Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on May 20, 2012
Degrowth (De-growth), Natural Resources, Population Growth, and Economic Collapse
We have seen how oil shortages can wreak havoc on the global economy and result in dramatic shifts in the global balance of power.
Many people are now starting to realize that the dream of unlimited growth and economic expansion is coming to an end. The Depletion Wall argues that the age of consumerism will come to an abrupt stop. The reserves of many of the base metals on which society depends are shockingly low. The supply of economically exploitable reserves of many minerals ranges from only a few to several decades’ worth.
The question is, is degrowth the answer to the problem of highly limited natural resources? Or, is it sustainable development?
Degrowth advocates argue that voluntary simplicity, reduced consumption, and decreased production and economic activity are the answer. They oppose sustainable development on the basis that it implies continued economic growth. Opponents of the degrowth option argue that decreasing consumption would increase unemployment and is unrealistic giving the level of poverty in many countries today.
The Depletion Wall argues that you can both maintain standards of living (or even increase them) while decreasing total economic production. 100$ (total production) divided by 10 people equals $10 each. But, so does $50 divided by 5 people. In this example, the total economic production decreases by 50%, but the per capita income remains $10/person! If the world’s population decreases at the same time as economic production does, degrowth can occur without individual incomes decreasing. A faster depopulation rate would result in lower unemployment.
As The Depletion Wall demonstrates, a combination of population decrease and Green Economic Environment (Depopulation-GEE) could deliver degrowth and dramatically lower the world’s environmental footprint, all of this while individual incomes remain the same or even increase. A Depopulation-GEE strategy would further result in lower unemployment.
A Depopulation-GEE strategy could keep individual incomes the same or growing while reducing the world’s environmental and resource footprint as well as the total world production if desired.
The GEE is based on a greening of the economy, which comes as result of green growth in environmental sectors and degrowth for unenvironmental products and practices. This two-stream approach doubles the impact on a country’s environmental footprint.
7 Comments on "Degrowth (De-growth), Natural Resources, Population Growth, and Economic Collapse"
Kenz300 on Sun, 20th May 2012 12:50 pm
The world added a billion more people in the last 12 years and continues to grow. We have a food crisis, a water crisis, a fish stocks crisis, a financial crisis and a jobs crisis. The ever growing world population makes every problem harder to solve. Access to family planning services needs to be available to all that want it. Endless population growth will only lead to more poverty, suffering and despair.
BillT on Sun, 20th May 2012 3:03 pm
There is no ‘sustainable’ development possible for 7+ billion people in a world with shrinking resources. There is no GEE that can work with more than 1 billion people total. None.
Bob Owens on Sun, 20th May 2012 3:51 pm
We have had 50 years since the Green Revolution in which to get our population under control. We have not done so and never will; human nature will simply not allow it. Nature will have to do the job. Time to wake up and look at the facts: Humans don’t want less people, ever!
DC on Sun, 20th May 2012 4:26 pm
This type is green-wash techno-fantasy tripe really doesnt belong here. Anyone take a look at that link? Pretty bad, here is sampler:
This is what they have to say about EVs
Q/
This will result a dramatic reduction of fossil fuel use and carbon emissions, much healthier cities, as well as the conservation of metals. The Green Economic Environment could make this happen as quickly as we want.
How replacing a 2ton gas burner going 65mph with a 2ton EV going 65mph will make cities ‘healthier’ is anyones guess. I guess according to these people the 40k+ people dead and 100s of thousands injured by gas-burners every single year in N.A. will drop to zero, because EVs will be made of toilet paper and emit perfume as exhaust.
Stephen on Sun, 20th May 2012 5:00 pm
I think it is time to move beyond “corporate profits at all costs” and adopt a model that can survive where less resources are needed, that we learn to repair things as opposed to throw them away, and relocalize, and eliminate the 9 and 5 commutes. This alone would save a lot of consumption and would be simple to implement.
Arthur on Sun, 20th May 2012 5:22 pm
Kenz, what on earth do you mean with “Access to family planning services needs to be available to all that want it.”?
Are you talking about condoms? Are you picturing Federal Express/DHL, whatever, to bring these rubbers free of charge to all inhabitants of this planet, courtesy American taxpayer? Are you employed by Durex?
Dick Burkhart on Sun, 20th May 2012 6:02 pm
De-growth is not a choice. It will happen one way or another. This includes eventual population decline, but it’s likely to be nasty because population growth is already in the pipeline for a generation or two whereas de-growth will commence later this decade.
Nevertheless here’s how to drastically reduce the population without a visit from the 4 horsemen of the apocalypse:
Promote a cultural shift to an average of 1 child per family, with that child born when the mother is in her mid thirties. This could cut the global population in half in 40 years.
Meanwhile a far more egalitarian and energy / resource efficient economy would go a long ways toward maintaining basic standards of living, even with degrowth.