Quote:
Originally Posted by sendler
Socio-economic chaos from the depletion of energy availability that reducing carbon fuel consumption, particularly liquid fuel that we depend on for mining and food, will kill many times the number of people and much sooner than continued carbon emissions. Why do we think that all of these climate agreements of the last 20 years have failed? Because we are dependant on growth and energy consumption to maintain the function of the world economy and there is no ready energy replacement at anything even close to the current scale. It is not just a matter of choosing to switch energy production sources as Green advocates want to believe. We have built a social trap for ourselves with unprecedented human growth over the last 150 years since discovering fossil fuel and there is now no painless or free market way out. There will be some "speed bumps" coming.
.
Population/ GDP/ Energy consumption is nearly 1:1:1. There has been a slight decoupling in the last few years as GDP shifts a bit toward services, but if energy goes down, so must the others. And so far there are very few 1%er's that are willing to kneel to let the rest of the world rise to a sustainable future.
.
.
.
. |
*Market segments which can get by without fossil fuels will be the first to go off it.Alternatives will fill the void.
*Food deaths recently appear to be a function of international law which protects the sale of light weapons which can find their way into the hands of those who would physically deny peoples access to available food.There appears to be enough food around.
*I just got Thomas Malthus' book on population.I haven't cracked it open yet so I'm not gonna go there yet.
*If we're not driving,and boating,and shipping,and RV'ing,and cycling,and canoeing,and skiing,and shopping,NASCAR'ing,and Indycar'ing,and SCCA'ing,and golfing,and......................................o n petroleum,we should have some available for heavy machinery and agriculture while we contemplate those technologies.
* I'm not sure any of the climate initiatives ever actually did anything.The US portion has been sabotaged internally since day one.
*Same reason we've never had a national energy policy except 'send in the troops.'
*No one will argue about the amazing energy density of liquid fuel and how we've floated to supremacy on a tide of petroleum.
*We've floated on it to global climate change as well.
*I could care less what 'green advocates' believe.
*I do care very much what the scientific community says.
*At least one economist has essentially said that, when it comes to the health of the planet,to hell with economics.
*Economists are at variance with respect to GNP and hydrocarbons.They can be de-linked according to some.
*The USA will advocate for market-based solutions,other governments are willing to go to command and control.There is a point where nationalization is on the table,corporate charters are at the pleasure of We the People,FCC broadcast licenses ditto,.............................
*The USA has already been there,done that.
*I don't have any first order reality experience with a 1%'er.(I know a lot of high people in places) I've known some millionaires.They seemed like reasonable people.
*The only US Congressman I ever met was Graham Purcell (D-Texas).He and my dad grew up together in Archer City,Texas.We visited him two years after he left the Congress and I got many insights into the workings of federal government.He left a very favorable impression on me.
* I have to agree with you about the 'speed bumps.'There will winners and losers.I like to believe that we,as a nation,will do everything in our power to make things as painless as possible in a transition to a new energy paradigm.
*Next weekend I'll be able to hear some of the You-Tube presentations recommended.I look forward to that.
Today
Other popular topics in this forum...
