If the Law of Entropy were clearly understood, society would have to face up to the fact that every time we use some of the stockpile of available matter and energy, it means two things: First, that however it may happen, we end up paying more for the disorder created in making a product than the value derived from the use of the product; second, less energy is available to be used in the future. This reality flies in the face of the way we think the world works. Sounds like nonsense to most people.
Whenever energy is extracted from the environment and processed through society, part of it becomes dissipated or wasted at every stage, until all of it, including the part made into products, ends up as waste in the end. Economists cannot accept this simple truth. They are indoctrinated with this notion that human ingenuity plus nature's bounty creates greater value, not less. They don't understand that machines and people cannot create anything. All we can do is transform available energy from a usable state to an unusable state, while allowing us some "temporary utility" along the way.
A study was done on how much energy was required to build an automobile. The study concluded that many times more energy was actually used than was necessary. Why was all the extra energy used? To get the automobile off the assembly line faster. "Haste makes waste" is a well-know idiom attesting to the intuitive reality of entropy at work. We need to start building machines that last (quality vs quantity), and to pursue the development of technologies that will operate with efficiencies closer to the ideal limits set by nature and as defined by the Law of Entropy. Implementing this last and most crucial goal are at odds with current economic policies and the general perception of reality that most people have of the world around them.
Thus our economy is dependent for its maintenance, growth and development on the acquisition of low entropy energy/matter and on the waste assimilation capacity of the environment. This means that beyond a certain point, the continuous growth of the economy (i.e., the increase in human populations and the accumulation of manufactured capital) can be had only at the expense of increasing disorder (entropy). This occurs when consumption by the economy exceeds production in nature and is seen through the accelerating depletion of natural capital, reduced biodiversity, air/water/land pollution, and climate change.
Our current economic production is utterly dependent on the availability of low-entropy inputs like oil. We basically have two sources of low entropy: the solar and fossil fuels. Solar is relatively infinite, but is strictly limited in its flow rate of arrival to earth. Fossil fuels are finite, but can be used at a flow rate of our own choosing. Industrialism and technology represents a shift away from the use of abundant solar energy toward major dependence on the scarce fossil fuels in order to take advantage of the controllable rate of flow at which we can use it.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that we should be fueling our cars with alcohol from food crops that gather current sunshine. This approach is different in practice from the money-based "least cost" method of optimizing production, so it is important to stress the differences between economic and thermodynamic analysis. Economic analysis is based upon perceptions of present value and scarcity as expressed in the marketplace, where the supply and demand framework is modeled on an instantaneous evaluation of the popular perception of shortages.
The late M. King Hubbert put it quite succinctly:
The world's present industrial civilization is handicapped by the coexistence of two universal, overlapping, and incompatible intellectual systems: the accumulated knowledge of the past four centuries of the properties and interrelationships of matter and energy and the associated monetary culture which has evolved from folkways of prehistoric origin.To put it simply: The knowledge of matter and energy + monetary policy=peak-oil.
Since the current monetary system wants growth, we need a system that wants stability. Would it be a monetary system based upon EROEI, rather than matter wealth? Instead of correcting inflation, we would correct a decrease in EROEI, or slow down entropy. A money system triggered, not by scarcity (supply/demand) but by thermodynamic flow-through efficiency. If entropy increased, you would curb the money supply. If people conserved more, you would free the money supply. The reverse of what we have now.
Money would be created based upon available renewable energy, while fossil fuels would be for key, non-profit energy use, and energy emergencies. The less energy you use, the cheaper it becomes. Bulk cost more than small amounts. The faster you drive, the more it costs you for fuel when you stop to fill up. Conservation would pay you a dividend. Perhaps we could have a carbon tax on hydrocarbons (fossil fuels) making the use of renewables more attractive.
Each person receives wages according to the amount of order they add to the system as a whole and pays fees/taxes for how much 'stuff' they turn into useless chaotic energy. Like reverse depreciation. No way to make anyone accept such a system of course, people are not intelligent enough to contemplate such a thing, and in addition you would have to have a great deal of control over people's private lives. But it is in the general direction I feel we should go governed by
our decision, and not by the ruthless laws of nature over which we cannot escape.
Much of my mindset is corroborated and influenced by the writings and teachings of Howard T. Odum.
http://www.mnforsustain.org/energy_ecol ... t_1973.htm