05-08-2011, 02:36 PM
|
#301 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maynard, MA Eaarth
Posts: 7,908
Thanks: 3,475
Thanked 2,952 Times in 1,845 Posts
|
A growing economy is not possible in the long term. Sustainability is the only thing that will work in the long term.
|
|
|
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to NeilBlanchard For This Useful Post:
|
|
Today
|
|
|
Other popular topics in this forum...
|
|
|
05-08-2011, 04:52 PM
|
#302 (permalink)
|
Diesel Addict/No Cure
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: chicago, il
Posts: 787
Thanks: 130
Thanked 74 Times in 49 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard
A growing economy is not possible in the long term. Sustainability is the only thing that will work in the long term.
|
Amen to that.
__________________
Volvo WIA42 VED-12 / 335 hp / 1300 ft/lbs / 9 mpg
Big n' Boxy, Never met a Hill it Didn't Like
|
|
|
05-08-2011, 05:28 PM
|
#303 (permalink)
|
The PRC.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Elsewhere.
Posts: 5,304
Thanks: 285
Thanked 536 Times in 384 Posts
|
If where we are now is the ultimate limitation on what we can do then we have two choices - withdraw to circa 1700, or decide not to.
If you expect to grow an economy in the same way as before - with abundant cheap energy which can be wasted - then yes, there are limits.
However I think we have abundant skills and expertise on how to mitigate the limitations in place and continue to grow in the future. In short I choose the "decide not to" option.
After all we have adapted in the past and I see no reason why we can't continue to do so.
This does not mean "drill baby drill", it means lets use our brains more.
Same aim, maybe different paths.
__________________
[I]So long and thanks for all the fish.[/I]
|
|
|
05-08-2011, 06:31 PM
|
#304 (permalink)
|
(:
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard
A growing economy is not possible in the long term. Sustainability is the only thing that will work in the long term.
|
Sadly there are NO politicians, govt leaders, or bidness leaders that are on board with that. It's all about growth growth growth with them. Someone needs to print up and distribute a politician/govt leader/ceo manual on SUSTAINABILITY and the reality of today and tomorrow.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Frank Lee For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-08-2011, 06:32 PM
|
#305 (permalink)
|
(:
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arragonis
If where we are now is the ultimate limitation on what we can do then we have two choices - withdraw to circa 1700, or decide not to.
If you expect to grow an economy in the same way as before - with abundant cheap energy which can be wasted - then yes, there are limits.
However I think we have abundant skills and expertise on how to mitigate the limitations in place and continue to grow in the future. In short I choose the "decide not to" option.
After all we have adapted in the past and I see no reason why we can't continue to do so.
This does not mean "drill baby drill", it means lets use our brains more.
Same aim, maybe different paths.
|
Explain to me why growth is so important and desireable to you.
|
|
|
05-08-2011, 07:03 PM
|
#306 (permalink)
|
The PRC.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Elsewhere.
Posts: 5,304
Thanks: 285
Thanked 536 Times in 384 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Lee
Explain to me why growth is so important and desireable to you.
|
It is desirable because it is how have got to where we are now and how we get to where we will be in the future.
Please explain to me how you think we should avoid it, and why ?
__________________
[I]So long and thanks for all the fish.[/I]
|
|
|
05-08-2011, 08:27 PM
|
#307 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,209
Thanks: 225
Thanked 811 Times in 594 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arragonis
If where we are now is the ultimate limitation on what we can do then we have two choices - withdraw to circa 1700, or decide not to.
|
No, because life isn't one-dimensional: we have a choice of many (probably an infinite number) of directions.
The important thing to realize is that on our current path... well, if you plotted each of the multitude of factors that go into making up "quality of life" (and accepting that most of them are in some degree subjective), you'd see that many if not most of them have peaked, and are heading downwards.
|
|
|
05-08-2011, 10:50 PM
|
#308 (permalink)
|
(:
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arragonis
It is desirable because it is how have got to where we are now and how we get to where we will be in the future.
Please explain to me how you think we should avoid it, and why ?
|
You are not done with your answer yet.
Where are we now? Overpopulated, with cluster****s and sprawl filling in between the clusters?
What does "growth" have to do with quality of life?
Would we not have technical advancements without growth? Why not?
Is there a positive direct connection between quality of life and growth? Why?
Look at a place like, say, California. Today, the nice temperate parts of it along the coast aren't much more than a support system for highways and streets. You can tell it was beautiful once upon a time. If you like cluster****s, it still is. I just think it would have been so much more awesome in that period before every square inch of it had human "development" on it- before my time, unfortunately.
I've got a "techie" brother-in-law that was so excited about an article he sent me about colonizing Mars. I was all, WTF? What is so great about the prospect of using the Earth up and then infesting another planet?
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Frank Lee For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-08-2011, 11:04 PM
|
#309 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maynard, MA Eaarth
Posts: 7,908
Thanks: 3,475
Thanked 2,952 Times in 1,845 Posts
|
We need to go back to sustainable i.e organic agriculture -- it works with the cycle of life, and improves the soil over time, and help the soil hold water and build it up rather than erode. Chemical fertilizers and pesticides and mono cultures and factory farming are depleting the soil and the aquifers quickly, and erosion and runoff is causing dead zones, and adds about 25% of the greenhouse gases in the form of nitrous oxide. Water soluble nitrogen runs off -- about 80% of it; and combines with oxygen. The natural organic process forms fixed nitrogen, which does not run off in the first place.
But, I think we will need to keep things like the Internet, and modern medicine, etc. So, we need to stop doing the unsustainable things, but keep the stuff that is truly valuable.
Dirt! The Movie
|
|
|
05-08-2011, 11:23 PM
|
#310 (permalink)
|
MPGuino Supporter
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Hungary
Posts: 1,808
iNXS - '10 Opel Zafira 111 Anniversary Suzi - '02 Suzuki Swift GL
Thanks: 831
Thanked 709 Times in 457 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Lee
I've got a "techie" brother-in-law that was so excited about an article he sent me about colonizing Mars. I was all, WTF? What is so great about the prospect of using the Earth up and then infesting another planet?
|
Since you haven't given up your corral of fuel consuming pollution emitters, and you are still alive and complaining of overpopulation, I can conclude that you are a hypocrite.
|
|
|
|