A+Crude+Awakening-+Pringle

1. Title, director and release year? A Crude Awakening: The Oil Crash, Basil Gelpke & Ray McCormack, 2006

2. What is the central argument or narrative of the film? The film argues that society today has a huge addiction to oil, which comes with many consequences. Essentially, the United States and the rest of the world has developed a dependency on the oil resource, one that has been linked with economic development. Issues such as war and violent conflicts have already risen over the conquest for oil and the number of confrontations are expected to grow as the resource diminishes.

3. What sustainability problems does the film draw out? The sustainability of the world and particularly American’s use of oil is questioned throughout the film. It is evident that oil has become our god and we worship it every day through our normal activities. Even down to the packaging of a product is produced from oil. At one point Barcu, Russia was pumping some 5,000 tons of oil a day during their “boom” period. Control over major oil refineries have been at the root of wars and violent conflicts, including WWI and WWII. These past conflicts over oil are a foreshadowing of the future, especially as resources become more and more scarce. Modern day Iraq and Iran are current examples of oil conflict zones. In 1922, 150,000 barrels of oil burst into the air over a three day period in Venezuela, literally giving the illusion of black rain. Perhaps this illusion has been transformed into a reality in our current world which is governed by oil without consideration for the detrimental, environmental impacts.

4. What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why? Many of the old photography scenes of industrial areas or oil mines were very compelling. In these images, it seemed as if oil was going to last forever and the wealth was infinitely growing. However, after seeing the modern day representations, as in Bacu, Russia, the abandoned oil mines demonstrates the finiteness of the resource. In the film one of the politicians suggested that it was not politically correct to talk about oil and war together, calling it the “O” word. This shows how ignorant our society was and has become about issues concerning the environment and putting these issues in a political context. It is unbelievable how oil is one of the cheapest liquids you can buy in the United States, yet, it is the single most important liquid next to water. Until the price of oil rises dramatically, we will not see drastic change that is needed to sustainable environment. People are primarily focused on the present and if they do not see negative affects in their life most time little is done to change.

5. What parts where you not compelled or convinced by? The film discusses Hubbert’s Peak which describes max production of oil. I am not convinced that the oil companies did not have the slightest idea that they were going to max out in production earlier in the process. They suggest that hydrogen would take 30-50 years of development to be able to implement I feel that if more of an effort was put into research and if hydrogen can be the golden choice we can cut that down by at least half.

6. What additional information does this film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc.? This film makes me want to seek out the amount people who predicted the United States would be over taken by foreign countries in before the 1940s. I am also curious to learn much oil the US has in its current reserves, including the un-mined oil in Alaska and how long this oil would last based on current rate of American oil consumption. I would also like to explore the world’s supply of uranium- it was projected that if we were to implement hydrogen energy we would run out of uranium in only 30 years. This is the first time I have heard this argument towards hydrogen power.

7. What audiences does the film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems? The film attracts older generations of viewers who have been able to see the rise of oil in global markets throughout recent history. It is hard to imagine the film will change views of environmental problems in a positive manner because of its approach. The film repeatedly slams a list of problems at the viewer then explains why all the existing solutions will not work. The film gives a dismal portrait of the future and offers little hope for change.

8. What kinds of action or points of intervention are suggested by the film? The film brings to attention the hybrid car which allows for a smoother transition from oil, however to suggest this is a legitimate solution is misleading. Experts estimate that if we were able to hybrid-tize all of our cars on the road today, we would still use up the same amount of oil over a 7 year period. Hydrogen is suggested as a conceptually great idea, however with this point of action, industry is reluctant to produce because there is no infrastructure and because there is currently no demand for hydrogen cars. Throughout the film, various low-impact solutions are offered and only through a combination of these solutions can the problem of excess emissions be solved. The suggestion that people should revert to Amish ways of life by using horses and living a minimalistic life really has no validity at all and simply is not feasible.

9. What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value? The film could have been more informative on some of the solutions rather than just laying out a timeline of where humankind went wrong. The video continually stressed the concept of peak oil and acted like it was a hard concept to grasp. After about the first 10 or so minutes of them discussing it, I was on the same page and it seemed like they added a lot of filler data that wasn’t necessarily relevant. A positive vibe could have been added to the film to keep the viewer from feeling depressed about the situation with absolute no course of direction to change the problem.