The Long Emergency: Surviving the End of Oil, Climate Change, and Other Converging Catastrophes of the Twenty-First Century Reviews

• Peak Oil Is Real, But This Book is a Bigoted Rant

  
  By A31HAHF6ZD5PNV on 2005-09-21
  I very much wanted to like this book. I greatly enjoyed Kunstler's earlier works (The Geography of Nowhere and Home from Nowhere), and I am deeply involved in local activism to make my local community less dependent on oil. I have read a great deal about Peak Oil and have no doubt that it is real and will soon be the greatest issue facing America and the world.
  
  That said, I hated this book. Hated it. Hated, hated, hated, HATED it. Kunstler displays a suffocating sense of superiority over everyone else (including the reader) and a total intolerance to any view other than his own. In his world, there is no god but the Long Emergency, and Kunstler is its prophet.
  
  He explains the basic of Peak Oil well enough (although a much more thorough presentation can be found in Richard Heinberg's books). He then goes off on a rant about geopolitics in the Middle East, a lot of which is simply wrong, and the rest being already well-known to anyone who reads the newspaper. He has no real idea what's he talking about here, but gives the impression that he believes his words to be true simply because they are HIS words.
  
  Kunstler then describes various forms of alternative energy which others say could help alleviate the problems Peak Oil will bring. He dismisses every single one of them, as if with the wave of a hand. Many of these proposed solutions are simply straw men that Kunstler sets up in order to shoot down. Many of the most innovative ideas to help deal with Peak Oil- the ones Kunstler would have a harder time debunking- are not even mentioned. Rather than rationally explore all the options, Kunstler begins with the assumption that nothing can possibly work and then seeks only the evidence to support his own point of view.
  
  The final chapter deals with "Living in the Long Emergency" and is simply a manifestation of Kunstler's dystopian dream world. He describes America degenerating into a self-made hell, and he seems to delight in describing how horrible every place will be. The Southwest will be overrun by Mexican invaders, Asian pirates will devastate the Pacific Coast, fundamentalist Christians will transform the South into a theocracy, and everywhere there will be starvation, disease and total societal collapse (with the single exception, oddly enough, his own neck of the woods in upstate New York, which apparently will be fine). In particular, he singles out NASCAR fans and people who listen to hip-hop music as being horrible human beings.
  
  The book has no index or list of sources. There are very few footnotes, and none of them refer to any reliable sources. One gets the impression that the few footnotes were tossed in to make the book appear to be a work based on research, but Kunstler is no researcher. Where do his facts come from? He doesn't bothering telling us- we're just supposed to trust him.
  
  Despite his protestations on the very first page, it is clear throughout the book that Kunstler WANTS society to collapse. His resentment towards modern America (and modern Americans) is obvious on every single page of this book. He wants Americans to suffer because he thinks that we deserve it.
  
  Ultimately, this book is based less on facts that it is on Kunstler's personal social prejudices. For a better understanding of Peak Oil and its implications, I would recommend Richard Heinberg's "The Party's Over" and Paul Roberts' "The End of Oil." In those books, you get the basic facts of the situation and suggestions for how to make the situation better, without the insulting, self-righteous, holier-than-thou ranting of this work.
  
  

• Excellent General Overview of the Consequences of Peak Oil

  
  By A9R5Q77FHRJZ4 on 2005-04-23
  I have been following Jim Kunstler's work for about a year, and in my opinion he--and others--are providing an important national service by attempting to warn us of the consequences of Peak Oil. Mr. Kunstler's most recent book, "The Long Emergency," is an excellent general overview of the topic, plus some addtional information on other threats to the world in the 21st Century.
  
  Believe it or not, Mr. Kunstler is actually not propounding the most pessimistic scenario for a post-Peak Oil world. He is trying to warn those who will listen to start preparing for a radically different world in the years ahead.
  
  In my opinion, everyone would be well advised to read this book, as well as some of the other recent books regarding Peak Oil.
  
  

• Fuel Drop + Climate Change + Disease + Water Drop = Great Depression.

  
  By A1S8AJIUIO6M9K on 2005-10-24
  This is a brilliant piece of work, indeed so compelling that after glancing at it over morning coffee I set aside a work day and simply read the book. I take away one star because there is no index, no bibliography, and the author is very poor about crediting his sources. On page 163, for example, his observations about 300 Chinese cities being water-stressed, and about the Aral Sea disappearing, appear to have come directly from Marq de Villier's superb book on Water: The Fate of Our Most Precious Resource but without attribution. This should have been footnoted.
  
  Having said that, I consider the book itself, despite its run-on Op-Ed character, to be a tour de force that is very logically put forward. Indeed, although I have seen allusions elsewhere, this is the first place that I have seen such a thorough denunciation of how cheap oil underlies everything else including suburbia and Wal-Mart cf. Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price. I am also quite impressed by the author's logical discourse on how communities have sacrificed their future coherence and sustainability for the sake of a few dollars savings on Wal-Mart products.
  
  There is a great deal in the book that is covered more ably and in more detail by the other 600+ books I have reviewed at Amazon, and indeed, replicates much of what I write about in The New Craft of Intelligence: Personal, Public, & Political--Citizen's Action Handbook for Fighting Terrorism, Genocide, Disease, Toxic Bombs, & Corruption but, I have to say, with a different twist that I admire very much.
  
  I find the author's exploration of how cheap fuel led to wasted water, helping create cities and mega-agricultural endeavors that reduced our water at the same time that we consumed centuries worth of unrenewable fossil fuel, quite alarming.
  
  I sum the book up on page 180 by writing in the bottom margin: "Fuel Drop + Climate Change + Disease + Water Drop = Great Depression."
  
  I disagree with those that consider the book excessively alarmist, and agree with those that find fault with the author's documentation. An index and an annotated bibliography would have doubled the value of this book. The author is clearly well read, logical, and articulate--an unkind person would say that he has also been lazy in not substantiating his arguments with what intelligence readers value most: an index and a good bibliography that respects the contributions of others to the argument.
  
  The author in passing makes a good argument against our current educational system, and I for one believe that we need to get back to a system of life-long education accompanied by early apprenticeship and real-world employment and grounding for our young people. What passes for education today is actually child care, and the smartest young people, like my teen-ager, consider it to be nothing more than a prison.
  
  On balance, a solid 4, a solid buy, and worth its weight in gold if you act on his advice and begin planning an exit strategy from those places likely to run out of water, fuel, and transport options in the next 20 years.
  
  

• Shallow, inconsistent, and a racist to boot.

  
  By A1VPQ8QRPO03YO on 2005-07-14
  Having read a good bit of the recent scientific literature on the peak oil problem, in addition to the alarmist crap promulgated by authors like Kunstler, I agree that we may well be entering the global peak oil scenario envisioned by Hubbert, Campbell, and others with genuine credentials in the petroleum industry. However, given the importance of the issue it would be better not to indulge in a vague rant about the end of civilization. Kunstler's argument runs something like this: economy is dependent upon transport, transport is dependent upon oil, hence no oil implies no economy. Unfortunately that analysis skips over the question of efficiency without even a glance. The unstated assumption is that the only vehicles we can produce must have an oil supply as abundant as the current one, but that is simply not true.
  
  In the U.S. the average fleet efficiency is presently about 20 miles per gallon. Yet, in Europe it is possible RIGHT NOW to buy a four passenger, production car from either VW or Audi that will get 80 to 100 miles to the gallon. This is not speculation or science fiction, nor must we wait for technological breakthroughs. The cars are coming off conventional production lines TODAY. This means that over a few years time, the fleet efficiency could be QUADRUPLED without any special trouble at all.
  
  Nor is this anywhere near the best that can be done. VW has a two seat concept car that gets as much as 300 miles to the gallon on the highway. That's right - Boston to New York on one gallon with fuel to spare. This car is not yet in production, but the prototype exists, and performs as advertised. Moreover it is a very attractive car. I'd love to have one myself. Anyone can read about it on the Web, and VW can clearly go into production if it chooses to. Unfortunately, our friend Kunstler dismisses this entire set of facts without a word, even though these cars have been around for some years, and they have been rather well publicized among those who actually care about fuel efficiency.
  
  Obviously the remaining oil will last a lot longer if we improve the fleet efficiency by a factor of five or ten, but it's even better than that. The proponents of ethanol and biodiesel estimate that the Western world could produce enough of these fuels to cover about 25% of our current requirements given the current fleet efficiency. However, if we drive cars that are four times as efficient then biofuels would cover ALL of our requirements. Thus, we don't need the petroleum at all, and we can quietly give it up any time we care to spend a few years making the changeover.
  
  Kunstler does have a sentence or three dismissing ethanol as a net energy loss since modern factory farming currently requires large inputs of petroleum. However, it does not have to be that way. He envisions everyone going back to an agrarian life in which the land would still produce the food we need, but there seems to be no reason that it could not produce biofuels as well. Again, this does not require any technological breakthrough, but simply wider adoption of more energy-efficient farming methods. In short, he comes off as deliberately inconsistent when he suggests that we could grow food, but that somehow we could not grow the material to make biofuels.
  
  Finally, his remarks about Southerners are nothing more than racist garbage. I took the trouble to query Kunstler on this point by email, and simply got more of the same. At a guess I'd say he did his research on the question by watching old reruns of Hee Haw and Dukes of Hazzard. He said, among other things, "I suppose a lot of these Nascar idiots were suited to persevere through a lot of mindless hard labor -- up until two generations ago, many were sharecroppers." Anyone saying comparable things about Jewish folks from, say, New York City, or African-Americans anywhere would be nailed instantly as a racist, and the same holds for mindless stereotyping of anyone else. Racial and ethnic insults are always odious, but coming from a guy who claims to have the last word on the fate of humanity it is simply stupid.
  
  I wouldn't have given the book any stars at all, but the system insisted on at least one. The book is a waste of time. If you want to read about Peak Oil there are plenty of actual geologists writing coherent, well-reasoned books on the subject, and if you want to find about the alternatives to a petroleum-based economy there are similarly plenty of expert authors dealing with any given topic. Kunstler is just a shallow, obnoxious jerk trying to make a quick buck by cribbing from his betters. I heartily suggest that you spend your money elsewhere.
  
  

• Excellent and eye-opening, but too dire

  
  By ABN5K7K1TM1QA on 2005-10-29
  Here is the argument that novelist James Howard Kunstler presents in this most engaging narrative:
  
  (1) We have a "one-time endowment of concentrated, stored solar energy"--i.e., oil.
  
  (2) At this point in history, give or take a few years, most of that stored solar energy will be gone. ("Peak oil" is upon us.)
  
  (3) The unprecedented growth of our society is predicated upon cheap energy and needs a continued supply of it to maintain itself.
  
  (4) That growth consists largely of a gigantic highway and road superstructure with massive suburban developments in places that cannot sustain their populations without cheap oil ("nobody walks in L.A.")
  
  (5) This land use structure is particularly and exclusively designed for the machines of cheap oil, cars, 18-wheelers, SUVs, etc., which will become too expensive to run as the oil patch rapidly depletes.
  
  (6) There is no substitute for oil--not coal, not nuclear power, not solar cells, not wind power, not hydroelectric power, not hydrogen fuel cells, not cold fusion, not corn oil--nothing will be adequate. The idea that human ingenuity will come up some sort of alternative fuel at the price we are paying today is just a pipe dream.
  
  (7) Our government has its head in the sand.
  
  Kunstler augments his argument with these major points:
  
  One, regardless of what energy source we might dream will replace oil, we will have to build the structures--nuclear plants, hydrogen fuel "stations," solar panels the size of New Mexico in the aggregate, massive forests of wind mills, etc.--from an oil platform, at least to begin with. Note that we now use energy from oil to mine coal and to build wind propellers. We use energy from oil to build nuclear reactors. Even solar panels require an investment of energy up front to build the panels. These are massive investments that nobody is really planning on. By the time we get our heads out of our wahzus it will be too late: there won't be enough cheap oil left to build the infrastructures necessary for a transition to alternative energy.
  
  Point two is that our gargantuan agribusiness is almost totally dependant on fossil fuels to (1) manufacture fertilizer; (2) to run the machines that plow the fields and harvest the crops; and (3) to fuel the pumps that pump irrigation water up from aquifers or from elsewhere.
  
  Point three is that we are also running out of water. Desalination requires massive amounts of energy. The fossil aquifers are rapidly being depleted. Every year water must be pumped from greater depths until the aquifers run dry. Even aquifers that naturally replenish are being drained faster than they can replenish.
  
  Point four is global warming. Suffice it to say that some places may go under water and other places may experience unpredictable climate change. The Gulf Stream may cease to run, throwing much of Europe into something close to an ice age while tropical conditions with topical diseases will move north.
  
  Point five is that globalization, which is currently making us in the developed world rich--indeed richer than any peoples before in human history--is really a ponzi scheme in which we rob the future in order to pay for current prosperity. Additionally, we are exploiting the labor and resources of others to support our high standard of living. When oil runs out, our ability to benefit from globalization will be greatly diminished and consequently our standard of living will plummet.
  
  The net result of all this, according to Kunstler, will be starvation, war, pestilence, and at best a reversion to a standard of living that prevailed before the oil window opened. Human populations will shrink until they reach an equilibrium with the natural resources of the planet.
  
  This is the salient point behind Kunstler's argument, namely that we have already, many times over, exceeded the natural carrying capacity of the planet, and are currently being artificially and temporarily subsisted by a one-time beneficence that cannot be replaced. When oil becomes too expensive for the masses, the result will be what he calls "The Long Emergency" which will be extremely painful at best and at worse catastrophic. Already he sees the wars for oil being fought, and further down the line, he predicts wars for water.
  
  I agree with Kunstler that we have too many people on the planet. And I agree that our government and governments elsewhere have their heads in the sand. However what I see happening is a long glide from oil to coal (and attendant pollution) to a great reliance on nuclear energy (with all it dangers) to gradually reduced populations, to a gradually reduced standard of living (especially in the US)--which might not be so bad. We would have less obesity and chronic illness caused by too much consumption and too little physical activity.
  
  But I disagree that the "long emergency" will be as terrible as Kunstler envisions. As long as the slide down the slope is gradual, human beings will adjust to it, as we have adjusted to the many changes that have taken place since we left the hunting and gathering way of life thousands of years ago.
  
  In particular, I think even Detroit can make small cars that get 100 miles to the gallon. At the same time I observe that commuters today in and out of our cities travel at an average speed of around 30 MPH. I think we can commute in bicycles at almost that speed. What really needs doing is a massive re-education and relearning program leading to a complete change in the cultural ethos so that we value living modestly within our means and in harmony with the planet's resources. This means gradually reducing our numbers and our demands on the earth so that we return to being part of the earth's ecology, not its cancer.
  
  
• Important But Destructively Alarmist
  By AMKRDWAM5T6TU on 2005-04-25
  James Howard Kunstler is right to say that peak oil will cause an economic crisis and will change our lives - but he is so alarmist that he makes it more likely that it will change our lives for the worse.
  
  When oil production peaks, we will either move toward sustainable energy and simpler living, or we will decide that we can no longer afford to worry about the environment and move to produce more coal and nuclear power. Kunstler predicts that, after oil peaks, we will be forced into an economy based on agriculture and cottage industry, scrambling to produce necessities. If environmentalists all make this sort of alarmist prediction, people will decide that our only choice is to produce as much coal and nuclear energy as possible.
  
  But Kunstler's prediction is completely unrealistic.
  
  Most electricity is now produced using coal, whose production will not peak soon. There are plenty of ways to replace the minority of power plants that are oil- and gas-fired, ranging from coal to solar. We will have enough time to shift to other sources of electricity: if oil production peaks in 2005, it will not go back down to the 1970 level until 2040, and during those thirty years, high prices will provide a strong incentive to invest in more energy production.
  
  Ultimately, we could generate all the electricity that America consumes today by building solar panels covering an area of about one-hundred miles by one-hundred miles. Solar power now costs about twice as much as conventional energy, but cost would probably go down as solar panels were mass-produced, and even if it did not, the economy could tolerate the increased cost phased in over several decades.
  
  Solar power and other forms of sustainable energy could power factories and farm machinery indefinitely, so we will not be forced back to cottage industry and labor-intensive farming.
  
  Transportation uses oil, and this is where peak oil will change our lives. There will be more local production, particularly of food, as transportation costs go up. And people will not be able to live in sprawl suburbs where you have to drive every time you leave the house.
  
  But (as Kunstler knows) the New Urbanists have shown that we can build walkable neighborhoods that are more livable than sprawl suburbs. People who live in these new urbanist neighborhoods consume less energy and land but actually live better than the average American does today. Outdated zoning laws are slowing the production of these neighborhoods, despite their popularity, but the zoning laws will undoubtedly change after oil peaks.
  
  For environmentalists to win the battle of ideas, we need to make the same point about the economy as a whole: that people can consume less but live better. Per capita GDP today is twice what it was in the 1960s, but people are not really better off than they were in the 1960s. People would be better off today if they could choose to consume less, work shorter hours, and have more time for themselves, their families, their communities.
  
  There will be an economic crisis when oil peaks. GDP will decline by 1 or 2 percent a year for many years, because prices will rise dramatically and the Federal Reserve Bank will rein in the economy to stop inflation. Unemployment will probably exceed the levels of the 1930s.
  
  If environmentalists put forth a positive vision of the future, which appeals to the average person, the economy could change its course even more dramatically than it did after the great depression. We could see a mass movement toward sustainability and simpler living.
  
  But if environmentalists follow Kuntsler's line and say that the only alternative is an economy based on agriculture and cottage industry, an economy that barely lets us scrape out subsistence, then the average person will obviously decide that we have no choice but to move full speed ahead with coal production. Coal will only extend the fossil-fuel economy for a few decades before its production also peaks, but shifting to coal even for that relatively short time will release so much carbon dioxide that the world will permanently be less livable.
  
  
• Interesting but highly problematic
  By A3QS8ZJFX2NSLU on 2005-05-31
  First, let me say that I think Kunstler is right on many of his assumptions (that there are no viable alternatives to oil for running our current economy, that suburbia and all its connected infrastructure are a huge waste of resources and won't long survive the oil crash, and that this can potentially be a good thing). I also think he's gone a long way toward promoting discussion about the oil crash, which is why it gets the stars it does from me (I originally gave it 3 stars; I would take one back if I could).
  
  That said, the book has a couple of serious problems. First and most obvious, it's very poorly documented. There's no index and only a few footnotes. Every page is loaded with facts and statistics without any sources whatsoever to back them up.
  
  Here's an especially glaring example. On page 269, writing about the old local streetcar lines we used to have, he says: "The story of the conspiracy by General Motors and other companies to destroy the U.S. interurban system is well documented." Well, no, actually, it isn't. I knew about it, but most people don't. And that's all he says. He doesn't explain what happened, and he provides no footnotes or sources so that readers can educate themselves.
  
  Second, and far more seriously, Kunstler shows a disturbing tendency to rely on ethnic and cultural stereotypes. The sections on the South and on race relations are especially offensive. When talking about the South, Kunstler talks on and on about "extreme religiosity", "rugged individualism", and the glorification of guns without any consideration that these things may not apply to everybody. (He actually says "southern cracker lumpenproletariat". Puh-leez.) He also seems to be unaware of the Southern Democrat tradition of Christian-based social justice.
  
  In the section on race relations, he gets worse. I don't believe he's a racist, at least not consciously, but he does come suspiciously close to blaming the victim here. He looks at the worst stereotypes of rap culture and then assumes that inner-city life is just one big party; he refers to how hip-hop "infantilizes" its fans and says "children do not engage in politics" (page 299).
  
  These are the most extreme examples, but this sort of thing happens throughout the book (there are hints of it in the sections about Arabs and Israelis, for instance). In general, when he speaks of any culture outside of his own white, upper-middle-class New York enclave, he relies on stereotypes rather than providing any hint that he's ever actually met anyone from those cultures. This, in combination with the lack of citations and background, makes for a dreary, depressing book. Often, he seems to be using the oil crash as a scaffold on which to hang his every grievance about the perceived stupidity of modern life. He gave me the impression of a typical Baby Boomer ranting about things he doesn't like without taking the time and trouble to understand them at any but the most superficial level.
  
  Frankly, Kunstler is just asking for trouble from the right wing with this book. Without any sources to back up his statements, he's going to be immediately dismissed as a breathless doomsayer, no matter how right he might be. And he's not going to persuade anyone who isn't already aware of the issues he raises. And, finally, the stereotyping will put off liberals who might be inclined to agree with him.
  
  Basically, this book is a polemic. And, while polemic has its place, if you don't back it up you end up speaking to the choir. And if you turn off people with borderline racism, even the choir won't listen. Kunstler raises some important issues, and he deserves credit for getting people talking about the subject, but the book is far too intellectually lazy for me to recommend.
  
  
  
• Good Oil, Bad SF
  By A1TDMH9O4Y1D9L on 2005-07-22
  I heard about this book on Treehugger, the (n)Utne Reader and other places, and eventually the library here managed to ILL a copy for me. It's about the role of cheap oil in our society, and about what the end of cheap oil will likely do to us.
  
  Read this book.
  
  The back cover is the scary image of a horse pulling a ruined car. The same image is the cover of Stirling's Dies the Fire, and I find it frankly impossible to believe that this is a coincidence. In any case, Kunstler seems to be fairly well known as a social commentator who hates suburbia and advocates a return to close-packed urban communities, a "Smart Growth" booster, in other words.
  He begins with a reinterpretation of the twentieth century in terms of fossil fuel use, especially World War Two. As Murray and Millett agree in A War to be Won, I have added this idea to my lecture on WWII, which I recently delivered twice to summer students. He sees the 1973 embargo as the warning, which the US ignored (all except me; my whole life has been a bracing against the end of oil). Hubbert's Curve, which I'd heard of while I was still in Northern California, is a central issue in this book, with the peak predicted very soon, if it hasn't come already.
  The Mainstream Media are talking more and more about the end of cheap oil, but no one is talking as starkly and unpleasantly as Kunstler. He then goes on to explain why several popular forms of "alternative" energy won't work. I wasn't sure that I believed all of what he said. I am not an engineer, but windmills (to generate electricity and pump enough water for stock) can be made without oil. Plastics can be made from fermented vegetable sludge; I ran a game once based on such a world. Also, recycling will preserve existing stocks of metals and even plastic for a long time, if we make it mandatory to recycle everything, and do it right now.
  Other things he says make a lot of sense. Fusion or zero-point stuff won't save the US: there isn't time to build ten thousand huge power plants, even if the technology becomes available this week. But in the Mojave, where I live, the problem isn't shortage of energy. It's that the area is a commuter suburb. Yes, growth will stop here when gas hits five bucks a gallon. But this area could do all its local commuting in electric cars powered by solar panels on peoples' roofs.
  
  He's right in his basic thesis: that long before we run out of oil, the end of cheap oil will shut down the car-based American suburban culture which I dislike, and am part of.
  (sigh)
  His section on epidemics makes sense, and much of this has already been made clear by books such as Laurie Garrett's The Coming Plague. His indictment of suburbia has been answered, although not convincingly, by many writers. He's right about Wal-Mart.
  He's right about oil being behind the farming boom of the 20th century. But I am not sure that sending masses of people into the fields, Cambodia/Kampuchea style, as he seems to want to do, is going to be more efficient than converting tractors to run on electric batteries powered by solar panels on the farm where the tractor runs, and then using electric trucks to move the produce at 25mph across the US. Tractors and fertilizer are so much more efficient than hand labor that every nation which could adopt them did so.
  
  I don't understand all the stuff about finance, and I don't pretend to. However, any major dude can tell you that the US economy is going to go to hell when gas hits five bucks a gallon. His weird and kind of abusive language when he talks about housebuying is a prelude to his really mean closing to the book.
  
  The last chapter is a strange mix of serious prediction and low-rent science fiction, with some generalizations about the regions of the US that show that Kunstler doesn't know very much about some areas or have a lot of empathy for them. For example, I think that Oregon won't be in as much danger of invasion from China as he seems to believe,(without fossil fuels, that is) and Portland's gravity-flow water system means that very low-tech repairs will keep the water system working there for a long time.
  
  All in all: a good book to shock people and make them think. A bad handbook for the future of the US. This review is one of many. Read it. Make up your own mind and then make plans. But whatever you do, don't ignore the end of big oil.
  
  
• Peak Oil Alarm Bells
  By A3K8GRI3S0NLFJ on 2005-05-11
  Kunstler's portrayal of the coming "Dim Ages" is designed to scare the hell out of you. His provocative language is often valid, but other points are much more speculative or not fully informed. So it's more like a worst-case scenario for the aftermath of Peak Oil (+ global warming, financial meltdown, etc.). A key contention is that even if we try to switch to renewable energy, we won't have enough fossil fuels or time to support the conversion process or to maintain the new infrastructure. The result, he predicts, will be a relocalization of the economy around small towns surrounded by farmland. He sees global pandemics as the most likely way nature will rid itself of surplus human population as ecological overshoot intensifies.
  
  Kunstler may be right when it comes to the possibility maintaining the suburban US lifestyle, but we all know that there is a huge amount of waste in this lifestyle. Also, just because fossil fuels are used today for something, doesn't mean that we may not find good, if perhaps somewhat more expensive, substitutes. Transportation is, of course, where the decline of oil will have the biggest impact, with airline consolidation already imminent. But Kunstler dismisses synfuels made from coal, which are politically likely despite global warming. That is, when the going gets tough, coal will be one of the first things politicians will turn toward - we'll be lucky to make progress on clean coal.
  
  Kunstler does recognize that nuclear power is a much better strategy, given the reality of global warming. But he opts for nuclear because he dismisses wind power as unmaintainable - too subject to breakdown, requiring too much fossil fuel support. Here many would disagree, given a many decades supply of coal and nuclear, plus the remaining oil and natural gas, to build the renewables and reduce population impacts.
  
  Kunstler is widely read but doesn't have technical background to fully evaluate what he reads. A prime example of this is his assessment of the "global peak" of oil on p. 24. He defines this as the half way point - the year when half the oil has been used up. Actually the peak is, of course, the peak - the date of maximum oil production. Geologists only forecast that it will approximate the half way point because some version of the law of large numbers should apply to the fact that production profiles of individual wells and of regions are approximately bell-shaped. Production techniques could, and are, changing this to some degree, and we may have already passed the half-way point. Also, this half way point is half way to recoverable oil, not all oil, as Kunstler believes. The USGS includes 50% more oil out there - oil that geologists like Campbell and Deffeyes think will never be recovered at any price.
  
  Later Kunstler states that the earth is a closed system (p. 194), and he repeats the death-through-entropy mantra over and over. Of course, life exists on earth precisely because it is not a closed system - it has a continuous supply of solar energy input to overcome the natural tendency toward dissipation and disorder (entropy). Most authors emphasize energy and efficiency, not entropy. Kunstler even declares that "efficiency is the straightest path to hell" (p. 191). He's right in that efficiency applied to non-renewable resources just uses them up more quickly, a major point of Campbell. But for renewable resources, high efficiency means transforming order without dissipating much of it - the reverse of death-by-entropy.
  
  Nevertheless, Kunstler's wake-up call is much needed. Some of his alarm bells may be false alarms but others certainly signal life-threatening blazes.
  
  
  
• Not worth the read
  By A5HRZ6IHBROSI on 2006-08-27
  I tried to read this book, but could not finish it. The book had an interesting message, but it was lost in the inaccuracies, broad sweeping statements, and linear logic.
  
  His comments about Peak Oil were inaccurate. There are plenty of books (1,000 Barrels a Second, for example) that address the issues accurately with much more thoughtful insight.
  
  With regard to broad sweeping statements he makes comments like the southeast is prone to individuality and violence. He failed to mention that when it comes to a sense of community and willingness to help their fellow man there is no better place to live then the southeast. (For the record I am originally from the upper Midwest, but lived in the southeast for 7 years.)
  
  Much of his prognostications about the future are linear, that is if a then b then c. The author is in his late 50s and I would think by this time he would have figured out that life is a dynamic process that constantly adjusts to its environment. If the cost of energy is too high people buy better gas mileage cars, drive less, close off portions of the house in the winter, don't use the air conditioner, purchase smaller homes, etc. If the environment changes people constantly adjust including me, the author, and you.
  
  What bothers me most about the book is that young people with less "life-experience" will read this book and believe this is the way it is going to be. The author's book is just one more scenario of what could happen in the future. But if life is a dynamic process, the constant adjustments to the environment makes it really hard to predict what will occur.
  
  
• Notes From the Underground?
  By A2JX4SFPFOPXDS on 2006-04-30
  I'm quite sure that I've read this book before. Ah yes, Dostoevsky's "Notes From the Underground"! Anyone remeber his thoughts on modernism (hatred of the Crystal Palace formerly in Hyde Park London)? What makes me ill when I read this book is not Kunstler's lack of knowledge, but his absolute lack of objectivity. One gets the sense that Kunstler quietly taps his fingers together like Mr.Burns of the Simpsons when he thinks of civilizations moterized nature grinding to a hault one day due to a lack of oil. Kunstler, like Spangler before him, dislikes what he sees in the modern world. Unlike Spangler, I doubt that he is quite as certain about the future as he purports. Rather, what better way to call for a revolution of perspective (a return to all that is natural, and not materialistic) than to raise the banner of fear? Kunstler would like us all to stop our cars for a moment and think of the impending plight of horsepower yet again. Perhaps in doing so, finding something more noble.
  I can't say that I disagree with Kunstler's dislike of the materialistic nature of modernity. Cultures do seem to be melting away as people define themselves materially more and more often. But that is not what is at hand here. We are dealing with a book that purports that we are on an absolute road to doom. To this I would argue that Kunstler is not an objective cartographer of the future, and his grim augury should be shunned.
  Having said that, do read this book (with a careful eye). Do not, however, buy it. Take it out from the library. It's not worth owning, or rereading.
  
  
• Kunstler is an idiot
  By A25JZP7C0U8SMI on 2007-01-24
  I read several environmental books in early 2005, and treated most of them in environmentally friendly ways. Richard Heinberg's and John Roberts's books I borrowed from the public library, Mark Hertsgaard's I sold back to Half Price Books, Ronald Wright's Massey lectures I read inside Elliot Bay Bookstore during three lunch breaks, and James Howard Kunstler's _The Long Emergency_ I read in one sitting in a local Barnes&Ignoble. The theme of the book is simple. Humanity has already consumed about half of all the oil residing in Earth's crust, and that was the easily available half. Within a few decades, worldwide oil consumption will inevitably fall several times. None of the available substitutes are as good as oil. Energy will become so scarse that the Industrial Age will come to a slow end. In the United States, suburbia will cease to be an affordable way of life, worldwide movement of goods will crash (and "globalization" will cease to be significant), and large social disruptions will follow, which might have political repercussions such as red-white-and-blue fascism. Large-scale and complicated institutions such as multinational corporations will be unviable; economics and politics will be local and regional; lifestyles will be simpler and closer to the earth.
  
  The one thing that stands out in this book is a near-total absence of numbers. And the reason Kunstler doesn't have any numbers is that nobody does. Vaclav Smil's book on the energy perspectives cites some predictions from the early 1970s about the world's energy consumption in the 1990s that turned out to be spectacularly wrong. Likewise, nobody knows, what the energy landscape will be like in 2050. The US DOE has drums with over 400,000 tons of depleted uranium. If half of it can be bred into plutonium, and the plutonium fissioned (the fission energy of plutonium is 1 megawatt-day per gram), this will produce 2E11 megawatt-days of thermal energy, and in power plants with 30% efficiency, this will amount to 6E10 megawatt-days, or 6E21 joules. The annual energy consumption of the United States is about 100 quadrillion BTUs, or 1E20 joules - 1/60th of this number, and the annual electricity consumption is about 4000 billion kilowatt-hours, or 1.4E19 joules - or 1/400th of this number. I don't believe that the United States would rather starve than use up the energy from these drums. Of course, electricity is a far more cumbersome fuel than gasoline (and only usable for ground transportation), so the current American two-cars-in-every-garage lifestyle will have to end anyway - but it will end far less dramatically than Kunstler envisions it.
  
  The main reason I think Kunstler is wrong is that there are many feedback loops in a democratic society that will enable it to adjust to the shortage of hydrocarbons. Some of these are technological. For example, fertilizer is now made with hydrogen obtained from natural gas. Given shortages of natural gas, will there be far less fertilizer made, which will cause the agricultural yields to fall dramatically, which will lead to food shortages? I suspect that it is more likely that waste heat from power plants (both coal-burning and nuclear) will be used to preheat water for high-temperature electrolysis, which is well known to require less electricity than room-temperature electrolysis. Of course, care must be taken to ensure that if hydrogen blows up, it doesn't damage the reactor. Another thing I didn't see discussed is the fact that so much stuff has been made in the twentieth century that much of it can be reused for decades if not for centuries. Robert Sheckley paperbacks from the 1960s are still perfectly readable, and will remain so for many decades. Also, considering how much garbage has been generated in the last 50 years, I would be surprised if in the 21st century, much of it isn't reused, possibly for fuel: for example, thermal depolymerization can be run on plastic bottles from landfills and generate diesel fuel.
  
  There are also many social feedback loops. The fact that the educated public is now much more interested in environmental and energy issues than 30 years ago is a good sign, even if this means that it is buying books by ignorant ideologues such as Kunstler.
  
  
• hateful agenda posing as economic analysis
  By A2D7FZE78VO960 on 2006-09-06
  With so many serious perspectives available on "peak oil", there is no reason to waste time on this screed, which only uses peak oil as a platform to cast aspersions on everything the author hates (and he hates, of course, all that which he does not understand).
  
  He hates: the American south and its culture, Wal-Mart, interstates, strip malls, the Arab nations, and most of all, suburbs and the people who live in them. He loves: Israel, the liberal Northeast as it was fifty years ago, Israel, hateful rants, and Israel.
  
  Peak oil lets him indulge in wishful thinking about how the Arab states will lose their power along with their oil, how the suburbs and Wal-Mart will collapse without cheap motoring, and the greatest reach of all: how the South and West will, for some reason, suffer more than the northern tier states in an energy scarce environment that he is certain is inevitable. Despite the fact that it is the northern tier states that are most dependent on cheap natural gas and heating oil, and have the least access to alternatives: solar, wind, biofuels. This last is thus little more than a transparent rationalization that allows him to imagine the reversal of the loss of economic and political clout of the north due to the inexorable flow of the American population from the dying Rust Belt cities to the more pleasant climes of the suburbs and the south.
  
  Of course, he said all the same things before he ever heard of peak oil; back then he was making the same arguments about how Y2K was going to destroy all those things he despises. As were a lot of the other peak oilers. In reality, peak oil is an important issue that is impossible to draw final conclusions about because of a lack of hard data; it has, like Y2K, morphed into the latest doomsday fad. This is particularly true in the USA, which, due to a decline in the value of the dollar driven partly by excess liquidity created by the Fed around the turn of the millenium, experienced disproportionate commodity inflation in the '05 period and thereabouts. In other currencies the rise wasn't nearly as dramatic, so the peak oil cult hasn't gotten off the ground worldwide, and with cyclical disinflation we will see the cult hunker down and go back underground. At least until the next round of inflation, when it will re-emerge. But this price inflation is a monetary phenomenon more than a matter of fundamentals.
  
  Like all doomers, everywhere Kunstler goes, he sees only ugliness. This is to be expected. The ugliness lies within him, so he will never escape it.
  
  Give this one a wide berth and learn something about Austrian economics. You'll be glad you did.
  
  
• The Sky is Falling!
  By A2KQRITCQSDXJW on 2005-09-16
  Future? Bleak. Like a Mad Max movie. Oil? Mostly gone. Nuclear power? Better start building nuclear power plants like crazy, but that probably won't happen. Hydrogen-based economy? Never happen. Horses? Better get one. The Southwest? Overrun by Aztecs. Rocky Mountain states? "A desolate fate." Mormons? "On the march." Manhattan? "Old corporate towers abandoned and dangerous." The South? Full of delusional violent crackers. Stay away from them. Black people? "The urban ghettos may explode again." Hmm...what else? The DC-NY Corridor? "A forbidden zone." Best career choice? Farmer. Carpenter. Probably due to the high demand for coffins, thanks to all the wars, starvation, AIDS, smallpox and flu viruses, not to mention all the crazy Bible-totin' Southerners and rap-spoutin' black men. Best place to live? Upstate New York where the author lives, but watch out: He says he has a shotgun and knows how to use it.
  
  
• Are You Ready?
  By A22LJBZFVD5O1N on 2005-05-15
  Every once in a while, a book comes along that radically rearranges your entire outlook on the world. For me, "The Long Emergency" was just that. Is it alarmist? Absolutely. Is it true? Almost definitely. Humankind has faced many obstacles in its brief history. Famine, disease, ignorance, tyranny, hubris, you name it. But in the years to come, civilization will come face to face with the laws of thermodynamics; and those laws do not bend. This book smacks the reader in the face with the dire consequences that await the world as we run out of cheap fossil fuels. Since World War II, the United States especially has set its public policy as if the oil spigot was eternal. We will pay dearly for that mistake.
  
  Many of the predictions here are not new. Left literature is fairly conversant on the subjects of overshoot, non-sustainability, and potential global collapse. But even more important here is Kunstler's bursting of the alternative energy balloon. One of the main blind spots in liberal thinking is the belief that solar, wind, geothermal, and hydrogen power will magically step in to fill our energy needs. This author makes mincemeat of those unrealistic hopes. The simple fact is that we've built physical and psychological infrastructures that just will not work under any circumstances in the future. Even with nuclear and coal brought into increasing play, the "Drive-In Utopia," as Kunstler likes to call it, is over.
  
  I cannot overemphasize the importance of this book. Buy it, read it, then pass it on to someone else. Then enrol in some sustainable building and farming courses to get yourself ready. The end (of cheap energy) is nigh.
  
  
• A Cracking Sound
  By A2RDFHTOF7T48Z on 2006-03-27
  Kunstler's conclusion that we are out on a limb and it is breaking is irrefutable. It's cheap oil and a wanton disregard for the consequences of exceeding the natural carrying capacity of the Earth that has put us here. Like it or not, there are 6.5 billion people on this planet that are dependent on oil to live. When the oil is no longer economically viable only about two billion or so can be supported by oil free agriculture. Maybe less, maybe more. And the world's population won't stop growing for a couple of decades.
  
  The ability to feed ourselves with enough left over for people who don't produce food is the basis for civilization. Period. When the oil is gone, where will the food come from and who will grow it? Massive dislocations and starvation are a given. An old Russian proverb goes something like, 'a hungry man is a dangerous thing.' When it takes ten calories of oil to make one calorie of food, what makes up the difference when the oil is gone?
  
  I've read the analysis and heard the arguments against biomass, thermal depolymerization, nuclear, etc. It's basic thermodynamics. There's no arguing it. Most of the articles in the popular press are long on praise and short on numbers. They read like descriptions of Pacific islander cargo cults. Oil is amazing and there's no replacing it with anything. If replacements were possible, they'd be here and ready because capitalism never overlooks a chance to make a profit.
  
  From my career in engineering I know that every piece has to be in place for the "bird" to get off the ground. A plane with and empty fuel tank sits on the runway. Putting the wrong fuel in the tank just makes it blow up on the runway. There's no shortcut. There's no free lunch. Santa isn't coming to town with coal for all the bad little boys and girls. And we've been very bad. And now we'll pay. However, the news is not all bad. Humans have lived without oil before. When people worked their own land and kept the fruits of their labor, their lot in life gradually improved. We know more than those people did. We understand more about materials and forces and pathogens.
  
  This much I knew before reading Kunstler's book. So why did I buy it? This is new territory. No one really knows what will happen. Part of solving the problem is understanding it. I'm looking for ways to hedge my bets. Kunstler's book isn't the last word on the long emergency, but it's a good start. I don't agree with all of his analysis or conclusions. However, I believe that about 80% of what he predicts has a high probability of coming to pass. Everyone's preparation for the long emergency will be different. Those who do nothing will be at the mercy of the elements. The elements don't care if humans live or die. Kunstler's message is too important to ignore. If you don't like Kunstler's wake up call, then stay mesmerized in your McMansion and gloat over your SUV and LCD TV and espresso maker and Jacuzzi and popcorn maker and Bermuda vacation and vinyl siding and snow blower and wife's boob job and garage door opener and dirt bike and jetski and ...
  
  
• A Jeremiad in the Original Sense--Don't Miss It
  By A1VA170GUYGTB on 2005-06-13
  Critics of this book have called it pessimistic and a jeremiad. As to whether the book is pessimistic or not, that will be hard to know until after the fact. Not every reader may recall what the word jeremiad actually means. It refers to the biblical prophet Jeremiah, who prophesied the destruction of the kingdom of Judah. The kingdom was in a state of complete self-denial about the danger it was in from the Babylonians. Jeremiah was trying to awaken the people to their danger, but he failed and Judah was conquered.
  The word jeremiad is therefore very appropriate for Kunstler's book; he is trying to warn America of the danger it is in. We can only hope that Kunstler is more successful than the ancient Jeremiah.
  Kunstler does a fine job analyzing the global oil peak. He also does well at pointing out why several much-touted technologies (like hydrogen cars) just will not work. Environmentalists would do well to pay attention. I could argue with Kunstler on ethanol's long term future; for certain specialized uses I think sustainably produced ethanol will indeed be an important fuel. Of course, this is simply storing solar power in another form, not a source of energy as such.
  I think our transportation system is more capable of adjusting to drastically lower fossil fuel use than Kunstler does. I think pedestrian pathways, bicycles, mopeds, light rail systems, and canals could do a surprisingly good job with urban and even suburban transportation at a vastly lower level of U.S. oil use, once the idea sinks in that the other choice is staying home. There is something to be said for American ingenuity once it really puts itself to work on a problem.
  The book is incomplete in some respects. Kunstler puts too little emphasis on reforming the science of economics to more accurately reflect reality. In my opinion, the obsession of mainstream economics with increasing GDP, as opposed to increasing quality of life, is one of the major factors likely to lead to Kunstler's Long Emergency. I would have liked more on reforming the price structure of fossil fuels to better reflect their actual long-term scarcity; this strikes me as our best hope for a soft landing into the post-Oil-Age world. Kunstler also says too little about the need to stabilize the U.S. population.
  Overall, though, the book is great. No truly patriotic American can afford to ignore it.
  
  
• Important to consider because we can effect change
  By A2GK5ARUJKXECN on 2005-06-02
  I love this book not because I believe all the Kunstler says but because I believe everyone should be listening. Kunstler points out that we have used about half of the oil that exists in the world (a well documented fact) and that the second half is naturally the more difficult to obtain. He admits but does not stress that we have a little more gas and considerably more coal and discusses their uses and problems at length. He discusses multiple scenarios that could cause oil and gas prices to rise more quickly than because of simple scarcity. He points out that in order to switch to alternate sources of energy and transportation, we need oil to run everything in the construction and manufacturing processes of these technologies. And he rightly points out that a "hydrogen economy" is a fallacy - do your research if you don't believe it.
  
  Although not thoroughly documented, I believe Kunstler has done plenty of research and most of his discussions are either basic common sense or speculation. He speculates on as many catastrophic scenarios and solutions that he can imagine. I had to constantly remind myself that although all of his doomsday predictions COULD happen, surely only SOME will happen. He is certainly not hoping his predictions will come true, but is wise for considering them.
  
  It has been obvious to me for a long time (mainly because my father is a nuclear energy promoter) that our world cannot continue on the path that we have chosen. Nearly our entire country, and to a lesser degree the world, has been running on non-renewable oil, gas and coal products. Imagine how easily it would be to get Vidalia onions (the real ones, not the substitutes from Mexico) in Wisconsin without cheap diesel fuel. We drink wine from France (and everywhere else), eat "sea bass" from Chili (because we have over fished at home), Salmon from Alaska, Oranges from Florida, Lobsters from Maine and everything from California. All of these items are brought to us mostly by overland trucking or air. We purchase more than half of our consumer products from places up to 10,000 miles from home. We drive 10-50 miles one way to work, some in vehicles that get only 10 miles per gallon. We have built highways, houses and malls on some of the most productive farmland in the country.
  
  If you don't read this book, please be sure to study the problem however you can. If we prepare to one degree or another, we will lessen the blow. We CANNOT continue to ignore the problem and hope everything will turn out alright.
  
  If you get this book and read it, please share it with others.
  
  Another book that I plan to read by Kunstler is "The Geography of Nowhere." I also plan to read other books about "end of oil" as well as learning to live without it.
  
  
• A far left spin on the Peak Oil crisis.
  By A117SFKYMZQGCL on 2006-05-03
  If you want the far left spin on the Peak Oil crisis this book is for you.
  
  Read this book if you want to hear about how Jimmy Carter was really our shunned savior. Or how Ronald Reagan and George Bush don't care about Peak Oil because they are Christians who believe that Jesus is Coming, so the end of the world doesn't matter to them. Suffice to say Kunstler is something of a nut.
  
  This book is an amazing mix of facts and the absurd. But is Peak Oil really going to bring civilization to it's knees?
  
  No, because the only reason alternative energy such as gasified coal, solar and ethanol are not produced in mass is because oil is STILL cheap and abundant at $75 a barrel. Kunstler even so much as admits that coal can fill the void for now, only he hates how dirty it is. He conveniently downplays that gasified coal is actually cleaner that gasoline today.
  
  The Peak Oil doomsayers also forgot that hydrogen powered cars can be implemented from anything that produces electricity, meaning solar, nuclear, coal, corn-ethanol, natural gas, hydroelectric and bio-waste products. All these and more can fill the void, albeit at a higher price so get used to it.
  
  As we begin to go down the oil curve prices will rise and alternatives will become competitive naturally filling the void. As we use more and more alternatives we use less and less oil making the oil supply last even longer. Energy just will never be as cheap as the `good old days' of easy oil. Oh, and yes expect economic disruptions from small to severe in the transition.
  
  In conclusion: Howard Kunstler is really a smart guy who is amazingly blinded by his far left ideology. This book has a lot good information but you will have to filter out the bias commentary from Howard. It was an enjoyable read nonetheless. I give you three stars Howard.
  
  
  
  
• fatalism when what we need is action
  By A30RI0AJ4CQBU1 on 2005-05-30
  Kunstler has not advanced the cause of renewable energy one bit with this book. It's irresponsible, and it makes me mad. There are many better and more constructive books on the problem of the impending global Hubbert's Peak for oil -- you could start with THE PARTY'S OVER by Heinberg or THE END OF OIL by Roberts (see my reviews of both). The larger issue is cogently summarized complete with data and mathematical analysis in LIMITS TO GROWTH: THE 30-YEAR UPDATE (see my review). Even if you think there's no hope for our Civilization, such as it is, you could read the much more constructive POWERDOWN by Heinberg, which examines scenarios for responding to the crisis, including positive community-based strategies.
  
  But it seems premature to me to conclude that all hope is lost. Hermann Scheer has written a powerful manifesto/strategy for renewable energy called THE SOLAR ECONOMY (see my review). In light of his analysis, Kunstler's dismissal of solar power cannot be taken seriously. Amory Lovins, who has been researching renewable energy since the 1970s, when he wrote the influential SOFT ENERGY PATHS, recently co-authored a book-length study called WINNING THE OIL ENDGAME, which was co-funded by the Pentagon. Lovins presents a plan for ending U.S. dependency on foreign oil by 2025, reducing oil use by 50%, mainly through improved efficiency, and by developing biofuels (see my review for more detail).
  
  Perhaps Kunstler thought this book might be optioned for a movie, a sort of Mad Max tale of civil war in the U.S. after the oil runs out. That's how it should be treated -- as dystopian speculation. One "peak oil" writer (Mike Ruppert) is heading for the hills, according to his website, having concluded that the end of the world will commence in 2007. Personally, I was inclined toward survivalism in the 1970s, and I'm not playing that game. Rather than wallow in despair, what we need is careful, strategic analysis, and bold action. See my OVERSHOOT AND COLLAPSE? list for more relevant books.
  
  CARPE DIEM!
  
  
• Provocative, Pessimistic, and Rational
  By A1FAWFMP6CDKG on 2005-06-02
  James Howard Kunstler has done his research well. Most of the science in this contemporary FUTURE SHOCK is both documented and grim. What distinguishes Kunstler from so many writers about America's possibilities in the twenty-first century is his refusal to accept any easy way out--his skepticism, his "show me" bravado, and his unalloyed pessimism about the future.
  
  Kunstler says things here that nobody wants to believe. Unfortunately, he may be absolutely right, at least much of the time. Given the ostrich approach of politicians, the skewed idealism/corporatism of the American media, and our "shoot the messenger" approach to uncomfortable ideas, I'm afraid that this most worthy tome will be overlooked by the masses: "extremism," "poppycock," "anti-American."
  
  We ignore Kunstler at our own peril. Without bold and immediate steps to fight the trends he carefully outlines here, his dystopian future may, in fact, become our nightmare reality in a few short years.
  
  All thoughtful citizens should read THE LONG EMERGENCY and fight for a brighter future for America and the world. WORLDWATCH should promote this book, as should PROJECT CENSORED. At the moment, it is being nearly wholly ignored by Mainstream Reviewers.
  
  Do not believe the negative blurbs linked to this website: readers who dis this thoughtful but frightening text are either misreading or distorting Mr. Kunstler's words. There are far too many variables to be able to predict the future with utter accuracy; however, one can label current trends with honesty and alarm, as the author does here, and then speculate: "If this goes on..."
  
  Read this book. Think about it carefully. THEN ACT.
  
  If you don't--don't say you weren't warned!!
  
  
• If this is the truth about the future, you'll want to know about it
  By A3ELOLX6CRIH0M on 2005-08-30
  This is the most sobering book I've ever read. If you want to be confronted with just how bad things could get as humanity consumes the remaining fossil fuel supplies, take a deep breath and read this book. The end of life as we know it may not need to stem from a nuclear war or from a major natural disaster; rather, it could well arise from our love affair with the increasingly popular and ultimately fatal suburban lifestyle that, to be sustained, demands excessive amounts of infrastructure and vast quantities of cheap energy.
  
  I lost sleep most nights during the week I read The Long Emergency, and am still troubled by its grim, yet plausible predictions for the future. North Americans are literally sleepwalking into the future. Most citizens are incapable of conceiving how current lifestyles that rely on cheap oil and polluting without bearing all of the consequences could lead to total economic collapse and profound social upheaval within a generation or two.
  
  Author James Howard Kunstler predicts that as oil and natural gas become increasingly scarce and expensive, the US will have no choice but to burn through its remaining coal supplies, with great environmental costs. Nuclear power, if jurisdictions can afford to build reactors, may prolong our energy-intensive way of life for a while. Beyond this, we may be limited to burning firewood to stay warm. Kunstler holds out little hope for alternative energy sources replacing our fossil fuels; solar, wind, geothermal and biomass will provide only a fraction of the energy we use today, and hydrogen is faced with so many storage and distribution issues that it will never take hold as all of its enthusiasts would like.
  
  Kunstler predicts that material standards of living will go down for virtually everyone in North America. We will, out of necessity, consume less energy, live much more locally, and be heavily tied to the land as we make the procurement of food our single biggest activity. Air travel will all but disappear. Wal-Marts and other large-scale enterprises will collapse. Federal governments may be unable to operate, and may become irrelevant as local stewardship of resources becomes the thing that really matters to most people.
  
  Those who are likely to be best off (or should I say the least worst off) will be residents of small towns near to farmland, without a ring of modern subdivisions to separate homes from arable land. Examples of such communities are found in upstate New York, where the author lives. Skills in demand will include animal husbandry and farming, the ability to repair things, and carpenters. People willing to collaborate and build networks locally stand the best chance of getting what they need to survive, if not live a decent, albeit slower, life.
  
  I highly recommend this book. Politicians, and those responsible for formulating public policy, would do well to be exposed to this cold, brutal picture of future reality. For what it's worth, Kunstler is not alone with his bleak assessment: Canada's Dr. David Suzuki said that the prospects for humankind are akin to a handful of people travelling in a car at 100 miles per hour toward a brick wall, while they argue over who gets to sit in which seat.
  
  The good news is that Kunstler's future, if it is to unfold, will not do so tomorrow. We'll have years to prepare for it. The bad news is that so few people detect, let alone respond to, the signals that suggest that our current energy-intensive way of life is not sustainable. I believe that the future as depicted in this book is inevitable; however, we could, were we not so selfish and independent-minded, postpone the arrival of that unwanted future, likely by decades. Unfortunately, I don't see human beings collaborating to forestall these unwanted circumstances, so I have begun to think through the steps that my family and I will take in the next few years to make our time on this planet as decent as possible. Key questions are: where ought we to live? What skills will we be able to barter? In what form should we keep our wealth (a basement full of boxes of candles and gold wafers kept in a safety deposit box may have more staying power than shares in big corporations)? I have no answers yet, but I am working on it.
  
  
  
• Beyond Alarmism: Reality of our Future
  By APB692GP1PIJW on 2005-05-10
  While critics of Kunstler dislike his "alarmist" approach, if you take the time to investigate how to manufacture materials and food, to build our vehicles and heat/cool our buildings, you'll beging to appreciate why dwindling oil reserves is going to devastate our country - even if we take serious action now. All power-generating technologies - coal, nuclear, solar, wind, biofuels - require oil to manufacture and maintain these facilities and technologies. As a materials scientist, I take seriously the challenge before us: to find new ways to manufacture materials without recourse to fossil fuels or combustion technologies (which exacerbate climate change).
  
  In the documentary "The End of Suburbia", Kunstler comments how even if we get our vehicles to run on hydrogen, it still takes some 90 barrels of oil to manufacture a car! The embodied energy from oil in our agriculture - from chemicals and irrigation, to ag machinery, processing and transportation - will likely make biofuels (often from subsidized crops which means the true price of oil is not reflected in cost analysis) less likely to help us in the future. Further, soil fertility is in serious decline: imagine trying to retrieve the nutrients that have run off the land and deposited into the oceans via ocean dredging, desalinization and transporting millions of tons of minerals back to the land, and then rebuilding a healthy soil biota. Our high-tech genetic modifications only get us so far in trying to "trick" plants to grow in increasingly poor soils.
  
  G. Tyler Miller's book, "Sustaining the Earth" complements Kunstler's in that it is a frank look at what we've done to the planet globally. Miller's book has its roots in a 1960's lecture that awakened Miller to the crisis ahead - and even he admits that when he heard the lecture, he told the lecturer that if what he'd said was true, Miller felt ethically obligated to give up his study of the corrosion of metals and work full time on these environmental problems. Miller spent six months carefully studying the scientific literature on everything from topsoil loss to air/water pollution to future energy issues in an effort to prove this lecturer was misguided or plain wrong. Instead, Miller realized that the lecturer's information was indeed correct and that we would be facing dire consequences from our planetary impact in the not-so-distant future. Miller's book methodically steps through issues in our planetary life-support system... and whose attention has it grabbed? With his careful, thorough, methodical, scientific approach, how many people have been truly "awakened" to the global mess we've made?
  
  The health of our life-supporting ecosystems has declined significantly since the time of Miller's "awakening", and the "end of oil" in tandem with climate change is, unfortunately, what it will take to "awaken" most of the public. I think Kunstler is doing us a great service with his books.
  
  The one point where I disagree with Kunstler is that suburbia will be abandoned and that walkable urban environments might thrive. While we may not be able to heat our homes in suburbia, they ARE shelter from the elements, and solar hot water heaters are not difficult to make (people used to live without hot water! Imagine!). We can capture rainwater; we can compost our human waste (see "The Humanure Handbook" by J.C. Jenkins). The key feature is that most of suburbia has LAND. Land close to the house. This feature makes it easy to farm with intensive mini-farming techniques like those taught by Dr. John Jeavons (author of "How to Grow More Vegetables..."), extended season harvest methods of Eliot Coleman, and "ubran Permaculture" methods (see Bill Mollison's books on Permaculture). Suburban houses will be comfortable for all but the coldest months of the year. Without employment (without oil, how can you get to your job?), you will have a lot of time to stay at home and cultivate the garden. By contrast, urban areas will have too high a population density to support agriculturally, and, aside from a small number of urban community gardens, will be forced to depend on farmers to grow their food for them. But large-scale agriculture won't be able to produce that much food for urban populations without fossil fuel! Urban areas are not surrounded by rural farms... they are surrounded by suburbia! So urban environments - no matter how walkable - will more likely become deserted as people won't be able to use their money to buy food. Large city buildings may be a tad warmer in winter, but will bake in summer without sufficient power for air conditioning.
  
  There are so many competing factors to consider - the main thing is to begin to consider them and implement changes NOW. Kunstler's "alarm" is most appropriate.
  
  
• A Unique and Compelling Synthesis of Emerging Trends
  By A16D03T1TM7AQ4 on 2005-05-18
  The Long Emergency seems a fitting finale to the trilogy that Kunstler began in 1992 with "The Geography of Nowhere", and followed 5 yrs later with "Home from Nowhere" (I skip over his more recent "City In Mind" since it is more of a collection of distinct essays). His contention 13 years ago was that suburban sprawl was degrading the landscape, undermining the fabric of traditional communities, and making people increasingly car-dependent, alienated and delusional. Now we learn that sprawl, and America's overall living arrangement has far graver consequences; it represents "greatest misallocation of resources in the history of the world". What makes this latest book so compelling and unique is the integration of emerging trends in climate change, oil & gas depletion, popular culture, demographics, disease, and globalization. Kunstler is not afraid to make bold predictions as to where these trends are leading us. Indeed, he differs from his contemporaries insofar as he tries to be intellectually honest about the most likely scenarios as these emerging trends take control of our lives.
  Critics of this book seem to miss the key points of the first 3 chapters: 1) An increasingly broad consensus among experts is emerging that we are at or very near the global peak of oil production; 2) Oil, (and to an extent methane) as we have used it for the past 100+ years, is unique. It has a very high "eroei" (energy returned on energy invested) quotient, is easily portable, and burns (relative to coal) reasonably cleanly; 3) Even with major breakthroughs in renewable energy technology, we aren't even approaching "eroei" numbers like oil, and we are running out of time to get the alternative energy infrastructure in place (i.e. we are using our finite supplies of oil to run suburbia rather than get long term investments made in sustainable energy); 4) The US economy has become largely dependent on the development & servicing of sprawl. When this living arrangement becomes untenable, the economy will nosedive. While critics will take exception to Kunstler's brazen, almost smug tone, they are wrong to conflate his confident predictions with a personal desire to see misery beset the human race. He is simply making educated guesses based on the latest evidence.
  The Long Emergency contains a few small, but noteworthy weaknesses. For example, Kunstler suggests that it is likely that all of the forest east of the Mississippi will be cut down and used as heating fuel in the decades ahead. Possible, but I would contend that any management practice that isn't sustainable will be fiercely resisted, even at gunpoint, by those who want to preserve some longer term life support system. As an unprecedented austerity envelopes people, there will be many among us who will quickly conclude that our previous manner of living was wildly reckless and wasteful, and henceforth, all resources must be used very carefully. Also, Kunstler states that anti-Semitism is well established in modern day France and that as the end of cheap oil dawns, this anti-Semitic prejudice might be redirected towards Muslims. While it may be true that France is less supportive of Israel than the US, the vast majority of anti-Semitic incidents in France are perpetrated by Muslims from former French colonies in North Africa. In essence, France has imported the Muslim-Jewish conflict into its borders with 4 decades of mass immigration. Therefore, it is more likely that there will be simple carrying capacity tensions within France, and pan-European resistance to desperate migrants trying to flee the Middle East as its oil supplies dwindle 20 yrs hence. Lastly, Kunstler doesn't much address what will happen to countries whose populations are still rapidly increasing despite their dwindling resources. Places like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, China and India are going to be increasingly hellish quite soon. People there will likely try to migrate northwards into Turkey, Greece, Yugoslavia & Russia. This is likely where most of the major flashpoints will occur. Ultimately, industrialized society has painted itself into a corner, and it is now one minute to midnight. Though he doesn't make the case for a soft landing, Kunstler would probably argue that US needs to initiate a radical program of conservation alongside the construction of dozens of new nuclear reactors, wind farms, and small scale hydro stations. Sadly, this is unlikely to occur. Our political class and media elites are too often preaching the mantra that technology will save us. It may not be until the crisis is too deep that they have a change of heart.
  
  Overall though, this book is a great read. Highly recommended.
  
  
  
• Catastrophic Changes
  By A1EU0MJNWK4YVV on 2005-04-20
  James Howard Kunstler suggests America is still sleepwalking into the future as it ignores the immediate crises of the end of cheap fossil fuel. He calls this time the Long Emergency, a time of changing everything about how we live.
  
  He first goes through all of the possible solutions for another energy source and systematically knocks each down. There will be no widely touted "hydrogen economy", there will be no fulfillment of the wishful notions about rescuing our way of life with alternative "renewables", nor will coal save us, we may need to turn to nuclear power, but that's no utopian solution either.
  
  In short, the Long Emergency will require making other arrangements for the way we live. We are in a special predicament due to a set of unfortunate choices we made as a society in the twentieth century. Kunslter writes, "Before long, the suburbs will fail us in practical terms. We made the ongoing development of housing subdivisions, highway strips, fried-food shacks and shopping malls the basis of our economy, and when we have to stop making more of those things, the bottom will fall out."
  
  What's his solution? We re-scale virtually everything we do and how we do it.... "The successful regions in the twenty-first century will be the ones surrounded by viable farming hinterlands that can reconstitute locally sustainable economies on an armature of civic cohesion. Small towns and smaller cities have better prospects than the big cities.
  
  Kunslter paints a picture of the dark ages. His solution is almost feudal in its simplicity. Plant a garden - live low to the ground - raise some chickens.
  
  Of course he couches that in emotive language when he writes, "The survivors will have to cultivate a religion of hope -- that is, a deep and comprehensive belief that humanity is worth carrying on. If there is any positive side to stark changes coming our way, it may be in the benefits of close communal relations, of having to really work intimately (and physically) with our neighbors."
  
  Has Kunslter given up? I'm not sure.
  
  
  
• Confirmation of your worst nightmare
  By A1MIEUC4KQDKHJ on 2006-04-04
  There are some that will hate this book. Denial is easy.
  
  There are some that will read it and then do further investigation. Investigation takes time and sometimes the answers aren't those for which we hoped.
  
  There are none that it won't frighten.
  
  This is a book about the history of humans and oil. The relationship has made for an exciting ride. It may be a bumpy ending.
  
  I believe that Kunstler is right on the money. I don't think he has overstated the case.
  
  He has made some very educated guesses about what the future may hold after the end of the oil age. He doesn't claim to be clairvoyant. When he is surmising he says so.
  
  Kunstler doesn't ignore alternative fuels; he carefully analyzes each and every known (and hoped for) alternative and comes to the same conclusion that many scientists, CEOs and "oil men" like George Bush and Dick Cheney have reached: that there is no good alternative that will replace oil when it's gone. At least none that are likely to materialize in time to avoid the "long emergency."
  
  It is not news that the easy availability of cheap oil is on the downhill side of the mountain. Life as we know it may change in some extremely unpleasant ways. Those changes may be sooner than we would like or expect.
  
  Kunstler points out that global climate changes are not the fault of men. Severe climate changes have plagued us since the planet first cooled off enough to even have a climate. He does accept the possibility that fossil fuel use may have exacerbated or speeded up the process.
  
  He methodically goes through the historic climate changes that have occurred. He points out that humans have survived them all up until now. All of that is beside the point. That is just the background.
  
  The point is that between the oncoming climate changes (that no one can predict with absolute certainty) and the all to soon end of fossil fuels to support humanity in the style to which we have become accustomed, the human race will be faced with some very hard times and tough choices.
  
  That is, the lucky ones will; the rest will be faced with no choices and no time.
  
  Anyone that discounts this book or the knowledge of the author based on poor proofreading for grammatical errors is ignoring the message and missing the point. The message is ugly but it is certainly worth getting.
  
  
• Appalling Lack of Intellectual Rigor
  By A2S8K87H2PCQ5N on 2006-04-12
  This author makes a presentation of problems which have evolved in the American landscape since early colonial development, citing obvious examples of bad buildings and making absurdly unsuitable comparisons, and with no regard for data about the realities of infrastructure or the complexities of such a vast nation... and to make a case for what? There is nothing here. Anyone seriously interested in these topics should be looking for writers with some background, such as Robert Venturi or J. B. Jackson. Mr. Kuntsler should stick to children's books.
  
  
• Don't Shoot the Messenger
  By A3SJND5V257YKP on 2005-07-05
  Most of the negative reviews here attempt to dismiss the message by attacking the messenger, a natural reaction by people who see a distressing analysis of their modes of living as a personal attack. If you have been fooled into thinking, as Dick Cheney asserts, that "the American way of life is not negotiable," then a person who points out your folly is easily seen as the cause of the problem. Some reviewers seem to think the author delights in the destruction of a society he hates (a lazy oversimplification) and then reject the entirety of the work based on this flawed perception. Instead of reading it as a personal insult, try to think of it as the "tough love" of a good friend whose aim is truly constructive criticism.
  
  It is true that the book suffers a clear lack of the documentation that should accompany the innumerable facts and figures the author relates.
  
  The bulk of this work focuses on the problems and indeed does not offer much detail in the way of solutions. As you read and generally accept his message, you may be eager to reach the chapters that explain how you can prepare for the coming hardships. By the book's end, however, you see that, while The Long Emergency may have succeeded as a much needed wake-up call, the want of a practical survival guide requires further reading elsewhere.
  
  
• Apocalyptic fantasies
  By AT8HLYEFO12MG on 2006-02-23
  Mr. Kunstler is an extremely talented writer and this book was very interesting to read, but I am only giving it 3 stars because it would have been better if he saved these apocalyptic fantasies for a work of fiction. None of the predictions that he ultimately makes after many chapters of fear-mongering are likely to come true.
  
  The truth is that free-market capitalism - the most efficient economic system there is for allocating resources - is now focusing its energy on creating alternatives to fossil fuels and it is succeeding. Mr. Kunstler either ignores or is dismissive of many of these current efforts. For example, on page 138 he is blithely dismissive of biofuels. "Forget biomass." he boldly writes at the beginning of a very short paragraph on the subject. But, why forget biomass!? Ethanol is currently one of the most promising substitutes to replace fossil fuels. Brazil is one of the most advanced nations in its use of ethanol and today over 40% of gasoline demand in Brazil is supplied by ethanol. There are real fossil-fuel alternatives that are available today, but instead in The Long Emergency, Mr. Kunstler decides to ignore them or scoffs at their viability.
  
  He also incorrectly states "The amount of petroleum and natural gas needed to produce the corn to make the ethanol would more than cancel out any benefit from using a supposedly non-fossil fuel." This is simply not true. Ethanol currently has a positive net energy value (NEV) and it is improving every year due to capitalism's relentless drive for more fuel efficiencies.
  
  At first I thought that Mr. Kunstler was simple working with dated material, but when I saw that this book was published in 2005, I decided that he likely intentionally ignores many of possibilities to replace fossil fuels because it doesn't fit his doomsday thesis. Another successful real-world example is Sweden, which has plans to have its dependency on oil broken by 2020 through a combination of biofuels, geothermal energy, hydrogen cars and nuclear power. And they have been successful so far as currently over 26% of all the energy consumed in Sweden comes from renewable sources (as opposed to the EU average of 6%). Mr. Kunstler is dismissive of all of these efforts, but in time he will be proven wrong.
  
  In 2050, the United States will not have descended into a Mad Max type world where we are killing each other for drops of oil. (At least not due to lack of energy alternatives... our fiat currency and massive debt and deficits are other issues which might eventually cause economic disaster). While Mr. Kunstler's 'energy' doomsday predictions would make for great fiction, they won't happen in the real world.. that is, not as long as we have capitalism working on our side.
  
  
  
• you need to read this book carefully
  By A1EJNY4C8CTNHJ on 2005-05-15
  Hello from sunny Scotland! Some of the negative reviews of this book are very wide of the mark. Jim Kunstler is not anti-modern and I have no doubt he is aware that 3% of our electricity comes from oil. He does state that mining coal relies on machinery powered by oil, it is transported by oil, and without oil you can't move very much. Solar power is dealt with in this book too. If this is to be of any use, the changeover needs to happen now. Oil is needed to transport the solar panels etc. and if any plastic is used in the design then that is oil-derived as well. Kunstler points out that without this resource everything becomes so much harder.
  For all those who have spoken of various alternatives to activities benefited by oil (i.e. agriculture), Kunstler points out that our soil is practically dead, and organic agriculture requires huge inputs of labour...how are you going to explain to all those people currently deluded by our modern cornucopia that the goodies are going to be taken away and that back-breaking work is to be the fundamental fact of life.
  Kunstler also deals very well with the techno-optimists. Technology has been subject to diminishing returns for quite a while now. If anything is going to save us it will cause just a smuch problems and this miracle is nowhere near on the horizon. So forget nuclear fusion, the energy-intensive coal to oil process, and thermal depolymerisation...they're not going to happen. Conservation and the Upsaala Protocol are the sane ways to powerdown. To all techo-optimists: remember global warming, the Gulf Stream shutdown, depleting aquifers, viruses etc...now repeat after me...all is for the best in the best of all possible worlds!
  
  

• World Made by Hand: A Novel
• The Coming Economic Collapse: How You Can Thrive When Oil Costs $200 a Barrel
• Gardening When It Counts: Growing Food in Hard Times (Mother Earth News Wiser Living Series)
• Powerdown: Options and Actions for a Post-Carbon World
• The Party's Over: Oil, War and the Fate of Industrial Societies