by MonteQuest » Sun 22 Jul 2007, 22:28:39
This is my 10,000th post on peakoil.com. Over the last 3 years, I have read and written much. The overwhelmingly constant theme I read, is one that focuses on the same short-term thinking that brought us here; addressing the symptoms rather than the causes.
Let me illustrate this with an analogy.
Suppose you found a bag of money or won the lottery. What would you do? A prudent and wise person would invest the money and set his lifestyle to meet the income from his investments. Sure, he might spend some to enhance his current lifestyle, but only a fool would squander it like there was no tomorrow and that the money would never end.
The fool would spend it maintaining an unsustainable lifestyle until he was down to a few bucks, then spend the few remaining dollars either on more lottery tickets or some pie-in-the-sky investment, hoping for a quick return or another windfall.
Rather than realize his lifestyle was unsustainable, he instead tries to find ways to continue it, robbing Peter to pay Paul, loans, robbery, etc.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'E')xpecting some other energy resource to provide energy on the same scale and level of concentration as petroleum, just because we happen to want one, is a little like responding to one huge lottery win by assuming that when that money starts running out, another equally large win can be had for the cost of a few more tickets. This is close enough to today’s consumer psychology that it’s easy to imagine somebody in this position pouring all the money he has left into lottery tickets, and throwing away his chances of avoiding bankruptcy because the only solution he can imagine is winning the lottery again.
A prudent society would have invested in renewable sustainable systems long ago.
So, here we are in overshoot. We are living beyond our means. We spent our “bag of money” on toys and a phantom lifestyle that we don’t want to give up. We are insistent that giving up our toys, our lifestyle and our huge family is not an option. We won’t cut up the credit cards, nor powerdown our lifestyle, and we don't want to go back to work.
We want a fix. We want something that keeps this phantom going...at all costs.
We foolishly believe that renewables will allow us to do so, while ignoring the writing on the wall from deforestation, loss of biodiversity, fisheries collapse, and global climate change.
Not to mention, that the investment in renewables is pennies compared to our current outlays and projected increases in demand.
We also seem to ignore the fact that peak oil is a global problem. Who brings solar to Darfur?
We don’t want to submit to nature’s population correction. We wish to avoid
that.
We are dreaming.
At the same time, we are suggesting making matters worse with talk of electric cars and other techno-fixes to perpetuate an unsustainable lifestyle…a pure construct of overshoot via fossil fuels.
We want to focus on short-term, short-sighted, selfish technofix solutions that allows
us, (those living right now) to avoid "unpleasant" changes, with no lasting solutions for those generations to follow.
We return to the” takeover method” by appropriating more of the primary production of earth (through biofools) to human needs at the continued expense of biodiversity. We increase the “drawdown method” by going after the remaining hydrocarbons, such as shale, tar sands, and heavy oil. Global warming be damned.
As William Catton has so eloquently noted in his book,
Overshoot: The Basis for Revolutionary Change.$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '"')Whichever of the two historic approaches we take, either choosing to accelerate drawdown or indulging in additional takeover, our new ecological paradigm enables us to see that eventually we will end up shifting back to the other. Either traditional way, if prolonged, leads to an inhuman future ... not toward the lasting solution of temporarily vexing problems ... For any lasting solution, we must abandon both of these ultimately disastrous methods. Drawdown bails us out of present difficulties by shortening our future. Takeover was of lasting value earlier in human history, but that time is past.
"We must learn to live within carrying capacity without trying to enlarge it. We must rely on renewable resources consumed no faster than at sustained yield rates. The last best hope for mankind is ecological modesty."
We don’t seem to grasp that any measures to avoid a die-off or postpone it, make the die-off that much worse and make it that much harder to reduce the population to a sustainable level by choice.
Thus, we choose short-term prosperity over a lasting preparation for the future, while denying the reality of overshoot and the coming population correction.
We just don't want to hear that "doomer" negativity, no matter how rooted in solid biological science and history.
We choose to be selfish, rather than learn to share.
Peak oil will force people to view the world differently, to a degree almost unimaginable to those who scarcely understand the concept just now.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Garrett Hardin', 'W')ith the coinage of 'sustainable development,' the defenders of the unsteady state have won a few more years' moratorium from the painful process of thinking.