[copious.abundance]

You didn't even begin to comprehend the article. Not even close. It went right over your head. You saw some mention of "technology" and immediately thought it was another "technology will save us" perspective. But actually it had nothing to do with "technology saving us." You don't even know what economic growth is, obviously. And you don't appear to even care to understand what it is, either.

[vtsnowedin]

The article is simplistic and wrong. Sure you can recycle copper etc. but there are some losses each time it is reprocessed and some of it is worn away into dust and oxides that can't be recovered. And you can't recycle a gallon of gas after you have burned it or a ton of coal or tank of heating oil.
Certainly market forces will help reduce waste of these non renewable resources but high prices will not produce any new volume of them once all deposits are developed.
We will be fine though once five or six billion are killed by market forces.

[Pops]

The article ignores the basic premise here, that FF and human carrying capacity are limited, but other than that it's great... lol.

Of course it is the technology argument. The premise is that the underlying BAU (energy/pop. growth) will continue forever so all we need do is keep inventing new, evermore frivolous (and increasingly expensive) stuff with which to amuse ourselves and GDP will automatically grow.

At worst it goes, "Sure raw materials (except FF energy, "surprisingly" no mention of that) are limited, and sure human population growth is limited; but it doesn't matter because we'll invent new iPhones and automatically be able to afford them."

Either way it discounts 2 of the 3 underlying enablers of growth that got us to this point: growing energy use and growing population. Innovation is a good thing, but to say it is the only thing and that by itself it can more than make up for falling energy and population is naive at best and shilling* at worst.

We won't "Angry Birds" ourselves into a future of less energy and declining population.


*Obligatory Ad Hom: what would you expect from a guy who was paid to write for Tech Central Daily)

[copious.abundance]

@vtsnowedin :

It wouldn't even matter if small amounts of copper were lost during the recycling process, because it just means the remaining copper would be that much more valuable. Then you can always find substitutes for copper, for many uses.

I hope I don't need to mention that there are energy forms that are renewable (solar, wind, etc.) and others that can provide energy for millennia, at least (nuclear). Civilization is not going to run out of energy.

[AirlinePilot]

I agree with that last statement oily, but not the way you think. The question becomes what does that civilization look like? Anyone who is being intellectually honest with themselves acknowledges the gaps between what we do with oil now and where we NEED TO BE with regards to "renewables" in order to meet and exceed our energy needs for that future civilization. Its not going to happen with Solar panels and Tesla's.

Yours is a religious belief in technology. Thats not a bad thing, it's just flawed right now when one considers the gaps that need to be bridged in order to get there. I stand by my premise that something miraculous needs to happen. Im not completely negative about that, but as we wrestle with BAU the time is growing very short for that. Im just not as faithful we are going to have another breakthrough which changes the paradigm. Its simply a flawed belief that we will offset significant amounts of FF to renewables with present and near future technology.

[Outcast_Searcher]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Shaved Monkey', 'H')ave spoken about the limits of growth with a honours student in economics and a mid ranging public servant in the finance department,basic reply was past history proves we will be alright,innovation will save us,economies can grow without resources, capitalism was the best system to improve our standard of living.
.....we are stuffed.
These guys control the ideas and the levers.

[Pops]

Place all the economists end to end and they wouldn't reach a conclusion. LOL

[vtsnowedin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('copious.abundance', '@')vtsnowedin :

It wouldn't even matter ...
....
Civilization is not going to run out of energy.

[Strummer]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('copious.abundance', 'I') hope I don't need to mention that there are energy forms that are renewable (solar, wind, etc.) and others that can provide energy for millennia, at least (nuclear). Civilization is not going to run out of energy.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Strummer', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('copious.abundance', 'I') hope I don't need to mention that there are energy forms that are renewable (solar, wind, etc.) and others that can provide energy for millennia, at least (nuclear). Civilization is not going to run out of energy.

[copious.abundance]

Let me put it this way:

Let's say it's 1996 and you're making $20,000/year. The price of gasoline is about $1.50/gallon, you drive about 25,000 miles per year, and your car gets 20 mpg. That comes to $1,875/year you spend on gasoline, or 9.4% of your income.

Fast-forward to 2014. You now make 92% more than you did in 1996 - that's $38,400/year. You still drive about 25,000 miles per year, and your car still gets 20 mpg, but gasoline is $3.50/gallon. That comes to $4,375/year you spend on gasoline - but that's 11.4% of your income, not much more than in 1996.

In reality, the car you're driving probably gets better gas mileage than the one you drove in 1996 (and it's a much nicer car, too!) - SUV's now get better gas mileage, on average, than SUV's in 1996, for example. So the percentages of your income you spend on gasoline are probably even closer than the 9.4% and 11.4%.

[Quinny]

Pops ref Tech Central - please tell me it's not Paul Georgia

[americandream]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('copious.abundance', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Strummer', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('copious.abundance', 'I') hope I don't need to mention that there are energy forms that are renewable (solar, wind, etc.) and others that can provide energy for millennia, at least (nuclear). Civilization is not going to run out of energy.

[SteveO]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', 'T')he only radical thing you need to understand is that the ride is temporary, the fuel tank will eventually empty and you should be prepared for landing or at least decent.