Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Am I the only one?

What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.

Am I the only one?

Unread postby tmazanec1 » Wed 23 Feb 2005, 08:51:05

My feelings are that, over the course of many millennia, the per capita use of energy will either be a step function (one step, with us currently nearing the upper level) or a spike (with us currently near the tippity-top). A majority here "know" that it is a spike. A minority here "know" that it is a step function. As far as I am aware, I am the only "undecided" member here. Or is that an incorrect description of the memberhip?
tmazanec1
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 506
Joined: Tue 12 Oct 2004, 03:00:00

Unread postby Doly » Wed 23 Feb 2005, 09:09:55

Not sure what you mean by "step function" here. Can you explain better?
User avatar
Doly
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 4370
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 04:00:00

Unread postby mgibbons19 » Wed 23 Feb 2005, 10:08:29

No Tom. I am deeply interested in this topic, but don't see that we have the information to say one way or the other yet. I am undecided as well.
mgibbons19
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1105
Joined: Fri 20 Aug 2004, 03:00:00

Unread postby tmazanec1 » Wed 23 Feb 2005, 12:07:41

Step function is, we go along from paleolithic to Industrial Revolution using a small amount of energy per capita, jump in a few centuries to using a higher level of energy per capita, then staying at that elevated level for hundreds of centuries more (sustainable society after soft landing and end of unlimited growth).
tmazanec1
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 506
Joined: Tue 12 Oct 2004, 03:00:00

Unread postby Tyler_JC » Wed 23 Feb 2005, 12:51:27

There is no such thing as a soft landing. You must understand this. A soft landing means that there is some sort of magic level that we can step down to peacefully. There is such a level, but it was reached in 1500AD. We have to move back 500 years.

We must go back before coal, before natural gas, before oil, before nuclear, and probably before hydroelectric power. The only question left isn't if, but when and how quickly.

Some hope that we will peacefully give up our high energy lifestyle for a more sustainable society. I don't think that Bill Gates wants to till the soil. I don't think that Joe Six-Pack wants to till the soil. And I sure as hell don't think that George W. Bush wants to till the soil. We won't walk away from an oil based lifestyle. Most of us will be dragged kicking and screaming. I hope to be one of those who makes it in the end. I can live as a merchant. I wouldn't mind owning a little store in some small town selling odds and ends. But I'm sure that I would be willing to accept anything less than that (at least without a fight).

So stop calling it a soft landing! A never-ending depression with resource wars and shortages is the best we can hope for. There are few alternatives and there isn't time to restructure society. I hope that we don't choose extinction but it's an option.

PS: I wouldn't call a never-ending depression with resource wars and shortages a soft landing. But it's the softest we are going to get.
Tyler_JC
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5438
Joined: Sat 25 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Boston, MA

Unread postby Ludi » Wed 23 Feb 2005, 14:47:15

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')here is such a level, but it was reached in 1500AD. We have to move back 500 years.


I'm not going to try to argue you out of your bleak scenario, but I do think we have some advantages over those of 1500AD (if we choose to use them). We have the scientific method, which enables us to understand the workings of the physical world a little better, and we have a somewhat better understanding of the earth's life systems. We also have some positive developments in agricultural techniques (not high tech) which could help avoid the unbelievably back-breaking labor of the past. Just my optimistic hopefulness that a majority of people won't foolishly insist on returning to the past because they believe we "have to."
Ludi
 

Unread postby tmazanec1 » Wed 23 Feb 2005, 15:16:02

Nanotech can give us a sustainable lifestyle similar to ours if we work on it and get it soon enough. This is the big factor in the equation. But no, infinite growth does not compute, Dr. Smith...it does not compute, IT DOES NOT COMPUTE, IT (Smith yanks out the power pack).
tmazanec1
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 506
Joined: Tue 12 Oct 2004, 03:00:00

Unread postby Tyler_JC » Wed 23 Feb 2005, 15:44:02

I use 1500 as a somewhat random reference. I don't think we'll give up the scientific method or many of the advances in medical treatment. (baths are good for you, we know that and won't forget it.) But the world will look like 1500. No long distance travel except for a few brave souls. Distant goods will become extremely expensive. Gold/Silver will regain its status as the official currency.

In the more enlightened places there might be a few libraries and universities. But in the deep rural South and in many other countries, a religious theocracy could rule. We won't live through the transformation but at some time in the next few centuries, large portions of today's rational thought will be lost. Powerful religious leaders will win the battle of thought in places without First Amendment's to stop them. Evolution isn't in the Bible and thus doesn't exist. Women are property in the Bible, God forbid we ignore this important "fact."

It doesn't take much to turn Backwater, Alabama into Medieval London. 8O

I dunno, I bounce back and forth on what will happen. We don't know enough about the Sheple to understand how they will react. In the coming years, we will learn. But at that point it's kinda too late.
Tyler_JC
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5438
Joined: Sat 25 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Boston, MA


Return to Open Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron