De-growth is coming - how to prepare?
Nathan Surendran
Public
Seen by 199
I recently published this blog post: http://bit.ly/1qpDZtK entitled 'The view from further down the oil supply pyramid - de-growth probable - an interview with Gail Tverberg. Southland NZ implications.'
Which details why the view that we have lots of oil left (which is true) and can continue with growth (green or otherwise) and 'progress' is fundamentally flawed (or even 'fractally wrong'... http://bit.ly/1pgqhDo)
The current economic system will in all probability collapse, as mass default ensues once hard 'energetic' limits to growth are hit. I believe Dmitry Orlov has a good handle on how this plays out, as described in his book 'The 5 Stages of Collapse' http://bit.ly/5stagesofcollapse. Read the free intro here: http://bit.ly/1sP0G8Gand let me know what your thoughts are.
Personally I'm inclined to think that the businessmen, politicians, ruling elites, whoever, can do all the talking, and take all the action towards or away from a 'more balanced economy' they want. It won't reverse Entropy, and the economy cannot be powered by hot air and 'hopium'!
There is, I believe at this point no 'turning of the juggernaut'. We are looking at a period of contraction in economic activity on a global scale, and a concomitant contraction in commercial / industrial activity, government, population, etc. The time scales are beyond me to fathom, but the reality of this future cannot be denied, although I admit the point that John Michael Greer makes, that the severity of the collapse is open to debate, and most certainly won't be uniform in space and time.
My feeling is that it is left to us personally is to make this 'transition' less difficult through participation in the creation of the necessary systems, skill-base, alternative economic mechanisms, etc that will give our communities, and those that choose to share in the creation and dissemination of this knowledge through creative commons, copyleft, etc, the potential to survive, and in isolated cases, thrive, going forwards.
With all the current talk of sustainability, I think it's also really important to have the conversation around 'what is it that we're trying to sustain' in light of what is actually possible, just and desirable: http://bit.ly/1p6ttl1
Nathan Surendran Tue 23 Sep 2014 11:41PM
Sounds great! Can you assist..?
Nathan
Stephen Bryson Wed 24 Sep 2014 12:45AM
@nathansurendran
Sure. I've just had another look and see that the description under subgroup does not seem to be editable, rather it is the description atop the thread which can be edited.
I will work on something suitable to describe EROI at the subgroup level and get back to you.
That leaves the primer and it's maybe best for you to put that one together, or at least to own the edit feature to the thread intro.
If the science is right then EROI could eventually have the sort of impact upon global debate as maybe has Climate Change, and just look how difficult that has been to bring into the political agenda.
Good reason then for the primer to be more like an executive summary. I can help but for the moment I'm only a few hours into this and it seems like you are the man here.
What do you say?
Colin England Wed 24 Sep 2014 1:00AM
@nathansurendran
https://sites.google.com/site/anatomyofglobalclimatechangevj/data-and-analysis
Solar energy has a energy balance of 3.2 years, wind turbines only have an energy balance of 6.6 months.
In other words, a solar panel will produce enough energy to reproduce itself in ~3.2 years. The next ~17 years of it's estimated lifespan is essentially free energy - And modern solar panels will last 40 years. Wind does much better.
That said, we don't have to maintain the same level of complexity that we have now. Getting rid of cars is going to be essential but that will still leave public transport, bicycles and walking (We'll probably end up being a fitter and healthier society).
Basically, we'll have to cut out a few rather useless things that we take for granted today but we'll still be able to maintain a vigorous, technological society.
Nathan Surendran Wed 24 Sep 2014 1:13AM
Hi Steve, I'll get working on something. It'll take a week or so..
N
Nathan Surendran Wed 24 Sep 2014 1:14AM
I'll take a look at this, thanks!
Nathan Surendran Wed 24 Sep 2014 1:22AM
@colinengland
Immediate reaction : student summer school study, or peer reviewed journal paper, which is to be preferred..?
https://sites.google.com/site/anatomyofglobalclimatechangevj/about-us ( https://sites.google.com/site/anatomyofglobalclimatechangevj/about-us )
http://festkoerper-kernphysik.de/Weissbach_EROI_preprint.pdf ( http://festkoerper-kernphysik.de/Weissbach_EROI_preprint.pdf )
The student study you link to appears to be pretty simplistic...
John G Wed 24 Sep 2014 4:39AM
Dennis Dorney
@felix I agree that the real issue is overpopulation
The elites have been pushing the overpopulation myth since Malthus was an up and coming eugenicist.
Growth is declining.
Dennis Dorney Wed 24 Sep 2014 7:47AM
@draco I am sure you are right about the technical data but that doesn't mean that we can survive at the lower productivity that you imply unless the monetary system is fixed as well. We aren't working just because we are greedy for those useless things you refer to.WE work because we have no choice.
Reducing production reduces our income but the debt to be repaid remains unchanged and must take up a higher proportion of our earnings. Effectively we are trapped by our present monetary system and need to change it.
John G Wed 24 Sep 2014 7:52AM
Dennis Dorney
Effectively we are trapped by our present monetary system and need to change it.
We're trapped by neoliberal dogma and neoclassical economists. Not the monetary system.
It would work just fine with some intelligent political economic management.
Colin England Wed 24 Sep 2014 9:12PM
The student study you link to appears to be pretty simplistic…
Yep, it was, but it doesn't need to be complicated to show the figures and those figures show that there's enough to maintain a reasonable living standard.
I am sure you are right about the technical data but that doesn’t mean that we can survive at the lower productivity that you imply unless the monetary system is fixed as well.
I didn't say anything about lower productivity, I said lower complexity. There's major difference.
And this discussion has nothing to do with the monetary system. Yes, it needs to be fixed but that's another discussion.
Stephen Bryson Thu 25 Sep 2014 12:42AM
@nathansurendran
Nathan the subgroup is set up but it was quite a challenge to fit any useful description into the 250 characters allowed (spaces included!).
Stephen Bryson · Tue 23 Sep 2014 11:10PM
@nathansurendran
Nathan thanks for the links.
What immediately occurs to me is that it is important to now set up a subgroup for EROI - just use the acronym alone - and with a brief statement of what the EROI is all about and what its relevance is to our modern civilization.
If this statement is made within the description of the subgroup you would then be able to edit it at any future stage, whereas if set within some following thread then any opportunity for editing is soon lost.
Next establish the first thread within EROI as an EROI Primer and provide any summaries and links, such as above.
Other threads could then follow on such as the negative growth implication as you have flagged in this thread..
What do you think?