Regarding Hubbert's graph...

The recent surge in US production of oil is the result of squeezing out more oil by using increased energy inputs (fracking). Even when the end of the graph is reached, let's say, 2050, there will still be substantial quantities of oil in the ground. BUT, as I understand it anyway, the energy required to extract the oil will exceed the value of the oil extracted. At that point, it simply doesn't make sense to drill a new well or go back to an old well.

I'm pessimistic and I'm sticking to it. IF we insist on pumping every last barrel of oil out of the ground, and shoveling out the last ton of coal, and burning it then we extend the energy supply on one end and decrease the supply of bearable climate on the other end. Meanwhile, population continues to grow, and I see no reason to suppose that we will manage to overcome changed environmental conditions by developing wheat, for instance, that can stand hot wet weather, or corn that can stand hot dry weather in the next thirty years. Fungal diseases, insects, soil depletion, floods, rising ocean levels, drought, etc. all weigh against an optimistic approach.

The argument that science & technology have improved our agriculture etc. yet now it is over is rather dubious too. — ssu

It is over for some people, and it will be over for more. I don't expect that our disaster will play out in one final cataclysm in Act V, scene 10 affecting everybody between South Africa and Finland, or between Tiera del Fuego and Nome (unless we get hit by a big meteorite).

The resources of the cosmos are more or less inexhaustible. All we need to do is get off this rock. — Echarmion

So true, but just a teensy bit easier said than done. So far, a dozen people have stepped on the moon, and the moon is only 250,000 miles away, and troubled by nothing worse than a vacuum.

This thread is about how humanity can keep growing. — Echarmion

Actually, this thread is about CAN HUMANITY STOP GROWING?

So true, but just a teensy bit easier said than done. So far, a dozen people have stepped on the moon, and the moon is only 250,000 miles away, and troubled by nothing worse than a vacuum. — Bitter Crank

Much of space is troubled by nothing worse than a vacuum. All that is required to get there is scaling up the things we can already do.

Actually, this thread is about CAN HUMANITY STOP GROWING? — Bitter Crank

It probably can. It's just insane to try to force it to by killing people.

It probably can. It's just insane to try to force it to by killing people. — Echarmion

I'm not in favor of killing 3 or 4 billion people either. So what's your do-able suggestion, aside from 3 or 4 billion people leaving the planet aboad space ships?

So what's your do-able suggestion, aside from 3 or 4 billion people leaving the planet aboad space ships? — Bitter Crank

Stop the discourse on overpopulation and start the discourse on poverty. Then do something about poverty, like, I don't know, kill the rich. Oh, you said do-able! Shit! I don't know, kill the poor, maybe?

Gonna kill kill kill kill kill the poor, kill kill kill kill kill the poor, kill kill kill kill kill the poor tonight.

But who's gonna work then? Fuck, we're doomed!

I'm not in favor of killing 3 or 4 billion people either. So what's your do-able suggestion, aside from 3 or 4 billion people leaving the planet aboad space ships? — Bitter Crank

Transform the economy from consumerism to a more sustainable, mostly circular system. Step up efforts to crack critical (for long term survival) technological and engineering hurdles, like fusion and space infrastructure. Immediately stop burning coal as much as possible, reduce flying as much as possible. Reduce personal cars as much as possible. Have governments research sustainable food options and encourage vegetarianism. Tax or otherwise discourage any form of wastage.

These are all good suggestions. I am in favor of all of them (with the possible exception of space infrastructure--meaning population habitat).

I believe/think/hope that a sustainable economy IS possible, is do-able, is absolutely necessary IF we are going to survive. We already know what sustainable food options are--it is vegetarian. The really difficult task involves an abrupt transition from fossil fuel/fossil chemical energy intensive economy to a much less energy intensive, economy.

The "World Made By Hand" series by James Howard Kunstler illustrates through fiction what life might be like in a catastrophic transition: do-able, but not at all nice. One can imagine that in a planned transition (over a short enough period of time to merit the term 'abrupt') it would be do-able, difficult, but not horrible. The unanswered question is how can any country (like the EU, the US, China, etc.) bring about a planned transition soon when the entire world economy is bent in continuing in the opposite direction of MORE, NOW.

It isn't the technology: It's the deeply entrenched elites (Koch Industries, et al) that are the primary obstacle.

The emphasis on family planning as an environmental fix distracts us from making essential investments in people and the environment. This includes supporting clean energy, food security, and mass transit, along with accessible comprehensive health systems infrastructure, education, and employment" — StreetlightX

Yeah, the emphasis should be on reducing all births for reason of not creating suffering for another person, and force recruiting new lives to an inescapable game :D.

What say you? — Bitter Crank

I say your summary is about right. I wish I could be more positive. But the awful truth is that humanity is a predatory parasite on Earth, capturing the resources of our host and devouring them without constraint. Our numbers (population) seem to relate to cancer cells, in the sense that we reproduce uncontrollably. Our end appears nigh. :meh:

I'm pessimistic and I'm sticking to it. — Bitter Crank

That may be so trendy and smart especially in a Philosophy forum, but is really the closest to the reality what the future will give us?

And btw. it's not only fracking, but also horizontal drilling has been a game changing technology. Yet this example isn't only about how technological advances make the luring and extremely popular calls for utter collapse of our society simply totally wrong predictions. It is an example of a happened crisis and what the 'collapse' really is like. Because Peak (conventional) Oil happened years ago. And Peak aggregate Oil can happen any year now. Might have happened alread.

So is a World of "Mad Max" chaos happening in the near future?

No.

We have already witnessed what this crisis and seen what it gave us: food riots and political instability in poor countries, a slowdown in the global economy. AND THEN one of the most hated phenomenons of today called market mechanism kicked in and demand dropped, stocks of reserves began to fill up and finally the price fell back from the three digit dollar prices.

Price of oil (brent crude?), several crises later:


In fact, nothing would be now a more welcomed boost for alternative energy resources to pick up even more ground than sudden increase in oil prices. And even without high oil prices renewable energy has made huge strides especially this decade.

It may popular to call for utter doom, an imminent collapse if urgently things aren't done. That's the politically correct discourse. Not perhaps the most realistic alternative that things might "suck" for a while, but life will go on and likely things be better than now. Yeah, human kind isn't right now making it's most important choices...

It is over for some people, and it will be over for more. I don't expect that our disaster will play out in one final cataclysm in Act V, scene 10 affecting everybody between South Africa and Finland, or between Tiera del Fuego and Nome (unless we get hit by a big meteorite). — Bitter Crank

And just for who? Just what are you talking about? Yes, the subsistence farmer will likely fade into history (good riddance!), except for the 'lifestyle' farmer that is so fascinated to grow plants (rather going to the supermarket). Otherwise, agricultural production is improving:



And notice this stat from China, the area of farmed land has basically stayed the same for many decades, but the production and yields have multiplied:

Wouldn't that tell us something?