Posted: Mon Nov 27, 2006 7:34 pm Post subject: Re: Converging Catastrophes
pstarr wrote:
Jack wrote:
2)Massive dieoff, and rigidly enforced population limits.
Jack, your 2nd solution appears the same as your subsequent overshoot and dieoff consequence.
Did you mean?
Quote:
2) Rigidly enforced massive dieoff leading to population limits
It makes more sense that way.
Well, I suppose I could have been more careful in my statement.
The key issue is rigid control of future population numbers (and growth). Whatever the scope of the upcoming dieoff, we'll probably see the numbers crash harder than they need to. The biosphere will recover somewhat, after which population numbers will increase again - thus creating a new cycle of overshoot followed by yet another dieoff. I suppose the next overshoot will be more modest than our present one.
The massive dieoff need not be rigidly enforced, for that would require planning the elimination of about 5.5 billion people. I doubt anyone could or would do that. So, we'll see it happen chaotically without form or plan. Sounds nasty, doesn't it?
But to avoid repeating this unpleasant lesson, humankind must learn to control its numbers. Can a bunch of yeast cells restrict their numbers? No. Can humans? I doubt it. _________________ Dieoff. Fun to watch. Better with hot buttered popcorn!
Posted: Mon Nov 27, 2006 7:42 pm Post subject: Re: Converging Catastrophes
DantesPeak wrote:
Will in a few years the US (for example) be willing use its post peak (in North America) NG supplies, and possibly post peak oil(worldwide), to grow extra grain (if possible) and/or reduce corn used for ethanol, or ship needed grain around the world?
To what purpose? Shall we extend the time span of overshoot? Should we make the damage more extensive? Have a care, for the child you save today may produce a dozen tomorrow. What then?
Joined: Dec 03, 2004 Posts: 1136 Location: Seattle, Wa.
Posted: Mon Nov 27, 2006 7:51 pm Post subject: Re: Converging Catastrophes
Jack wrote:
The biosphere will recover somewhat, after which population numbers will increase again - thus creating a new cycle of overshoot followed by yet another dieoff. I suppose the next overshoot will be more modest than our present one.
I fully agree that humans cannot control their numbers until an external correction happens. I am not sure though that we will repeat this again in the future. It assumes we assimilate nothing as a culture from the calamities ahead. I see the upcoming events as transformative. We aren't mindless goats nor are we comparable to past civilizations that experienced die-off. All of those civilizations departed without a historical context in place where they could externalize their experience. Modern humans, with the assets of modern science imbedded in our culture, are going to be processing the events as they unfold. This is novel. This could have an enormous impact on our value system that may cause future civilizations to enact sustainability into the organizational institutions (political/economical/religous) that today would be unheard of. It's either that or the eventual extinction of our species. Than the planet will have to wait for a few million years for the next sentient being to come along that gains the power humans have to have aother go at it. We are the first clumsy attempt. _________________ Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
Posted: Mon Nov 27, 2006 7:52 pm Post subject: Re: Converging Catastrophes
Jack wrote:
DantesPeak wrote:
Will in a few years the US (for example) be willing use its post peak (in North America) NG supplies, and possibly post peak oil(worldwide), to grow extra grain (if possible) and/or reduce corn used for ethanol, or ship needed grain around the world?
To what purpose? Shall we extend the time span of overshoot? Should we make the damage more extensive? Have a care, for the child you save today may produce a dozen tomorrow. What then?
The dieoff isn't necessarily bad, so long as it affects others. Truly.
The dieoff won't be much fun at all. I lived in a country where over 100,000 people were exterminated. It reached up to all levels of society. Scary as hell. It won't be much fun even here in the US of A. And all those people dieing somewhere else may show up here. They may be us. We use a large fraction of our remaining oil every year. We don't have much left. Our farmlands are heavily dependent on natural gas as fertilizer. We've peaked in natural gas. There aren't any fertilizer manufacturers in the US anymore. We have 300 million people to feed. What makes you think it will only affect other places and people?
Posted: Mon Nov 27, 2006 7:55 pm Post subject: Re: Converging Catastrophes
coyote,
Good idea. We need to think more about the bigger picture. To talk about Global Warming alone, it is too easy to dismiss, and put down. What's a few degrees? It's not caused by man...it's a natural process...besides, Alaska might welcome a bit of warming.
But as more pieces of the problem are added, it becomes harder and harder to argue against. There is no doubt they are all related.
Don't forget the growing financial crisis; debt, both government and private; trade deficits; derivative trading; government entitlements, medicare, medicaid, social security; the growing percentage of skilled workers soon to retire and leave the workforce(with no one really set to replace them). These things are also related to peak oil (although it may not be so apparent) and are converging with all the others.
If we are going to solve the problem, we must first see it clearly...but some would say it's too late.
__________________________________
The late historian Hugh Trevor-Roper said, " History tells us...when things look really bad, when all seems hopeless... never quit, never give up, there is always something you can do...there is always something that can be done."
Joined: Dec 03, 2004 Posts: 1136 Location: Seattle, Wa.
Posted: Mon Nov 27, 2006 8:01 pm Post subject: Re: Converging Catastrophes
Revi wrote:
What makes you think it will only affect other places and people?
I couldn't agree more. I'll go one step further. There are many developing countries I would much rather be in during these challenging times than the USA. I'm already well advanced in my planning in this regard. _________________ Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
Posted: Mon Nov 27, 2006 8:19 pm Post subject: Re: Converging Catastrophes
Revi wrote:
What makes you think it will only affect other places and people?
I don't. I used the statement as a rhetorical tool.
If you prefer, you could equally ask why Brazil should send ethanol to the U.S. Or why North Dakota should send wheat to New York.
As dieoff develops, one must decide who lives and who dies. Or, one can refuse to make the decision, thus letting someone else decide. If we suppose that 80% of the global population will die unpleasantly, sending resources elsewhere to slow the process seems counterproductive.
That said, the U.S. has a relatively low ratio of population to land. Whether that will be used effectively, and whether the U.S. has the will to keep the starving masses at bay, are both very much open to question. In all candor, I rather doubt we have the gumption. We'll probably do something both symbolic and stupid, such as refusing to light the national Christmas tree in order to save the nutritionally insecure. _________________ Dieoff. Fun to watch. Better with hot buttered popcorn!
Joined: Dec 02, 2005 Posts: 6284 Location: Oil-addicted Southern Californucopia
Posted: Mon Nov 27, 2006 8:30 pm Post subject: Re: Converging Catastrophes
JMB wrote:
Don't forget the growing financial crisis; debt, both government and private; trade deficits; derivative trading; government entitlements, medicare, medicaid, social security; the growing percentage of skilled workers soon to retire and leave the workforce(with no one really set to replace them).
Coyote's list, as long and profoundly serious as it is, isn't complete. Add your points and we're getting close.
I'm sure there are even more factors we could include... _________________ "Thank you for attending the oil age. We're going to scrape what we can out of these tar pits in Alberta and then shut down the machines and turn out the lights. Goodnight." - seldom_seen
Joined: Dec 03, 2004 Posts: 1136 Location: Seattle, Wa.
Posted: Mon Nov 27, 2006 8:40 pm Post subject: Re: Converging Catastrophes
Ludi wrote:
Jack wrote:
Can humans? I doubt it.
Yes, they can. Most human cultures HAVE restricted their numbers. But not civilization.
Some previous human cultures controlled their numbers as an adaptive measure for survival. This cultural adaptation was in response to external environmental pressures caused by resource limitations. If modern civilization experiences similar external environmental pressures than why do you assume that we cannot act in a similar way to past cultures that did contol their numbers? All of our knowledge of modern civilization and it's cultural adaptability has been during the ascending curve of ever increasing abundant energy. What do we really know about how modern civilization will respond on the downward curve?
I repeat that past civilizations experiencing die-off are not necessarily representative of the only alternative that awaits us. The advances in science and reason and knowledge and the historical perspective may very well separate us from the Mayans or Easter islanders etc. _________________ Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
Last edited by Ibon on Tue Nov 28, 2006 1:24 am; edited 1 time in total
Posted: Mon Nov 27, 2006 10:14 pm Post subject: Re: Converging Catastrophes
Ibon wrote:
We are too far gone to expect solutions to bring us back to some pre-existing state like say 50 years ago where all the imbalances are corrected. We are now entering unchartered waters where we will have to ride the tsunami that we are creating. That does not mean that we are heading toward an inevitable collapse even though it certainly looks likely when you really digest the impacts of the problems you mentioned above. What I always like to mention as a type of silver lining to this depressing scenario is that as we reach tipping points of disruption there will be painful consequences that will exert an enormous pressure on our culture and actually start the process to mold or transform our values.
Surviving the calamities ahead could force us into sustainable practices where today there is no political, economic or cultural impetus to do so. (Of course if the consequences are so severe that our institutions collapse than we will have all out anarchy. In that case we wont even have the time to contemplate our future let alone ponder on how stupid we have been. We will be thrust into the moment of raw survival!).
While I hope you're correct, the pressure we may feel could be of the terminal type. Just as we are putting what I like to call 'Terminal Selection Pressure' (TSP) on many species, we may end up facing a similar pressure if the bottom drops out of the environment, or in the event of nuclear war.
One can hope for the best, but can you imagine the madness, the complete insanity, once it becomes apparent we are not only facing a dieoff, but possible extinction? The loss of everything so hard won over the centuries - the arts and sciences, the entire accumulation of human knowledge lost. Not so much that the knowledge is lost, but there would be no one left to comprehend or enjoy it.
Pressure we will face indeed, but it may not lead to a better destiny, or even survival of the human species.
Joined: Feb 23, 2005 Posts: 492 Location: Winnipeg
Posted: Mon Nov 27, 2006 10:42 pm Post subject: Re: Converging Catastrophes
Clearly the thing to do is to limit future damage, whats done is now done. As a corollory another thing to do is to try to fix existing damage. I am reminded of how the Black Sea was dying back in the Soviet Heyday. It is recovering quite nicely now as the USSR's fertilizer runoff and whatnot has slowed as their economy suffered serious dislocation.
So we must disrupt the global economy. We must divide everyone up into regions(by geography, race etc...) and make them self sufficient in food & energy. So what we need is some trade wars, some embargos, some kind of disruption to shipping & eliminate excess production for trade...Hmm...How to do that...Hmmm
Say! maybe this peak oil thing could act as that catalyst.
As for people worried about the lack planning making things worse, I have to ask, what can of planning are you expecting to see? Warehouses of grain? big fuel dumps? If theres going to be such problems in the decades ahead, why on earth would anyone want to advertise such assets? If sustainability mean 80%+ of people have to die, if I was in charge of preparing for it, I would not show any sign of it, especially not to my own people. Even in the good times, such an ostentatious display would make people jittery and unpredictable.
Good planning at this stage, is to show no planning. If the plane was about to crash and only you knew when, would you make a big display, or casually walk over to the only parachute?
I'd bet money there's vital commodities stashed all over the place, it wasn't that long ago that people were thinking about a nuclear apocalypse.
The moral of the story, stay flexible, stay out of sight.
So I guess my answer to the question is to stick with your people, depend on what you have, not what others have, because nothing comphrehensive will be done until its obvious to even the lowest common denominator, by then it will be too late.
Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2006 1:01 am Post subject: Re: Converging Catastrophes
Seems to me that no realistic solutions exist (except for if you want to regard consequences as solutions).
Quote:
Yes, they can. Most human cultures HAVE restricted their numbers. But not civilization.
Whatever strict policies that worked for small communities in the past won't work now. Look at Tikopia. They were sustainable becuase of their isolation, but now they take advantage of globalization just like everyone else. And why shouldn't they? It's only human nature. _________________ "Life is merely an orderly decay of energy states, and survival requires the continual discovery of new energy to pump into the system. He who controls the sources of energy controls the means of survival. "
Joined: Dec 03, 2004 Posts: 1136 Location: Seattle, Wa.
Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2006 1:12 am Post subject: Re: Converging Catastrophes
DefiledEngine wrote:
. And why shouldn't they? It's only human nature.
.
That is a failure of imagination. Take a quick look at all the wacky cultural traits humans have developed from circumcision, religion to low riders and tell me why our human nature couldn't imbed cultural traits toward ritual practices that would maintain our population. It is the very nature of human nature to adapt. We are almost as good at it as cockroaches.
The vast majority of humans like to follow a script and be told what to do. That is human nature. _________________ Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
