# data[].attributes.body
1.What did you learn about your topic that surprised you the most?
What I learned about this topic is that the great impact this will have and the rippling effect. As a child hearing about oil crisis, I didn't understand it until you start to notice little changes in your everyday life.

2. Provide a real-life example of how this topic is relevant or interesting
for you.
I lived in Alberta in 2012-partially 2014 because my mom had got a job there, and living wise things were expensive. With the market shutting down and the pipe line issue that occurred we moved back to Ontario. Another example, early state of 2020 the gas prices were extremely low that I have ever seen at 70 cents at one point, and it increased significantly during summer. I was always curious regarding the oil industry.

3. If you could pass on your knowledge to a family member or friend, what
do you think is the most important thing to pass on?

I would stress the importance of global footprint that gas and oil has on our planet. To eliminate as much as we can and maybe even the repercussions, a-lot of people are not aware on the effect it has on our life and economy.

# data[].attributes.body
This website has facts and impacts of oil from economy, environment, and society.

Oil and gas are known to be the fastest evolving source of emission. By 2030 Canada is expected to reach 41 percent of emission. Canada's GDP depends strictly on oil extractions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Facts About Canadian Oil Canada's economy is changing.To have a good conversation about what happens next, we need to start with the facts. Canada's economy is changing.To have a good conversation about what happens next, we need to start with the facts. Learn more about Canada's oil Canada's oil sector is complex - with...

# data[].attributes.body
This article it states that we need people to invest in oil and gas market more to prevent a global crisis.
Oil crisis, prior to the pandemic approximelty 1.3 billion homes didn't have access to electricity. statics stated that 2.8 billion lacked access to clean cooking fuels. With covid-19 it's expected to decline -4.4 percent.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A significant increase in oil and gas investment is required to stave off a coming global energy crisis, according to an international body that represents energy ministers from 70 producing and consuming nations including Canada, the United States, China, India, Norway and Saudi Arabia.

Without substantial new investment, world markets could be short 27 million barrels of oil equivalent per day by 2022 due to the sharp drop in spending by producers because of COVID-19, according to a December joint report by the International Energy Forum (IEF) and Boston Consulting Group (BCG).

The report predicts the shortage could rise to 68 million boe/d by 2030 even if demand growth post-COVID continues at below the historical average. It warns that reduced supply could lead to greater market volatility and higher prices, slowing the global economic recovery and jeopardizing energy security and international goals like reducing greenhouse gas emissions and supporting social equity.

"The key issue in a post-COVID-19 market risk assessment should not be peak demand but peak investment," the report says.

"Lower [investment] levels appear to be insufficient to deliver the volumes of oil and gas needed to maintain market stability...Even if oil demand were to flatten, the industry would still need to make significant investments to compensate for production declines (natural oil and gas production decreases over the life of a well as the deposit it taps is depleted)."

The reduced investment in oil and gas is unlikely to result in a faster transition to lower-carbon resources, according to the IEF and BCG. That's because governments would probably see high fuel prices from a market out of balance as a strategic threat, and would seek to boost domestic production in a bid to strengthen energy security.

"Given the energy security concerns that prevail in many countries, the reserves brought online would likely generate a higher level of unwanted greenhouse gas emissions than if pure economics held sway," the report says.
Spending cuts and required investment
IEF and BCG are not alone warning that substantially more needs to be spent on oil and gas development. According to a December report by Rystad Energy, "the world is on track to run out of sufficient oil supplies to meet its needs through 2050," despite potential for lower future demand due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the transition to low-carbon energy sources.

"To meet the global cumulative demand over the next 30 years, undeveloped and undiscovered resources totaling 313 billion barrels of oil need to be added to currently producing assets," according Rystad analysts. They calculate that "to match this requirement, exploration programs will have to discover a worthy-to-develop resource of 139 billion new barrels of liquids by 2050, an impossible task if this decade's low exploration activity levels persist."

IEF and BCG estimate that globally, oil and gas companies cut capital spending by a combined 34 per cent in 2020 and are likely to cut by another 20 to 30 per cent in 2021. This is more than the initial reduction of 28 per cent following the price decline that started in 2014 - and the impacts are going to be steeper and harder to recover from.

In the two years following the 2014 price collapse, oil and gas producers leaned on suppliers in the service sector to cut costs, which they did sharply, by 30 per cent or more.

"This time around, suppliers have less scope to do that," the report says, estimating that in 2014 a $1 cut in capital spending reduced actual activity by 34 cents. In 2020, a $1 cut in spending diminishes actual activity by 87 cents.

Analysis by IEF and BCG suggests that industry investment will have to rise over the next three years by at least 25 per cent annually from 2020 levels, and that by 2030 investment will need to rise by at least $225 billion from 2020 to stave off a crisis.
Increasing social disparity
Lower spending on oil and gas threatens social equity around the world, according to IEF and BCG.

"Even before the pandemic, an estimated 1.3 billion people worldwide had no access to electricity; 2.8 billion lacked access to clean cooking fuels; 2.5 billion had no clean water; 800 million lived in extreme poverty...and air pollution inside buildings caused 4 million premature deaths annually (exceeding current COVID-19 mortalities), according to UN figures," the report says.

The pandemic is stressing the situation further, with global economic growth expected to decline to -4.4 per cent in 2020.

"Against this backdrop, reduced upstream spending by oil and gas companies and tighter investment constraints will make achieving global goals such as affordable access to modern energy services and healthy living conditions more costly and more challenging, increasing social disparities worldwide," the report says.
A barrier to reducing greenhouse gas emissions
Increasing difficulty to invest in oil and gas hampers the ability for producers to reduce their environmental footprint, according to IEF and BCG. This goes against policy objectives, as energy demand forecasts show continued reliance on fossil fuels for some time to come.

Data from IHS Markit indicates that while 2020 could go down in history as a "pivot point" for development of non-carbon energy, the dominance of fossil fuels is decades from over.

In December, analysts forecast that non-carbon energy (wind, solar, geothermal, hydro and nuclear power) would reach or exceed 10 per cent of global demand in 2020, a mark not seen before. If the trend continues, non-carbon energy could meet 13 to 16 per cent of global demand in 2030. That would leave it up to fossil fuels to satisfy 73 to 77 per cent of the world's primary energy needs.

"Fossil fuel demand is unlikely to record persistent demand declines," IHS Markit said. "And a return to global economic growth in 2021 would lead to an increase in overall fossil fuel demand."

The unaltered reproduction of this content is free of charge with attribution to Canadian Energy Centre Ltd.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Report warns global energy crisis looming without increased oil and gas investment - Canadian Energy Centre

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A significant increase in oil and gas investment is required to stave off a coming global energy crisis, according to an international body that represents energy ministers from 70 producing and consuming nations including Canada, the United States, China, India, Norway and Saudi Arabia.

# data[].attributes.body
What happened in 1973?

Gasoline shortage and increase in oil prices left people waiting in massive long lines which caused panic throughout America. The U.S embargo caused a the inflation, expenses gone up and people couldn't afford it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The scene captured in the Associated Press photograph is somewhere on Long Island, but it could have been anywhere in the United States during the oil crisis of 1973. Dozens of cars sit bumper to bumper at a gas station in four long lines, inching toward the pumps, just visible in the distance under butterfly lights. The cars are American, mostly late-model full-size sedans, gas-guzzlers with V-8 engines. The station is a Texaco, which then operated more than 30,000 such outlets across all 50 states, but the branding is oddly out of sync. The sign facing the highway is up-to-date, with the hexagon logo that was the company's standard by 1968; but the building is an aging prewar model, a tired white box trimmed with green speed lines that long before had stopped heralding an optimistic future. Once the station would have gleamed like a harbinger of modernity, dominating the low-rise landscape on the expanding urban periphery. But now, crowded by postwar strips and subdivisions, it is just one more stretch of one more mile of one more American roadside. With its leafless trees and overcast sky, the scene feels desolate. It's the twilight of Autopia - of the United States of the Automobile that had been created from coast to coast and that had transformed the American landscape and the national culture.

Throughout 1973, as demand for fuel outstripped supply, Americans experienced with shock the nation's first-ever peacetime gasoline shortage.

By the fall of 1973, scenes like this were commonplace. Already that spring, as demand for fuel gradually outstripped supply, American drivers everywhere experienced with shock the nation's first-ever peacetime gasoline shortage. But given the realities of postwar energy production and consumption, it had to happen sometime. The United States was using more oil than it produced and relying on greater amounts (nearly 30 percent) of imported crude. Refinery capacity was insufficient to meet the country's seemingly insatiable desire for gasoline (as well as fuel oil for electricity and heating). Back then there were more than 100 million cars on 3.8 million miles of U.S. roads and their gas mileage was lousy (about 13 miles per gallon). But that was OK, because before 1973, gas was cheap and abundant - at least as dispensed at the nation's 220,000 filling stations.

The motorists filling their tanks were just the most obvious manifestation of Autopia and its discontents. Underlying the situation were the monopolistic practices of the country's largest oil companies, which, despite the breakup of Standard Oil way back in 1911, continued to own or control their own reserves, refineries, and retail outlets. In March 1973, the industry augmented its long-standing vertical integration with "conscious parallelism," establishing quotas for crude oil processing and curtailing deliveries to independent refiners. This last action closed the spigot for the independent service stations that accounted for 45 percent of the retail gas market. Within months, 1,200 independents were out of business; thousands of others were operating on limited schedules. Name-brand retailers, meanwhile, were experiencing brisk business and high profits, whether they were Mobil stations in New Jersey or Conocos in Colorado.

The crisis allowed Exxon, Gulf, and Shell to stoke consumer fears through restricted business hours, ten-gallon limits at gas stations, and alarmist full-page newspaper ads.

In May, the Nixon White House announced a voluntary allocation system with a goal of forcing an even distribution of crude oil and gasoline throughout the market. In July, the Federal Trade Commission issued a damning report that blamed Big Oil for the expanding gas shortage. The mounting crisis allowed Exxon, Gulf, and Shell to stoke consumer fears through restricted business hours, ten-gallon limits at stations on major roads (like the New York State Thruway and the New Jersey Turnpike), and alarmist full-page newspaper ads. At the height of the summer driving season, "no gas" signs were legion on roadsides coast-to-coast. The final blow came in late October, with the oil embargo spurred by Saudi Arabia and supported by Arab OPEC members in retaliation for U.S. support of Israel. Since 1945, when President Franklin Roosevelt met secretly with King Abdulaziz Ibn Saud on his way home from the Yalta Conference, the United States and Saudi Arabia had enjoyed a special relationship predicated on economic exchange and security guarantees and founded on the common bond of oil - the Saudis had it, the Americans needed it. For both countries, oil was an essential ingredient of postwar prosperity and geopolitical power. With the embargo, and the artificial oil shortage it created, Saudi Arabia demonstrated its rising power. From October 1973 to March 1974, the price per barrel of crude quadrupled, from $3 to $12. Stateside, the embargo intensified existing shortages, and consumers felt the pinch as gas prices rose nearly 50 percent, from 38 cents to 55 cents per gallon.

"Panic at the pump" and "gasoline fever" set in. News reports described drivers waiting for hours in queues that stretched for miles. Aggravating the actual shortage was the psychological impact: not only the fear of running out of fuel, but also frustration with conservation measures like gasless Sundays and a new federal 55-mile-per-hour speed limit - the kind of limits Americans hadn't experienced since the patriotic restrictions of World War II. Irate motorists turned violent; perceived line cutters, gas siphoners, and service station attendants were subjected to verbal and even physical abuse. Angry truckers were blockading interstates; deranged drivers were shooting up gas pumps; concerned citizens were installing locks on fuel caps. These incidents underscored the impact of the energy crisis, but they also foretold deeper disturbances of the American status quo.

Irate motorists turned violent; perceived line cutters, gas siphoners, and service station attendants were subjected to verbal and even physical abuse.

There were predictable ripple effects, both literal and metaphorical, from a car with an empty tank. There were the gas station closures that threw thousands of small business owners and their employees out of work during the summer and fall; then, in winter, there were layoffs in the automobile industry, and in related manufacturing sectors. With roughly 20 percent of American jobs connected to Detroit, this was understood as the leading edge of the intransigent stagflation that would ultimately mark the decade. "If people drive less," Time magazine observed in November 1973, "companies that rely on car-borne customers are likely to be hurt." To underscore the gravity of the situation, the article named three companies likely to be affected: McDonald's, Holiday Inn, and Walt Disney. It wasn't necessary to name any others because these purveyors of fast food, motor lodging, and family escapism were ubiquitous landmarks of the American roadside - emblems of the Autopian transformation of the midcentury landscape.

In those years McDonald's was in a period of hyper-expansion, with more than 2,600 franchises and a massive modernization campaign underway to replace its original hamburger stands with mansard-roofed eat-in restaurants. The self-styled "Nation's Innkeeper" was also enjoying record growth: some 200,000 driving travelers stayed every night at a Holiday Inn. By 1973, with more than 1,400 motels, each equipped with an iconic fifty-foot "Great Sign," the chain had become "inescapable on American highways" - typically the nation's older state and federal routes rather than newer interstates. With new franchises supposedly opening every three days, Holiday Inn was, as described by historians John Jakle and Keith Sculle, at once "a catalyst and a reflection of the age of mass travel." And two years earlier Disney World had opened on 27,000 acres of swampland outside Orlando and midway between Tampa and Daytona Beach on the recently completed I-4. As with the original Disneyland, in Southern California, the Florida theme park's easy-on/easy-off location was critical to its success - and to the success of the hotels, restaurants, and resorts that surrounded the park.

The 1970s oil crisis was nothing less than a cultural crisis that destabilized the foundations of modern U.S. society.

But with the embargo, the outlook for car-dependent businesses had become increasingly gloomy. In November, McDonald's, Holiday Inn, and Disney, along with other publicly traded companies that investors believed would be hurt by gas shortages, got caught in the sharpest Dow Jones plunge in more than a decade. But if the economic impacts were grave, the cultural consequences were even more severe, as Americans began to grapple with the social consequences of driving less. Technology historian David Nye has described the 1970s energy crisis as nothing less than a "cultural crisis" that destabilized the foundations upon which modern U.S. society was built, and ultimately challenged the so-called "American way of life." The crisis, Nye argued, had revealed the ugly face of human agency in creating, over a half century, and especially after World War II, social and spatial systems organized almost entirely around the car.

Nye's analysis is not merely the result of hindsight; the degree of contemporary recognition of the situation is remarkable. "The phrase is misleading," argued the syndicated columnist Joseph Alsop in April 1973, "not because there is no energy crisis but because the crisis involves so much more than mere high gas prices and rationing of automotive gasoline"; and what it involved was "just about every aspect of every American's daily life." It was sobering to realize, as the media regularly reported, that from the spectacular to the quotidian, nothing would be untouched by the crisis. In Las Vegas, the lights of Glitter Gulch and the Strip were dimmed to save electricity, and with the signs turned off the sheds appeared considerably less decorated. To be sure, this was a largely symbolic gesture intended "merely to set an example"; but to many observers it seemed also a tacit acknowledgement that fewer cars were cruising Fremont Street and Las Vegas Boulevard than before the gas shortage.

Outside Chicago, suburban housewives - whose daily circuit of schools, sports, and shopping were made possible by the family station wagon - considered the impossibility of life without wheels. In December 1973, a reporter for the New York Times tracked one suburbanite, Bunny Orkin, on a round of several dozen errands over the course of a week, and concluded that Orkin's "battered" old wagon - a 1966 Oldsmobile Vista Cruiser - had become a "an accepted necessity of life, like a two-car garage and a color television set." And more, the reporter continued, the station wagon had become "a virtual symbol of a highly mobile, sprawling suburbia where everyone drives everywhere ... Station wagons clog the lots of the drive-in banks, the drive-in restaurants and, of course, that metropolitan center of motordom, the giant shopping center." In Los Angeles, this dependency was even more acute. The Los Angeles Times reported that the typical local housewife traveled more than 10,000 miles a year conducting the ordinary business of daily life, as did numerous laborers and office workers, all oriented to those "distinct and dependent forms of retailing, wholesaling, journey to work, recreational and industrial patterns" that had emerged in a city "built to the scale of the automobile."

The typical housewife traveled more than 10,000 miles a year conducting the ordinary business of daily life, as did numerous laborers and office workers.

As daily papers, nightly newscasts, and weekly magazines made excruciatingly clear, the energy crisis confirmed that the increasingly dispersed patterns of postwar development had intensified the nation's reliance on cars - and fueled its Autopian self-image. "Today, rambling suburbs have spread out of urban areas, and millions of Americans drive to work by car," Time declared in November 1973; the magazine drove home this point at least once a month well into 1974. Demographic data and geographic analyses back up the journalistic assertions. Writing in the March 1973 edition of the Annals of the Association of American Geographers, John Hudson noted that growth in the "suburban fringes [of] major metropolitan areas" had been so intense in the past few decades that new analytical models were required to understand existing patterns of settlement and density. Indeed, in the postwar decades, the federal trifecta of mortgage insurance, accelerated depreciation, and highway subsidies, along with local efforts to dismantle streetcars and inter-urbans, had transformed the United States into Autopia with a capital A; or "Car Country," as the environmental historian Christopher Wells put it.

Whatever the term, the impact of the energy crisis was unmistakable. As existing routines were disrupted, "sweeping changes ... to the way people work, travel, and spend their leisure time" were inevitable, as Time predicted in a piece titled "A Time of Learning to Live with Less." Even the newest roadside landmarks - businesses clustered at interstate exits - were threatened with obsolescence; one New York Times article wondered whether "diminishing gas supplies" would revive "the bus, the train, even the horse."

There is a rueful tone to much of this coverage, an awareness that an era was coming to a close, even if commentators rarely agreed on what, specifically, was ending. To some, the import was grandly ideological; the energy shortage would surely delegitimate any latter-day versions of manifest destiny, any reflexive equating of growth with progress, no matter the cost. If the sheer expanse of the continent had prompted an American "doctrine of bigness" in the 19th century, then what the journalist Stefan Kanfer called Henry Ford's "profligate invention" gave new life to an "ethic of unbounded growth" in the 20th century - until, that is, the energy crisis offered "a painful, overdue comeuppance."

Out on the American roadside, local responses to the most obvious effect of the crisis - the wave of service station closures - varied sharply. Some worried about the visual and psychological effect of abandonment, claiming that blight had reached the suburbs for the first time since the Great Depression; from Long Island to Los Angeles, there were debates about ordinances to prohibit gas stations from operating within 1,000 feet of each other. Others mourned the passing of the gas station as "a way of life" and an institution that not only serviced automobiles but also operated as a de facto community resource, a suburban counterpart to the urban shopkeepers celebrated by Jane Jacobs. A trade association spokesperson described the gas station operator as "the unpaid information center of the country, the lubricator of baby carriages and kids' bicycles, the keeper of the nation's toilets [and] the community Joe who sponsors Little League teams."

Some argued that the energy crisis offered 'a painful, overdue comeuppance' to a car-dependent nation.

A year before the crisis, in an essay in The Atlantic titled "The Last Traffic Jam," former Interior secretary Stewart Udall warned that the United States had reached a tipping point where the social costs of the car-oriented way of life were outweighing the benefits. Arguing for an ethos of "less is more," and borrowing from the language of the campaign for population control, Udall made a case for putting "a limit on the automobile population" while at the same time supporting mass transit, denser communities, and preservation of open space. Udall's arguments were prescient, and at least some of his predictions seemed confirmed the following summer when Congress approved a compromise three-year extension to the Highway Trust Fund, the taxation mechanism that financed the construction of the interstates. Since its establishment in 1956, the Trust Fund had been used exclusively for automobile-oriented infrastructure; as a result, it had, in the words of a New York Times editorial, "more to do with determining the physical character and social style of American cities and suburbs than any other Government program." The Trust Fund was rooted in the conviction that the automobile was, as another Times piece put it, "sacrosanct," and so were its highways. Thus it was meaningful when the extension ratified in July 1973 permitted the states, for the first time, to use a small portion of their revenues to finance mass transit.

On December 31, 1973, Time published a cover story that seemed a kind of eulogy for Autopia. The article mistily recalled the pleasures of the automobile and dutifully catalogued its deleterious side effects. There was the exhilaration of barreling down a highway and the giddy sense of unbounded geographic mobility; but there was also air pollution, traffic congestion, tedious commutes, insidious debt, roadway fatalities. And most obviously there was "a blighted landscape of junkyards, filling stations and hotdog stands." Yet even as the social and statistical negatives piled up, car dependency was assumed to be inevitable; it was never truly questioned. Challenges to the existing order that were already underway, like the freeway revolts in urban centers, especially in San Francisco, went unmentioned. For the popular magazine, there was a literally larger concern: the nation's "gigantic geographic dispersion" was too great, its "drive-in economy" was too important, and too many citizens had no other means of transportation. It was perhaps possible to imagine "a movement of middle-class whites back to the city," and to speculate that this might help "contain suburban sprawl"; but in those years this seemed at best a hazy dream.

Such was the nation's conundrum as the energy crisis worsened. If America was unable or unwilling to give up automotive transportation, it was at least ready to acknowledge it had a problem with the car. More precisely, like the functioning addict it had become during the past half-century, the country was ready to acknowledge that the car had a problem. Which car? The "classic, distinctively American, roomy, powerful, glittering family car ... built for an age when 50-m.p.h. speed limits, gasless Sundays and talk of rationing would have seemed like blasphemies," in the words of the Time eulogy. The point was plain: America needn't end its love affair with the car; only its love affair with the "big car."

The smaller, fuel-efficient cars effectively enabled the continuation of American auto-dependence.

This distinction was not as inconsequential as it might seem. For the American public, there was, as the title of another Time article put it, "a painful change to thinking small," as citizens were forced to reevaluate the vehicles that had become status symbols and objects of desire - to sacrifice the "two-ton eight-cylinder behemoth" on the altar of fuel efficiency. The shift in market demand spurred by the gas shortages prompted Detroit to finally produce smaller, fuel-saving models to compete with the increasingly popular Japanese imports. It didn't really matter that the pre-crisis gas guzzler never quite died - millions continued to roam the highways for the rest of the decade, through the oil shortage of 1979 and even as the sun rose on Ronald Reagan's "Morning in America." Fuel efficiency was the zero-sum game in the automotive landscape because the post-crisis car did nothing to lessen traffic congestion or environmental blight. In fact, the Honda Civic and the Chevy Chevette effectively enabled the continuation of American auto-dependence, of the dispersed settlement patterns and the drive-in cultural practices. The United States would remain Car Country for the foreseeable future; but still, something had definitely changed in the automobile utopia.

In the Rearview Mirror

As the oil crisis intensified, diverse commentators attempted to give a name to what many regarded as a distinct period that was receding into history. Stewart Udall argued that we were reaching "the end of automania," an era characterized by the greedy consumption of land as well as oil. In Congress, a committee on atomic energy referred to "the deepening twilight of the fossil fuel age," acknowledging the lingering social and economic effects of decades of cheap and abundant fuel. John Jerome, a one-time editor for Car & Driver who'd renounced his ties to Detroit, went so far as to pronounce "the death of the automobile" - a demise hastened, in his view, by the excesses and overproduction of the big car, and by the "ancillary disasters" of pollution, congestion, and environmental degradation. Jerome saw the early 1970s as an inflection point: the moment when America finally began to "audit the books" on the "supercorporation" of the automobile industry. And he made an important historiographic prediction: "When the history of the automobile is written, scholars will necessarily focus careful attention on this crucial period."

Yet scholars were already focusing on this crucial period. One of the first to recognize the end-stage significance of the oil crisis was the historian James J. Flink. Flink's first book, America Adopts the Automobile, 1895-1910, was an early social history that studied the impact of the car on everyday life before World War I. When the book was published, in 1970, it marked a real departure from the typical automotive history, which tended to focus on the great men and their great machines (Henry Ford, the Model T, etc.). The following year, at the annual meeting of the American Historical Association, in the first-ever session devoted to the automobile, Flink expanded his purview to study the broader and more ineffable cultural effects of the car; his particular interest was its collective image in the American psyche as this image evolved over the course of the 20th century.

Flink identified three stages of automobile consciousness. In the first, which ran roughly from the early turn-of-the-century experiments to the Ford assembly line at Highland Park, Americans enthusiastically embraced the car, or at least recognized that it would inevitably influence the country's social structures and physical landscapes. In the second stage, from the consumerist twenties to the equally consumerist postwar decades, they came to idolize the car and thus readily transformed existing institutions and environments to accommodate the machine. In Flink's final stage, starting in the late 1950s, Americans shift gears and decry the car as a major social, economic, and environmental problem. But events were moving fast, and just a few years later, in The Car Culture, he extended the chronological scope to encompass the energy crisis and Richard Nixon's resignation in August 1974. Flink recognized the perils of writing a history of the present; yet he dared to conclude that what we were then witnessing was truly "the ending of the age of automobility."

The Car Culture is at once a history and a polemic; indeed, 1973 and the oil crisis were, to Flink, what 1890 and the "closing of the frontier" had been to Frederick Jackson Turner. In "The Significance of the Frontier in American History," presented at the 1893 meeting of the American Historical Association, Turner famously argued that the continual march of westward settlement - of introducing "civilization" into the "wilderness" - was the decisive factor in shaping a distinctly American culture and character. And so, when the 1890 census showed that there remained no unsettled land in the continental United States, Turner concluded that the "first period in American history" had ended. To Flink, the comparison was not over-dramatic; it was apt. The automobile, he insisted, as both a fact and an idea, had made a more profound impact on 20th-century America than the frontier had on 19th-century America. And by the mid 1970s it had become clear, he argued, that "the automobile culture and the values that sustained it are no longer tenable" ; and that as a consequence the country was entering a new phase of historical development. Unsurprisingly, before long the historian would realize that reports of the car's death, his own and others, were greatly exaggerated. By the end of the Reagan administration, he conceded what had become obvious; "there can be no doubt that the automobile will continue into the 21st century to be the dominant mode of personal transportation in the world."

The Triumph of Nostalgia

Given Flink's equation of the end of automobility with the closing of the frontier, it is intriguing to see a parallel dynamic in popular culture. Just as an earlier generation had mythologized the cowboy of the vanishing wilderness, so too did more contemporary storytellers sentimentalize the car culture of the mid-20th century. By the early 1970s, amidst the energy crisis - amidst the growing awareness of a new world of hard limits - Americans were increasingly nostalgic for a not-so-distant past that seemed somehow simpler and more innocent. This longing is epitomized by the popular and critical success of American Graffiti, George Lucas's coming-of-age cinematic narrative, released in 1973 but set a decade earlier, in the late summer of 1962, in the Modesto, California, of the director's youth.

Amidst the energy crisis - and a growing awareness of a new world of hard limits - Americans were increasingly nostalgic for a not-so-distant past.

In his influential 1983 essay, "Postmodernism and Consumer Society," Fredric Jameson argues that American Graffiti inaugurated a new genre: "the nostalgia film." What separated the nostalgia film from any other movie about the past, Jameson asserts, was the attempt to recapture "specific generational moments," in this case "the atmosphere and stylistic peculiarities" of the Eisenhower era. To the movie critic of the Los Angeles Times, Lucas's rendering of the recent past amounted to a kind of "collective spiritual autobiography." This is most evident in the film's use of vintage cars and the culture those cars created. Over a twelve-hour period from sunset to sunrise, the movie follows a group of white middle-class teenagers as they cruise the strip, hang out at a drive-in, drag race on the edge of town, and talk tentatively about their future. In the film, cars are both subject and object, serving as mise-en-scène, as narrative device, and very nearly as dramatis personae: an elusive Thunderbird, a reliable Impala, an aging Deuce Coupe. The streets, storefronts, and parking lots were real enough (the film was shot on location, with Petaluma providing a convincing stand-in for Modesto), but a decade's remove seemed to distill them into an almost archetypal landscape. And while the cars, clothes, and music are essential to the film's recreation of that distinct cultural moment, so too is its principal location. Mels Drive-In appears in the very first frame, behind the opening credits; as the sky darkens, at dusk, the main characters cruise by and pull in, park and converse. Throughout the film, they drive all around town; yet they always return to Mels.

Tellingly, Mels functions as a cultural landmark beyond the film. Though it was a real diner - the original opened in San Francisco in 1947, and there were several outlets in the Bay Area - it was rendered in American Graffiti as an iconic presence, transcending the particulars of place; in the words of film critic Stanley Kauffmann, as "an oval neon temple." Though drive-ins like Mels had been commonplace in the American landscape, and especially in California, since the 1930s, by midcentury they'd become a favorite hangout for teenagers with wheels. In American Graffiti, against the backdrop of a blazing Technicolor sunset, the establishing shot of Mels seems an Autopian update of Edward Hopper's Nighthawks, with a big sky and a parking lot instead of city buildings and sidewalks. In Mels, too, we see an expanse of plate glass revealing a curved counter. But at the drive-in, it was the curbside carhop service that was the draw.

Jameson describes the film's nostalgic milieu as "a desperate attempt to appropriate a missing past." And in fact, by the time American Graffiti began filming, Mels was already a relic. As the producer acknowledged at the time, "circular drive-ins ... the favorite stomping grounds for teenagers and their hot rods in [the 1960s], had virtually disappeared." In truth, there was nothing remarkable about the original Mels, which occupied a workaday structure designed and built by the carpenter father of one of the restaurant's founders. But in American Graffiti, the drive-in, seen through the camera lens, functions as a historical marker of an idealized recent past; a past that had been, in the shrewd phrase of Jean Baudrillard, utterly "aestheticized by retro."

Had George Lucas not immortalized it in celluloid, Mels Drive-In would have been forgotten long ago. The franchise was sold just before the San Francisco location, on South Van Ness, was scouted for American Graffiti; the new owners went bankrupt soon after the movie's release; by the late 1970s, the site was vacant and remained so for the rest of the century. Thus was the real Mels an insignificant casualty of the restlessness of real estate preferences and retail demographics. "The death knell has already sounded for another manifestation of the car-crazed society," the New York Tim es observed in 1978, in an elegy for the drive-in restaurant. "I'm sorry to see them go. But maybe I'm just being nostalgic," said an executive at Bob's Big Boy.

Today's enthusiasts are hailing electric and driverless vehicles, and car sharing and ride apps, as the fulfillment of an old promise: the infinite extension of the territories of the automobile.

A few years later, that nostalgia had intensified to the point where Steven Weiss, son of the eponymous Mel, relaunched what he hoped would be recognized as a beloved brand (or at least a registered trademark). In 1985 Weiss opened a new Mels, at a new location, in San Francisco; today he runs a chain of eight Mels Drive-Ins stretching from the Bay Area to Southern California. These are usually described as "replicas" of the drive-in that appeared in American Graffiti. Yet beyond the signature neon sign, they have little in common with the original, unprepossessing Mels, and the differences suggest the ways in which nostalgia for a golden age of Autopia has operated beyond cinematic space. For the Mels of today is less reproduction than representation. The restaurants are overloaded with the sort of "period" chrome and neon details that now seem enough to evoke an image of early '60s car culture; more significantly, they feature indoor seating and, occasionally, outdoor tables. In other words, Mels Drive-In is no longer a drive-in. In the twilight of Autopia, nostalgia triumphs as simulacra.

But that is not all. While some roadside aficionados have fetishized a bygone age of automobility, seeing in its artifacts the evidence of a more innocent time, today's enthusiasts are imagining Autopia anew, hailing electric and driverless vehicles, and car sharing and ride apps, as the fulfillment of a long-sought promise: the infinite extension of the territories of the automobile. But before we remake our metropolitan landscapes once more in the image of the car, we should take a good long look in the rearview mirror. We have been down this road before.

Your support makes our work possible.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The scene captured in the Associated Press photograph is somewhere on Long Island, but it could have been anywhere in the United States during the oil crisis of 1973. Dozens of cars sit bumper to bumper at a gas station in four long lines, inching toward the pumps, just visible in the distance under butterfly lights.

# data[].attributes.body
The oil crisis has a great impact on not only car fuels, also climate change, economic crisis and energy source. This should be a concern globally.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
TRUMP'S LIKELY FERC NOMINEE WON'T BE SLAM-DUNK FOR COAL BAILOUT: Think again if you assume President's Trump's expected nominee to fill a seat on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission will be a rubber stamp for the administration's coal bailout.

At first glance, opponents of subsidizing uneconomic coal and nuclear plants would have reason to worry about Bernard McNamee, the presumed nominee for a spot on FERC.

McNamee currently leads the policy office of the Energy Department, the very agency that Trump tasked to devise a plan rescuing coal and nuclear using rarely invoked emergency powers.

But in conversations with nearly 10 energy policy experts, conservative allies, and politicians who've worked with McNamee - all of whom oppose subsidizing coal and nuclear plants - they describe a principled, serious, independent figure who would approach his new job without a bias in favor of Trump's agenda.

'Independent' thinker: "If the Trump administration's goal is to politicize FERC, they picked the wrong person," Kenny Stein, director of policy and federal affairs for the American Energy Alliance, said of McNamee.

"Bernie is not going to do that," Stein told Josh. "He has decades of experience doing filings with FERC, going before FERC. He is very familiar with independent role of the commission. So I won't expect him to try to upend the commission, or its process or goals."

Stein worked with McNamee when they were both policy advisers for Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, from 2013 to 2014.

Free-market background: Allies say his work for Cruz, and in other stops, reveal McNamee to be a supporter of free-market principles, who dislikes subsidies and would oppose efforts to favor coal and nuclear over other energy sources.

McNamee has also led the Tenth Amendment center at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a conservative think tank that opposes propping up coal and nuclear plants..

Conservative roots: But McNamee got his start as a policy adviser from 1995 to 1998 for Virginia Gov. George Allen, a Republican who credits McNamee for helping reshape the state's government to model "conservative principles" in its welfare programs, criminal justice system, and public schools.

"Bernie is so studious, he is very principled, he's a conservative, and he likes applying the law and constitution, rather than inventing it," Allen told Josh. "If confirmed to FERC, he would decide issues based on merits and facts and would be constrained by whatever the evidence is."

The big question: But can he credibly change hats? McNamee's supporters say it's unfair to criticize him for advocating Trump administration policy priorities at the Energy Department.

"I would raise a distinction between his personal views and what he says at DOE," Stein said. "He is good lawyer and advocate. He is advocating a position that he is employed to advocate for. The coal subsidy scheme was already defeated at FERC and adding Bernie to FERC won't defeat that status quo."

Welcome to Daily on Energy, compiled by Washington Examiner Energy and Environment Writers John Siciliano (@JohnDSiciliano) and Josh Siegel (@SiegelScribe). Email dailyonenergy@washingtonexaminer.com for tips, suggestions, calendar items and anything else. If a friend sent this to you and you'd like to sign up, click here. If signing up doesn't work, shoot us an email and we'll add you to our list.

RICK PERRY PREPARED TO PICK 'WINNERS AND LOSERS': Energy Secretary Rick Perry reaffirmed Tuesday the Trump administration doesn't have a problem helping coal and nuclear at the expense of other energy sources.

"The government's been picking winners and losers since government was created," Perry said at the Energy Department's National Renewable Energy Laboratory, in comments reported by Bloomberg. "We do it by tax policy, we do it by regulation, we do it by permits. Pick good! Be smart! Use the right kind of technical people to help you decide where to invest and pick the winners, pick them right. Government's going to continue to do that."

Perry has used rhetoric in like this in the past, saying that subsidies may impose costs on consumers, but "you cannot put a dollar figure on the cost to keep America free."

THE SENATE ENERGY COMMITTEE COMES BACK TO LIFE ON WEDNESDAY: The Senate Energy Committee jumps back into action late Wednesday afternoon, but the major action doesn't start until Thursday with a confirmation hearing for William Cooper, the Energy Department's top lawyer.

Letters from industry groups started piling up at the committee, calling for the quick confirmation of Cooper.

The air conditioning industry was the first to chime in: Given the role the Energy Department plays in setting requirements for how the industry builds their equipment, it makes sense that manufacturers want some say on the next Energy Department general counsel.

Their impressions of him are positive: Cooper "clearly has a deep understanding of energy policy and the regulatory process under which it is implemented," especially given his service as a senior staffer to two House committees with energy jurisdiction, said Joe Trauger, regulatory affairs VP with the Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute, in a letter sent this week to the committee. The trade group clashed with the agency during the Obama administration, as the agency sought to ramp up the stringency of standards at a pace the industry did not agree with.

Second to chime in on Cooper was the natural gas pipeline industry: The pipeline industry has become increasingly reliant on the Energy Department for natural gas export permits.

Don Santa, the president of the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America, said in a letter sent to the committee on Wednesday that Cooper recognizes the "necessity of expanding and maintaining the pipeline infrastructure that connects domestically produced natural gas to markets."

The Energy Committee is also slated to take up the confirmation of Lane Genatowski to be director of the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy at the Energy Department.

The research agency within the Department of Energy has been a target for major cuts under Trump's last two budget proposals, although Congress has sought to keep it healthy and up and running. Genatowski is has extensive experience in the banking sector.

Meanwhile, the committee holds a legislative hearing on Wednesday on National Parks' bills, but it covers nothing too controversial or reform-focused.

JUDGE SLAMS CHILDREN'S CLIMATE LAWSUIT IN LATE-NIGHT RULING: A judge in Washington state issued a late-night ruling Tuesday that killed off a climate change lawsuit filed against the state by a group of child activists.

King County Superior Court Judge Michael Scott ruled in favor of the State of Washington's motion to dismiss the lawsuit, Aji P. v. State of Washington. The 13 young activists in the suit argue that the state is violating their constitutional rights through actions that cause climate change. Judge Scott ruled that issues brought up in the case are political questions that cannot be resolved by a court, and must be addressed by Congress and the president.

A similar lawsuit by child activists has also targeted the Trump administration, and will be heard in federal district court in October. It appears the child plaintiffs are having better luck going up against big government, and not the states.

WHEELER NOTES FAILURES IN FLINT AND GOLD KING MINE DISASTER: Environmental Protection Agency acting administrator Andrew Wheeler says the agency must improve its communications with citizens about the risks they face from environmental crises.

"We have fallen short in the past from our response to the Gold King Mine in Colorado, to the Kanawha River in West Virginia, to Flint, Michigan," Wheeler said. "We owe it to the American public to improve our risk communication."

Wheeler made the comments Wednesday morning in a video address to the members of the the first in-person National Environmental Justice Advisory Council public meeting in Boston.

The three environmental disasters he mentioned all grabbed national headlines and embroiled EPA in controversy. Earlier this month marked the three-year anniversary of the Gold King mine spill, in which EPA was to blame for sending 3 million gallons of toxic sludge into the Animas River that the agency is still in the midst of cleaning up. The Flint, Michigan, drinking water crisis became part of the 2016 presidential race, with candidates trying to one-up each other on promises regarding Flin'ts recovery. And the 2014 chemical spill in West Virginia made water undrinkable in the state across nine counties.

EPA: TRUMP'S CLEAN CAR RULES WOULD INCREASE HIGHWAY FATALITIES: EPA had argued for months that annual traffic fatalities would increase by an average of 17 deaths per year under Trump's clean car rules, according to documents released Tuesday. The documents showed that EPA fought for months against a Transportation Department analysis of the rules that said they would prevent about 1,000 fatalities per year. It only makes sense that EPA saying the opposite would make headlines on a slow news Tuesday.

But does it mean anything? Seeing that EPA now appears to have signed off on the rule using the DOT analysis, it is unclear what it means for the agencies.

However, it could be used against Trump: To be sure, opponents will be digging through the heap of documents released Tuesday to discover what other gems they can find to argue against the regulations.

California has already preemptively sued the administration over the regulations, and the environmentalists at preparing to mount a major offensive to block Trump's rollback.

HOW TO PREVENT THE NEXT OIL CRISIS: The 400,000-member strong Consumer Energy Alliance released a policy blueprint Wednesday morning for avoiding the harmful consequences of a rise in oil prices.

The group includes everyone from large steel manufacturers to fuel-dependent trucking firms and airlines. Even if the price of oil rises by a few pennies, the implications for rising industry and consumer costs will be huge, the report explains. "As little as a one-cent increase in the average price of diesel fuel can add up to another $350 to $370 million per year in fuel costs across the shipping industry -- eventually making its way across the supply chain and into the price of products we purchase at the grocery store," the study reads.

The report's strategy is focused on federal lands: "While fluctuations in global energy markets are part of the problem, American energy resources are the solution," according to the report. "Currently, the United States has large amounts of oil and natural gas resources on federal lands onshore and offshore, as well as technologically feasible renewable energy solutions," it continues.

In addition to drilling, the policy blueprint also calls for more renewable energy: Don't count out other forms of energy. The group believes it will take a combination of all forms of energy to insulate the U.S. from global energy price shocks.

This will take a heavy lift by Congress and the administration: The report calls for significant reforms to the Renewable Fuel Standard, the nation's biofuel program. It wants more biofuels introduced into the U.S. fuel system to act as a price cushion when oil prices go up. "In addition, the federal government should support the research, development, and demonstration of advanced biofuels to ensure their commercial success," it says.

The group also calls for Congress and the administration to leverage "advancements made with regards to vehicle technologies."

But oil production must increase: "The single largest factor in the price of gasoline and diesel at the pump is the price of oil," it explains. "In order to foster responsible development of domestic oil supplies, the federal government should recognize the significant oil and natural gas resources on federal lands."

TRUMP ADMINISTRATION'S LATEST OFFSHORE DRILLING AUCTION IN GULF FARES SLIGHTLY BETTER THAN LAST: The Trump administration on Wednesday morning held a new auction for offshore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, yielding $178 million in winning bids, a modest improvement from its last major lease sale.

The 77 million-acre offering is slightly larger than a similar oil and natural gas lease sale conducted by the Interior Department in March, in what the agency billed as the as the largest offshore drilling sale in U.S. history.

Comparing results: The new sale covered 77.3 million acres and 14,474 unleased blocks, in federal waters offshore Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida. It received 171 bids by 29 companies, with Hess Corporation making the largest bid at $25 million.

It covers almost the same area as the previous sale, in which companies bid on just 1 percent of available acreage.

The March 21 sale offered 76.9 million acres, raising $124.8 million on 159 bids from 33 companies, including Shell, Chevron, Total and BP.

Stressing improvement: Trump administration officials said Wednesday's sale was an improvement, and downplayed perceptions of reduced interest in offshore oil and gas drilling.

"I look at it as a positive sale," Michael Celata, Gulf of Mexico regional director at the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, told reporters Wednesday morning. "There is obviously continued interest in deep water. Overall, I still think the Gulf is a very viable place."

But risks abound: The industry may not be overly interested in offshore drilling, critics say, because it is expensive, more risky, and overshadowed by easier-to-access onshore fracking opportunities from the shale boom.

POWER FINALLY RESTORED TO ALL ENERGY CUSTOMERS IN PUERTO RICO: Power has been restored to the final home in Puerto Rico nearly a year after Hurricane Maria destroyed the island's electricity grid.

The island's state-run power utility Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, or PREPA, confirmed Tuesday that a family in Ponce became the last customers to have had their power restored.

Puerto Rico has spent $3.2 billion on repairs, installing some 52,000 new electrical poles and 6,000 miles of wire, the New York Times reported.

That's not all: But there's more work to do. Jose Ortiz, PREPA's new CEO, said up to one-quarter of the completed work to restore the power grid after the storm will have to be redone, to rebuild in a more sustainable way.

"There are many patches - too many patches - developed just to bring power to the people," Ortiz told the Times. "Now we have to redo that thing."

Rebuilding 101: Earlier this summer, the Energy Department released a report recommending ways to make Puerto Rico's power grid more resilient from future disasters, and criticizing PREPA's performance during Maria.

The report said Puerto Rico should get more of its power from renewables, as required by local law, and lessen its dependence on imported fossil fuels.

CLIMATE CHANGE ACTIVISTS TOUT PRIMARY WIN: The anti-fossil fuel group 350.org says it received a victory in Tuesday night's Minnesota primary win by Democrat Ilhan Omar for Congress.

"Ilhan Omar's victory joins a wave of primary wins for climate progressives," said May Boeve, 350 Action's executive director. "Her campaign is lifting up climate action and challenging Big Oil billionaires as part of a broad platform for justice," Boeve said in a statement.

Boeve's group rose to prominence during the 2016 presidential election: The group was notorious for pressuring candidates to endorse a 100-percent renewable energy platform that calls for an end to all drilling and mining. The movement the group helped foment is often referred to as "Keep It In the Ground."

Boeve said Omar supports a move toward 100-percent renewable energy as a jobs creator. "Minnesotans deserve a representative in Congress who's willing to fight against dangerous fossil fuel projects ... and support the transition to a 100% renewable energy economy that puts millions of Americans to work," Boeve stated.

Boeve's mid-term strategy is to back Democrats that support the 100-percent renewable platform: On top of Omar, the group has also endorsed several other Democratic congressional candidates, including Deb Haaland of New Mexico, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Jess King of Pennsylvania, Katie Wilson of New York, Dana Balter of New York, and Rashida Tlaib of Minnesota.

It has also endorsed Democratic Senate candidate Kevin de León of California, and the gubernatorial candidates Cynthia Nixon in New York, Ben Jealous in Maryland, Andrew Gillum in Florida, and Bob Massie in Massachusetts.

CHINA FILES WTO COMPLAINT ON TRUMP'S SOLAR TARIFFS: Trade tensions between China and the U.S. worsened Tuesday, as Beijing filed a complaint with the World Trade Organization over Trump's solar tariffs.

China was the main target of the 30 percent tariffs on imported solar panels that Trump imposed in January, the first of the president's trade moves that have left U.S. companies begging for exemptions, worried about paying more for overseas components.

Threatening China's dominance: About 65 percent of all solar modules are made in China, and seven of the top 10 module manufacturers are Chinese.

"As the U.S. violations have severely distorted the global market [for solar panels] and seriously damaged China's trade interests, China's use of the WTO dispute settlement mechanism is a necessary measure to safeguard its legitimate rights and interests and maintain multilateral trade rules," the commerce ministry statement said in its filing, reported by Reuters.

FLORIDA GOVERNOR DECLARES EMERGENCY FOR RED TIDE PROBLEM: Florida Gov. Rick Scott has declared a state of emergency to combat toxic algal blooms, which are killing wildlife and harming beaches.

An outbreak of toxic algal blooms, known as red tide, has lasted for nine months in waters off Florida's southwestern coast.

The harm to life: Florida residents in retirement communities are reporting respiratory problems from vapors associated with red tide, the Washington Post reported. Almost 300 sea turtles have been found dead since January.

The emergency declaration covers seven counties stretching from Tampa Bay south to the Everglades. Scott, a Republican running for Senate, said he is providing $1.5 million in emergency funding to respond to the environmental crisis.

Answering the climate question: Is climate change contributing to the problem? While red tide is a natural occurrence, they have occurred more frequently seem since the 1950s and 1960s. Scientists say climate change could be making red tide more common, because warmer waters can create ripe conditions for algal growth.

Touring the damage: Officials from the EPA, Interior Department, and Army Corps of Engineers on Wednesday are touring areas impacted by the Florida algal bloom, led by Rep. Francis Rooney, a Republican.

TRUMP HOTEL IN CHICAGO SUED OVER RIVER WATER USE: Trump International Hotel & Tower in Illinois is being blamed by the state for allegedly threatening the ecosystem of the Chicago River.

A lawsuit filed by Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan claims that the building uses nearly 20 million gallons of river water on a daily basis for various cooling systems. The warm water is then put back into the river.

As a result, the lawsuit alleges the complex has not met various requirements involved with a state permit designed to mitigate the harm to fish.

The Trump Organization has accused Madigan, a Democrat, of filing the lawsuit because of political motives.

RUNDOWN

Reuters Chinese oil importers shun U.S. crude despite tariff reversal

Bloomberg Elon Musk's vast oil conspiracy ends with Saudi billions

New York Times Puerto Rico spent 11 months turning the power back on. They finally got to her.

Washington Post The next five years will be 'anomalously warm,' scientists predict

Wall Street Journal Diamondback to acquire Energen as oil patch consolidation continues

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Daily on Energy: Trump's likely FERC nominee won't be slam-dunk for coal bailout

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
TRUMP'S LIKELY FERC NOMINEE WON'T BE SLAM-DUNK FOR COAL BAILOUT: Think again if you assume President's Trump's expected nominee to fill a seat on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission will be a rubber stamp for the administration's coal bailout.

# data[].attributes.body
Sooner or later the time will come when we run out of oil, if we take the right precautions. As in the electricity we use, how much you drive.

# data[].attributes.body
This image is a great example of the increase in oil prices that we will be facing.

# data[].attributes.body
Oil Crisis in Canada

In this video Mayor of Calgary Naheed Nenshi stated that with the pandemic, Canada is faced with an oil crisis which can lead to an economic crisis. This has been an ongoing battle since 2014. This leads to a high rate of unemployment and the quality of living to be much more expensive. Mayor Nenshi is concerned about where they will be with the Alberta Economy. Stated that the Federal government knows how to fight through the economic crisis, although facing with coivd-19 it has been hard.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How bad are things in Canada’s oil capital?

# data[].attributes.body
How much oil do we have left?

This video dives deep into oil reserves and how crucial it is to have a sustainable lifestyle. Crude oil is not bound to run out, "Today the world consumes about 34 billion barrels a year." Another interesting fact I didn't know until today, is that 2/3 of the oil is located in the middle east. This could be an issue when the rest of the other countries runs out and has to rely on Saudi and can possibly cause an economic diaster in the oil industry.

# data[].attributes.body
This video breaks down the oil crisis in 60 seconds. Oil prices and its global impact during Covid-19. Due to the pandemic there were economic delays between China and the supply chain management which transports our fuel. Due to the lack of using Oil, there is an over the flow of fuels that are sold for a discounted price by Saudi Petroleum Company.

# data[].attributes.body
There was an increase in expenses for the pipeline. Alberta was struggling keep to produce or retain oil. They were selling each barrel of oil for $12  instead of $52. They believed in order to keep a sustain the oil market, Alberta will be moving 120 barrels more the usual to keep their profit.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
CTV National News: Canada's oil price crisis

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Alberta announced plans to move oil by train amid a growing economic crisis over the price of Canadian crude oil. Glen McGregor reports.

# data[].attributes.body
There is a worldwide demand for oil, and Canada happens to be one of the country that has the greatest oil supplies. Although, the increase of the oil prices can lead to a recession in the economy. One of the biggest concern is when there is a shortage of oil, and the demand will increase.