Serf’s Up, Dude
serf (sûrf) n.
1. A member of the lowest feudal class, attached to the land owned by a lord and required to perform labor in return for certain legal or customary rights.
2. An agricultural laborer under various similar systems, especially in 18th- and 19th-century Russia and eastern Europe.
3. A person in bondage or servitude.
(American Heritage Dictionary)
The essential element in serfdom was, of course, that one was bound to the land itself. In many cases, the lord of the manor actually held property rights over the serfs themselves. In fact, the lord held those rights even upon the serf's offspring, the serf class was hereditary. Keep that definition in mind as you read this little gem. (Yes, this is the same item linked yesterday through Mark Steyn via Kate at Small Dead Animals.)
Transport policy-makers should start preparing now for a dramatic reduction in motorised travel that will be brought about by carbon rationing, one of the country's leading environmental thinkers told LTT this week.
"Just start reading the runes because what's going to happen is the demand for road, rail and air travel is going to start falling away just as soon as we have rationing," says Mayer Hillman in an interview with the magazine.
Hillman, senior fellow emeritus at the Policy Studies Institute, says carbon rationing is the only way to ensure that the world avoids the worst effects of climate change. And he says that the problems caused by burning fossil fuels are so serious that governments might have to implement rationing against the will of the people.
"When the chips are down I think democracy is a less important goal than is the protection of the planet from the death of life, the end of life on it," he says. "This has got to be imposed on people whether they like it or not."
But I'm linking this again to provide a little background on Hillman. Like this article from the Guardian.
According to Hillman, our carbon emissions will need to be cut by 10% each and every year for a 25-year period to bring convergence between rich and poor nations. Hillman believes that no sector will feel the impact more than transport. This is how it would work. Each of us will be allocated an annual fuel allowance, and every time you buy a product or service with a significant energy component - whether paying a gas bill or buying an airline ticket - it will be deducted from your annual account.
There will be trading, of course. If you're clever or frugal, you'll be able sell your surplus fuel coupons on the open market to those willing to buy them. And there'll be takers, since a return flight from London to Florida will consume double the annual fossil fuel ration that each person presently living on the planet can be allowed. Says Hillman, a delightful blend of the libertarian and the interventionist, "You want to fly to America? Fly to America, but you'll be bloody cold for the next couple of years because you'll have run out of coupons."
You'll be tied to the land and will exist at the mercy of the new lords of the carbon manor.
Civilization, Energy, Environment, Left Wing | Gaius Monday, 17 December , 2007
By Jess, Monday, 17 December , 2007 @ 10:29 am
This is the best line:
According to Hillman, our carbon emissions will need to be cut by 10% each and every year for a 25-year period to bring convergence between rich and poor nations.
What it means:
…our carbon emissions economic livelihood will need to be cut by 10% each and every year for a 25-year period to bring convergence between rich and poor nations make rich nations poor and all people equal.
By feeblemind, Monday, 17 December , 2007 @ 10:57 am
I wonder if Hilman’s low opinion of democracy would change if a dictatorial government came to power that did not find favor with his views?
By martian, Monday, 17 December , 2007 @ 12:36 pm
I wonder if Hillman has made the logical next step in his evaluation? My wife drives 25 miles one way to and from work every day. Under his sytem she would have to quit her job because she would otherwise use up her ration in no time (and mine). She wouldn’t be alone, the same would happen to most people as rations are cut every year. Basically, he’s advocating the collapse of modern society as we know it.
I’m also wondering if he owns a calculator? If you cut carbon emmisions by 10% each and every year for 25 years, that gives a net result of a 250% (10X25) cut in emmisions. I honestly don’t believe that’s physically possible since you can’t get rid of more than 100% of ANYTHING. Once you’ve reduced anything by 100%, it no longer exists. Even if you make it progressive and only get rid of 10% of what’s left from the previous year’s reduction, by the 25th year we’d all have to stop breathing (we exhale carbon dioxide - a carbon emmision) in order to meet the reduction goal.
By Gaius, Monday, 17 December , 2007 @ 1:11 pm
No, it would be a 10% redeuction each year, so 90% multiplier each year. It’s not straight subtraction. But the number is appalling. Take a baseline of some arbitrary number (use 1,000) you get to a bit over 79 at the end of 25 years. Or roughly neolithic levels. No, actually worse than that.
By Rich Horton, Monday, 17 December , 2007 @ 1:38 pm
I notice on PSI’s website Hillman is listed as an expert on “setting clocks forward.”
Maybe he is PSI’s janitor, and its a very egalitarian place.
By quilly mammoth, Monday, 17 December , 2007 @ 2:00 pm
Two ways to accomplish that nuclear power or nuclear winter.
By Mockin'bird, Monday, 17 December , 2007 @ 2:51 pm
I’ll be stockin’ up on lead and gunpowder offsets.
By Sam L., Monday, 17 December , 2007 @ 4:01 pm
I love these guys who “know for abso-damn-lutely posi-damn-tively” what’s “best” for me–especially since they “think” there’s nothing I can do about it. I believe this may be covered under the 2nd Amendment.
By N, O'Brain, Monday, 17 December , 2007 @ 6:44 pm
Watermelons: green on the outside, red on the inside, and dying to get their hand on the whip.
Or maybe the knout.