Who has the energy for this?

The story from USA Today that sparked this post is several days old, so the link may be dead. It had to do with the "near record" price of oil and the inadequacy of either presidential candidate's plan for solving our energy problem.

Republicans. Their $18 billion plan is little more than a grab bag of tax breaks and subsidies to boost production. But even if they could achieve their long-sought goal of tapping the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, they would barely alter the energy equation. The 1 million barrels per day it could produce are less than 5% of current consumption, and equals the amount that consumption has grown just in the past five years.

Democrats. Kerry would increase fuel-efficiency standards and offer tax incentives for people to buy more fuel-efficient cars, among other things. These might achieve some savings. But he relies on consumers' willingness to buy smaller cars, something they have been loath to do in an affluent era.

I think that's a fair enough assessment. The article mentions a big gas pipeline from Alaska to the lower 48 and hydrogen for cars. And then:

But more is needed. A bold plan would be on the scale of the Apollo program and would seek to make hydrogen- and electric-powered cars as common as gasoline-powered ones are today. Bush and Kerry have plans to promote hydrogen, but not nearly on the scale or timetable necessary. [emphasis added]

This is what's been weighing on my mind these past few weeks, as we've seen the price of gasoline climb and stay at high levels. Our whole economy relies on petroleum. Petroleum is a non-renewable resource that is becoming scarce and ever more expensive. Near-record prices have become record-breaking prices. I keep wondering what will happen when the prices go up even further.

We already see some ripples in the economy because of increased transportation costs. Will we need locking gas caps? Will the lines at service stations get longer? Will people start taking the bus and looking for more mass transit options? What about consumer goods? Will we become less of a consumer society?

I'm not so sure that I am as alarmed by all of this as I am totally irked. Irked with our culture of consuming and wasting and wanting more, that is. I'm starting to get rather tired of the shop, shop, shop mentality. The intrusions on our computers from spam and pop-ups and spyware are all part of the push to consume. It's almost futile to watch network television any more; the commercials seem to take up more time than the actual programs. But it's not just the constant barrage of advertising that is annoying.

It's the greed. The corporate greed. The individual greed. The national greed. Why should the U.S. have 5 percent of the world's population and consume 25 percent of its energy?

There is something corrupting about the comfort and ease of our lives. We do not realize that the food and clothes and shelter that are basic to our survival are (a) that and (b) derived from significant expenditure of energy. We don't think about the possibility that even they could be threatened, both in quality and in quantity, if our nation begins to see energy prices double yet again.

Yet for all of my unease about this situation, I cannot envision what the alternative might be. There is certainly no vision coming from the presidential candidates. They offer piecemeal solutions. Kerry's I like more than Bush's, yes, but neither is thinking--or at least talking--about the huge changes that we need to make in this country as we face the imminence of peak oil.