over to us endlessly for the last 20 years.
And so you wonder, under any scenario that has us coming into serious conflict with China, what happens to the U.S. retail economy?
What do people think is going to happen with that?
Well, of course, that's a two-way street, too, though, James.
And since they're producing all of these things and making a great deal of money from it, they might be loath to get into a conflict with their biggest market.
I think what we'll see happen, in fact, will be a bit different.
As the oil markets wobble, and this brings us back to the United States, as the oil markets wobble, I think that all large entities in the United States, corporations, governments, even large agricultural systems, are going to find themselves in trouble.
Really, anything large is going to be in trouble, anything that is done on a giant scale.
And one of the easier ones to talk about is Walmart and the businesses like it, the national chain retail system that we had devised for ourselves for carrying on trade in America, retail trade.
So we depend on these enormous systems, the Walmart warehouse on wheels where they're sending 18-wheel tractor trailers continually all over America with all these plastic waiting pools and mix masters and trucks full of women's clothing and plastic flip-flops and garden tools and all this stuff coming from China,
being made in China, and is circulating continually around the United States until it lands in the Walmart in Altoona, Pennsylvania.
This is a system that is not going to prove to be very resilient, especially in the face of wobbling oil prices, fluctuating oil prices.
You know, first of all, it's a living arrangement, and it's also an economy.
It can also be viewed in sort of macroeconomic historic terms as, and this is how I would put it, the greatest misallocation of resources in the history of the world.
The greatest misallocation of resources in the history of the world.
We poured all of our post-war wealth into building this infrastructure for daily life that has one outstanding characteristic, which is that it has no future.
And the future is now here.
And so you have to ask yourself, what is the destiny of this living arrangement we've created for ourselves?
You know, we also have the problem that the dirty secret of the American economy for the last 20, 30 years is that it has come to be based mainly on the creation of ever more suburbia and the furnishing of it and the accessorizing of it and the servicing of it.
And if you subtract all of that, you know, the home building and the tanning huts and the burger barns and the strip mall building and the automobiles and, you know, motoring around continually, and you subtract all that activity in motion from the American economy, there isn't a whole lot left besides open heart surgery and haircutting.
And so people ask me, why does the American leadership seem so clueless about this issue?
Why aren't they preparing the American public for this post-cheap oil future?
First, let me answer my own question, my own rhetorical question.
The reason that we're being so poorly prepared is that nobody wants to touch this issue about what the American economy really is and the fact that it's utterly dependent on this chain of suburban activities, the building of ever more tract houses, the building of ever more strip malls and big box stores.
And sooner or later, we're going to bump up against some very uncomfortable limits.
We already are.
One of them is that the middle class in America has been struggling for a while to keep their incomes up, to keep their wages up.
In fact, it's been a losing battle.
And a great deal of the retail action for the last 10 years has simply been people giving their credit cards a workout.
And we know where that leads.
And we know that that has to stop sooner or later.
So the reason we don't hear about this from our leaders is that they're terrified that if this game of musical chairs stops with the suburban economy and the economy based on building suburban houses, that there won't be a whole lot left.
And that means a lot of unemployed people and a lot of angry unemployed people who are going to be bewildered about the loss of their entitlement to the American dream.
Well, for one thing, we may not, you know, big cities are going to be in as much trouble as suburbia, especially the biggest ones, places like Chicago, New York, L.A. New York and Chicago especially being overburdened with exactly the kinds of skyscrapers and large buildings that we're going to have trouble with in a post-cheap energy economy.
But getting back to my point, you have to look, for example, to the problems that we will encounter in agriculture when the cheap oil economy starts to falter.
You know, we produce all the food for our nation, in essence, by pouring oil on the soils of the Midwest and pouring fertilizers made out of natural gas on the soils of the Midwest.
And so we have this agriculture based on large corporate entities producing cheese doodles and Pepsi-Cola for the American diet.
And that is not something that is going to continue for very long.
And we are going to get in severe trouble with food production.
The upshot of it all is that probably within the next 20 years, we're going to have to be producing a lot more of our food locally and in a different way, in a smaller scale, probably using a lot more human labor.
And I think there will be a lot of turbulent movement of people away from suburbia and even away from our largest cities.
The age of the 3,000-mile Caesar salad is coming to an end.
We're going to have to make other arrangements.
But, you know, we're also going to have tremendous problems with employment as vocational niches disappear and whole industries begin to wither.
And a lot of those people, I think, are going to find themselves one way or another, sooner or later, redirected into agriculture, which I believe will come much more to the center, return back to the center of American life.
It's a picture that I think is very hard for the average citizen to comprehend.
And yet I think that's exactly where we're heading.
Well, you know, circumstances will really dictate what happens with that.
It certainly depends how long we can maintain the kind of friendly trade relations that we have.
People assume that globalism is a permanent institution, when in fact it's really just the product of a kind of transitory period of certain conditions, a certain growth medium.
There was a wonderful article in the magazine Foreign Affairs about a month or two ago by Neil Ferguson, the young historian at Harvard.
And he was describing the first period of globalism that began in the 19th century, just after the Franco-Prussian War around 1870, and continued until 1914.
And, you know, this is this wonderful era of the late 19th century, turn of the century, sometimes known as the Belle Polque, the beautiful era.
It was part of the progressive era in the United States.
This era of tremendous prosperity and technological innovation, you know, all these wonderful things being invented, the car, the railroad, the telephone, motion pictures, phonographs, airplanes, you know, you name it.
And tremendous global trade going on in this 45-year period.
And then it all comes to an end with World War I and this tremendous calamity.
And it isn't really resumed again until the 1960s or 70s when, you know, after a Second World War, those nations involved begin to recover and globalism resumes.
So we're in kind of the second phase of globalism.
So when you look at the oil companies, James made an awfully good point that they're not looking for new oil, particularly, not investing money in that area, but instead of buying back their own stock and divesting and looking at other things.
James Howard Kusler writes in a very blunt, in-your-face fashion, telling you what's about to happen, what is happening with regard to energy and our economy.
And it seems to me, James, that in every, even the biggest disasters, there are winners and losers.
So there are going to be areas that will do and people that will do better than others during this long emergency.
Can you pick out any of the winners or good places to be?
Well, this is a kind of fascinating aspect in reflecting on where we're going and what's going to happen with us.
And, you know, of course, I don't pretend to have a crystal ball, but I think that there are some predictions that you can make.
They're already pretty clear.
This period I call the Lung Emergency will be one of economic hardship, political turbulence, and some parts of the United States are going to do better than others.
I'm rather pessimistic about the southwest.
Phoenix, Las Vegas, which you apparently live near.
The excitement will be over in Las Vegas.
Tucson, these places are going to have really severe problems on top of the energy problems they face.
Well, first of all, you're going to have severe problems with water.
You're already bumping up against those problems, especially in the Las Vegas area.
That's quite right.
And they're only going to be exacerbated by the problems that you have with petroleum and natural gas.
It's hard to, you know, people think about, you know, cheap air conditioning in Phoenix.
Phoenix is virtually unlivable without some kind of air conditioning relief.
You get 100 days a year with three-digit temperatures.
Correct.
And it's really hard to take.
And air conditioning has made it possible.
Not just air conditioning, but cheap air conditioning that most people can afford at some level.
And so on top of that, and water problems, and friction with Mexico, which I think is going to continue and become worse, because as the American economy suffers and stumbles, the Mexican economy will suffer by another order of magnitude.
And that will tend to increase the volume of people seeking to leave Mexico and come north, even if America is struggling.
And I think that friction is going to increase and become a much more severe problem.
We are, after all, working on a number of other energy sources.
Now, there's no magic bullet yet, but wind energy and solar energy and some of these hydrothermal, some of these other things we're working on, biodiesel, there's no single solution, but it looks like there may be an array of possible alternative solutions out there that could, at the very least, slow what you're talking about.
And indeed, there's plenty of reason to believe that we will be using virtually all of these things in the years to come.
But I would direct you to really a basic formula, which is that no amount of alternative fuels or renewables or systems for using them is going to allow us to run the United States the way we're used to running it, or even a substantial fraction of it.
And so it leads to a consideration of what actually might happen.
And I think what you'll see is that some of these systems of solar, wind power, hydropower, you know, there are more esoteric ones even, I think that some of them will be used on a very local basis, perhaps even on a household basis.
But we're not going to just plug and play the equipment that we're now using.
You know, we're not going to run the interstate highway system on biodiesel.
I've been having a correspondence with biodiesel enthusiasts by email for the last 10 days.
Well, for example, if you reflect on the idea that industrial agriculture in America based on fossil fuel inputs is going to be in trouble and that we're going to have to change the way we do farming and food production,
one of the basic conclusions you come to is that we are probably going to need more acreage to make up for the crop losses that we will have as a result of not being able to pour fertilizers and pesticides on the soil.
It will take more acres to grow an equivalent amount of food.
I'm talking about biodiesel fuels as one of the alternatives that people are proposing.
And a lot of people think we're just going to take X amount of acreage and devote it to growing soybeans or hemp or algae or something that will produce oil and that we'll run the interstate highway system on these crops.
I wonder if we're going to be able to do it at all.
This is the point I'm making, is that I think we're vastly underestimating the amount of cropland we're going to have to dedicate not only to growing food for human beings, but in addition, growing feed for working animals, which requires tremendous amount of dedicated cropland and acreage.
And, you know, the biodiesel people have this kind of weird suburban view of things.
It's a kind of a gee whiz, you know, here I am sitting in front of my computer having fun making algorithms and looking at the screen, but I'm not really thinking of the real world out there.
And the real world is we're going to need a lot more acreage for growing food for humans and for animals.
And I'm not convinced at all that there's going to be much land that we can devote to growing biomass for these biofuels.
I think it's a chimerical kind of pursuit, a quixotic, excuse me, a quixotic pursuit.
What you describe must be obvious to more than just you.
I mean, it's virtually a national security issue all the way around, no matter how you crack it up.
It's a national security issue.
So what is our leadership doing?
I mean, most Americans would expect as we look at something of this magnitude, we have something along the lines of a Manhattan Project to come up with something to stop what otherwise is ahead for us.
We are lost in raptures of infotainment from top to bottom.
Let me give you an example of something that we could do that we're just not doing anything about.
If we could restore the passenger railroad system in the United States, we could take a very significant amount of pressure off of our oil imports because so much of our oil is dedicated to running cars.
If we could restore the passenger rail system, we could take a lot of the pressure off of the airports that are now suffering from tremendous congestion and flight delays because they're running all these flights between cities that are 400 miles apart that would be much better served by rail.
So if we could restore the National Railroad System, that would do a lot for the morale of the American public and give them a sense that they had some power to help themselves and affect their own lives in the face of these energy problems that are coming down at us.
But this is the one thing that nobody wants to do.
Certainly if it was run at the level above the kind of Bulgarian National Railroad Service that we run it at now.
People will not take trains that arrive three hours late.
People will not take trains that do not show up on time.
But they will take trains that leave on time, that follow timetables, that are reliable.
And we just haven't had that in this country for years.
And it would give people at least a significant new choice.
And we wouldn't have to be running our cars all the time for everything that we do.
Especially for the, you know, it's one thing to talk about, you know, making those seven trips a day to the school, the Walmart, the soccer field, the pharmacy, et cetera, et cetera.
It's another thing when you're talking about people who have to go from Columbus, Ohio to Cleveland.
And there are plenty of them every day.
All these people out there piloting their own vehicles, making these 325-mile trips, these tedious and often dangerous trips, for people who are 70 years old behind the wheel.
That's not a good thing for everybody to be the pilot of their own vehicle.
Anyway, there are models for this in other parts of the world where it happens to work pretty well, and we just don't want to do this.
we're too intellectually and economically lazy to begin this process.
And you can get to a train station and hop on a train to Amsterdam and get to Amsterdam and take a tram into the heart of Amsterdam without ever having to get into a car and without suffering because of it.
People in Europe don't feel like losers because they're getting on trains.
But it's obviously a different social experience.
You have to feel that it's okay to be with other human beings acting in a civilized manner.
The fact of the matter is we're not going to be able to continue living the way we're living anyway, so we're going to have to do this whether we like it or not.
I think the nut of the problem we're talking about is why haven't we started talking about it?
Why didn't, you know, I happen to not be a Bush voter.
I happen to have been a registered Democrat, although not a happy one.
John Kerry didn't say a word about restoring passenger railroad service.
And it was one of the few things that he could have said that would have encouraged Americans to feel some confidence about our ability to do things and get things done.
We should be doing everything possible to get rid of the incentives to continue to build more suburban sprawl.
Because everything that we put in the ground now is going to have a tragic outcome.
Every housing development that is getting started now, every new strip mall that goes in, is going to be just one more dysfunctional entity in three or five or ten years.
And there's going to be a tremendous liability for American civilization.
But, you know, as we started saying earlier, some places will do better than other places.
I happen to think that the Northeast and the Upper Midwest will do somewhat better than the Sun Belt.
Why?
Well, I think what you'll see in the Sun Belt is that it will suffer in proportion exactly to the degree that it benefited from the last 30 years of the final cheap oil fiesta that we've been enjoying.
Well, we're going to have problems with that for sure.
But, you know, one of the other problems in the Sun Belt is that up until really just after World War II, the Eastern Sun Belt, the wet Sun Belt, you know, the states of the old Confederacy, were generally agricultural states.
There were few cities of consequence.
There were a lot of towns, but few great cities of consequence right after World War II.
And most of what happened in the South after World War II was really the result of this cheap oil fiesta and the suburban building program that went with it.
And so most of the construction in the South, most of the stuff that exists is new.
And most of it is not going to work very well.
It's going to be much more of a liability for people in the Sunbelt and for the kind of economy they're going to have to transform themselves into.
And I think that there are all sorts of hidden consequences that haven't really begun to show yet.
And one of them is this, that as this suburban infrastructure for daily living becomes worthless and dysfunctional in the South, I think you're going to see a great deal of conflict arise out of it.
And some of it may even become violent as this society attempts to kind of reallocate our resources and reallocate our land for different purposes.
Well, for one thing, I think that you'll see in the NASCAR belt, as I call it, I think that there is a kind of an attitude of hyper-individualism that is pretty common.
The notion that the individual rights are supremely important.
There is.
And this combines with a romance for firearms and violence and the idea that firearms should be used liberally in defense of hyper-individualism.
And I think that a lot of these things will combine to produce some very unfortunate politics in the South, a politics of grievance and resentment that is liable to boil over into violence, especially with the suburbs tanking and people losing their homes and all of their investments and their livelihoods.
And I think we'll see...
Well, I think we'll just see, for starters, a lot of conflict in the South between the people who are hanging on and the people who are doing very poorly.
A lot of this conflict may arise around the issue of the reallocation of land because we're not going to be using it for suburbia anymore.
We're probably going to have to return to local agriculture.
the hallmark of the period of the long emergency is that we're going to have to live profoundly and intensely local.
The book is The Long Emergency by James Howard Kunsler.
And in a moment, I'm going to ask him, I wonder how it goes saying things, you know, telling the American, the world, things that it doesn't want to hear.
Usually in such situations, the messenger is not treated well at all.
I'd like to remind my audience that a very great deal of the information I use, and incidentally that relates to the long emergency, the article sent me that I ended up reading, a lot of these things, most of them I use on the show, are sent to me.
So if you have something of great interest, an article or anything at all, really, I'm available on the internet, of course, artbell at mindspring.com or artbell at aol.com.
That's A-R-T-B-E-L-L at mindspring.com or AOL.com.
Now, James, generally when somebody like yourself writes something like you've written, you know, you're telling people things they really, really don't want to hear.
As you point out, we're sleepwalking through this and they don't want to hear the kinds of things you've said tonight.
So how has it gone down?
I mean, the messenger is usually shot in situations like this.
I hold the public very much accountable for their own predicament.
The public wanted to build this suburban drive-in utopia for themselves, and they've gotten exactly what they wanted.
You know, I see this a lot in the struggles that have occurred over Walmart over the last 20 years, because I've been often brought into various communities to help some battle against a Walmart here and there.
And the fact of the matter is there's always some sizable faction of the local population that wants the Walmart very badly.
Now, in my opinion, they're often making a choice that goes very much against the self-interest of their community because the Walmart will come in and, in effect, destroy their local economy.
And it's happened time and time and time again, and we've all seen it.
And yet Americans have not been able to make the connection that, you know, that there's a reason why it's important to have a local class of people engaged in retail and wholesale and these fine networks of economic interdependency and why they matter to a locality.
Americans have basically sold themselves down the river to save $9 on a hairdryer, and they've done it time and time and time again.
So our own behavior collectively has been somewhat foolish over the last, you know, through the post-war period and accelerating, especially in the last 20 years or so.
But of course, you know, you're living in one of those towns out west that really sprung up about 20 minutes ago that did not have really a deep and long infrastructure of commercial stuff and families running business going back for generations.
Quite right.
But here, back in the older parts of the United States where that's the case, you see tremendous devastation.
Most of the towns in the eastern United States now look like a former Soviet backwater.
They are so dead, and the desolation is so visible.
The boarded up storefronts, the shut-down factories, the empty streets, the houses that are not taken care of.
Well, I'm east of you somewhat by about 200 miles.
I'm over sort of near the Vermont border.
unidentified
Okay.
The reason I'm calling is because I realize how daunting all this information can be to most people that hear this for the first time.
And I think there's some optimism that can be taken away in an example that's been set nearby where I'm from, which is, I mentioned Rochester, New York, Ithaca, which is a town that's created its own currency.
And what that's done is essentially reversed the trends of export-based economies into essentially a localized economy where everything in the local is favored.
You know, they still use the U.S. dollar in Ithaca, New York, mainly.
The Ithaca experiment has been kind of an idealistic, cooperative experiment to construct a network of favors and barter and the ability to obtain local services and to promote that idea.
And it's been a good-hearted Experiment.
I'm not sure that it really is the way we're going to be doing stuff in the future in America.
I imagine we're still going to be using the dollar.
The dollar may have quite a bit less value.
We may see quite a bit of barter.
Sometimes I think that we're going to be living in a garage sale nation.
Well, I see it as a noble, small-scale, local experiment, but not necessarily something that has widespread implications for what's really going to happen in the States.
And, you know, it's also among a fractional population of the people who live there.
I happen to believe that our economy is largely a sort Of hallucinated economy right now.
We're kind of levitating, kind of running on fumes.
And it wouldn't take much to kind of knock the hallucinated props out from under it.
And all of this implies that we may have less of an ability to project our power internationally than we believe that we do.
I mean, we certainly have airplanes and nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and bombs and rockets and things.
But we're already proving that just to occupy one unfriendly nation is a very difficult enterprise and not something that we could necessarily sustain for a long period of time.
So I think that we probably will withdraw back into the Western Hemisphere, and the world will be a larger place.
Oh, you know, I think that any reasonable person could look at the situation and say, well, What seems really reasonable?
And at what point do we start exhausting our military and bankrupting our treasury in doing that?
I think that you could come up with a range of time that most people could agree on.
Probably something between the next 12 and 48 months.
We're going to have to decide whether we stick around there.
A lot of people talk about the possibility, the prospect of occupying Saudi Arabia for one reason or another, mainly to protect our access to their oil.
And in the event of some kind of a thing like a coup d'etat or a threat to the Saudi family or some kind of terrorism against the infrastructure of Saudi Arabia.
Well, we say that, but I don't think that we could really prevent it.
Could we occupy Saudi Arabia and even control the terrain there?
I doubt it after our experience in Iraq.
Could we protect the oil infrastructure?
Well, the conventional wisdom is that all you need is five pounds of Semtech plastic explosive and a camel, and you can blow up a most important pipeline that runs across Saudi Arabia from Riyadh to Jeddah.
Wildcard Line, you're on the air with James Howard Klunsler.
Good morning.
unidentified
Good morning.
This is Michael from Indio, California, which is not a very well-to-do but rapidly growing community, which is like a mixture of Middle America and the Southwest, as he was describing.
I do predict, and I'm only 25 years old, that I predict in 25 years the United States will become like the former Soviet Union.
That's what I predict.
And I'm only 25, and I have a very good knowledge that if I paid attention to our deteriorating public school history courses.
But I did give a lecture on Earth Day at a large, mega-large suburban high school here in the New York Capital District on Earth Day.
And I was astounded at how out of control, how rude, how stupid the kids were who were there.
They didn't want to pay attention.
Their teachers had no control over them.
And I had to throw two kids out of the auditorium myself because the teachers wouldn't do it, wouldn't control the kids.
I asked them later, why don't you control their behavior?
And they said, well, we can.
There are these elaborate bureaucratic procedures we have to go through to control them.
And so it was shocking to go to this school.
Anyway, it happens to be my belief that what we are going to see is that our large centralized school districts will not work very well for us anymore, you know, for very similar reasons to the other things in suburbia failing us.
These schools that depend on these fleets of yellow school buses to drive hundreds or even thousands of miles every day.
They're very hard to heat because they're all one-story buildings.
Moreover, I think education itself is going to change.
Right now, American High School amounts to very little besides an elaborate babysitting service.
You know, some kids do succeed at it on its own terms, but even they suffer from the futility of it.
And I have a feeling what we will see is schooling becoming much smaller, taking place on a much more distributed basis around the places we live, in smaller physical places, and that schooling for many people may not go past the eighth grade 10, 20 years from now.
I think the college is going to cease to be a mass consumer activity in the sense that it is today, and it will return, if at all, to being an activity for the elite.
Now, how much resentment and grievance that generates among the people who are disentitled from it remains to be seen.
I think a lot of large universities are going to dry up and blow away.
We're simply going to be a much less affluent society, and we're probably not going to be able to run many of these great universities, including the great land-grant diploma mills of the Midwest.
James Howard Kunstler is my guest, and what a dire message he carries.
The book is called The Long Emergency.
The Long Emergency If you imagine the economic social changes that have been outlined tonight by my guest, then you have to imagine a drastic change in politics because that reflects, of course, what's going on.
And so how will American politics change through this period of time?
Ah, well, we were talking a while ago about this new phenomenon that I think we'll be seeing in the years ahead, the formation of what I call a formerly middle class, a large former middle class.
And they will be full of grievances and resentments, and they will be bewildered by the loss of their entitlements to life in a drive-in utopia.
And I think that they may even be so angry that they will vote for corn-pone Nazis or people like that, people who will make George Bush look very mild indeed in comparison.
Really?
Now, having said that, I have to qualify that by adding that I think that the federal government will become progressively less powerful rather than more powerful in the years ahead.
Remember, I said anything big, anything on the large scale.
Yeah, whether it's government or Walmart or large industrial cargill type farming operations, anything big is going to wither during the long emergency.
And a lot of my friends are very disturbed about the prospect of a big brother government controlling their lives.
I think that we'll be lucky if the federal government can answer the phone 20 years from now and that, let alone regulate our laws.
I do think on a local basis, on a local basis, we're liable to see a lot of extremism, and some of it may be quite dangerous because it will involve things like scapegoating and blaming our problems on various groups of people.
I think justice is liable to be a lot swifter and cruder.
We're going to not tolerate misbehavior, and we're going to deal with it probably fairly swiftly.
There are two points the gentleman made that I think are kind of interesting.
You know, one is he's generally describing what I would call the diminishing returns of technology, meaning that we think that technology is only a benefit in our lives, but in fact, it bites back a lot.
And so we have this big project in Boston where we tried to put the expressway underneath the city, and it turned out to be very problematical.
You know, this leads to a consideration of another big problem, though.
A lot of Americans are confused about the difference between technology and energy.
Often in this public discussion, you'll hear people say, new technology will help solve these problems for us.
But the problem isn't the technology.
The problem is the energy that the technology runs on.
You can find new technology all day long for all sorts of things.
Everything from running rock and roll music through your eardrums to running a Volkswagen on the residue of a French frying machine.
But if you don't have the basic energy to run these things, then it sort of doesn't matter what kind of technology you come up with.
Well, I would put it differently, although I've said that more or less.
What I am saying is that even if some miracle occurs and we discover some source of energy that we hadn't known about before or some way of using the things that we've got that we didn't know about before, there will still be this period of hardship and turbulence that we're going to go through that I call the long emergency.
So I see the period itself as being really quite unavoidable.
But I wouldn't completely foreclose the idea that the human race will discover some other way of running things.
Yeah, and there's also, you know, quite frankly, the prospect that the carrying capacity of the Earth for the numbers of human beings that are now living on it really has been exceeded.
And whatever else happens, we're probably going to have to die back to a more sustainable population.
Now, whether that happens over several generations or a millennium or just a couple of decades is a question that's up in the air.
And it's not necessarily something that I advocate one way or the other.
Something will happen, but I wouldn't want to advocate for it one way or the other.
You mentioned about the synthetic fuel, so I'll go on to another subject.
I think that the individualism to drive, you know, 30, 50 miles should be given up because it would be a patriotic thing to do and to keep the American way of life, to be able to go to the drugstore, you know, make these little trips.
And also, I think that if they design railroads, that they should make the subway cars or other cars, you know, more human-friendly.
You do feel like you're giving up, that you're a failure if you go into one of these things.
So if they make them prettier and make them, you know, more user-friendly, make you feel more important going into them.
One example, in the old subway cars, they used to have them like sixteen people together in a like a little rectangle.
And now you have these just these long lines and you really feel like a real failure in them.
So if they make these things, you know, more people feel more important.
Well, yes, you do need some agreement at all levels of government that these things are necessary.
Right now, we're having a debate in Congress about allocating something like $1.8 billion to saving Amtrak.
We're spending $80 billion in Iraq and a lot of it to fix the sewers and electrical systems of Iraq.
And we're not even willing to spend a small fraction of that maintaining our existing rail system.
And, you know, it's true we have a railroad system that the Bulgarians would be ashamed of at this point.
And we have to do better.
I don't happen to agree with a caller that Americans are going to voluntarily step out of their cars and stop driving individually just out of patriotism.
They will stop doing that when they're compelled to do it by circumstances and not before.
There's very little disagreement in the scientific community about that.
And we're going to be facing some additional problems.
In my opinion, this has most significance for our food production issues, because not only are we going to be facing the loss of oil and gas inputs, but we're going to be facing some very strange and perhaps devastating climate issues.
You know, years of drought, the inability to grow certain crops that we have been accustomed to growing in certain parts of the year, desertification of places that only receive marginal amounts of rainfall.
These things are all going to be part of the bigger picture of the emergency that we're facing.
I think that if anything, the problems that we're going to encounter with oil are closer.
And I think that because of this reason, that you don't have to run out of oil or even go very far down the arc of depletion before the major systems that we depend on start to destabilize and wobble and mutually amplify each other's distress.
So that when the price of oil goes up even moderately, that's when the big box retail stores start to have trouble with their business equation.
That's when the agricultural producers start to have trouble with justifying their production.
That's when people start losing jobs.
That's when the air starts coming out of the economy.
That's when people discover that the investments they've made may not be worth what they thought they were.
And all sorts of things start affecting each other and wobbling.
And pretty soon you find yourself, you know, in the beginning, in a very, very difficult economic situation.
You know, then you're confronted with the realities of really how you're going to use these infrastructures of daily life that are really seriously failing you.
Well, we're unlikely to have a hydrogen economy, at least the way the president described it.
We can make hydrogen and we can use hydrogen, but it's almost, you know, you don't, you get less energy from the hydrogen that you have to put more energy into the process of getting the hydrogen Than you get from the hydrogen itself.
Yeah, and I think there was also this idea that we would construct an enormous number of nuclear electric generating plants to get the hydrogen, and that we would be running the easy motoring system of America, the Interstate Highway and all of its furnishings on hydrogen.
But I think what you find really with hydrogen is that it doesn't scale.
That's sort of an engineering term.
It doesn't scale.
And it's true of a lot of the alternative fuel things.
You can do them on a small basis.
You may be able to do them on a household basis or even on a neighborhood basis.
but we're not going to be able to run the system of american society as presently constituted on the thing i would take it right now your book the long emergency is available amazon dot com all the bookstores borders barnes and noble the independent booksellers.
You know, there are a lot of people out there who recognize there's a problem, who would like to hear it articulated in a rational way and are interested in where we're going and what we're going to do.
And especially the young people out there who are going to be living most of their lives in an America that's quite different from the one that we've been used to.
I get emails every day from people who are making real plans to move to different places.
You know, people who are going to leave Los Angeles, for example, and recognize that that may be one of the more difficult places to be.
People who are thinking of new trades and vocations.
People who are in college learning things that they know that they will never be able to make a career of, like, public relations or marketing, you know, marketing.
Things that are not going to be vocations 30 years from now when they're my age.