In his magnum opus on The Entropy Law and the Economic Process, Georgescu-Roegen argues that economic scarcity is rooted in physical reality; that all natural resources are irreversibly degraded when put to use in economic activity; that the carrying capacity of Earth—that is, Earth's capacity to sustain human populations and consumption levels—is bound to decrease sometime in the future as Earth's finite stock of mineral resources is presently being extracted and put to use; and consequently, that the world economy as a whole is heading towards an inevitable future collapse.[25]
Authors who] were set exclusively on proving the impossibility of growth ... were easily deluded by a simple, now widespread, but false syllogism: Since exponential growth in a finite world leads to disasters of all kinds, ecological salvation lies in the stationary state. ... The crucial error consists in not seeing that not only growth, but also a zero-growth state, nay, even a declining state which does not converge toward annihilation, cannot exist forever in a finite environment.[29]:366f
... [T]he important, yet unnoticed point [is] that the necessary conclusion of the arguments in favor of that vision [of a stationary state] is that the most desirable state is not a stationary, but a declining one. Undoubtedly, the current growth must cease, nay, be reversed.[29]:368f [Emphasis in original]
Newfie wrote:In his magnum opus on The Entropy Law and the Economic Process, Georgescu-Roegen argues that ... Earth's capacity to sustain human populations and consumption levels—is bound to decrease sometime in the future as Earth's finite stock of mineral resources is presently being extracted and put to use; and consequently, that the world economy as a whole is heading towards an inevitable future collapse.[25]
Plantagenet wrote:The problem with this viewpoint is that that human estimates of the sum total of "Earth's finite stock of mineral resources" keeps changing. If we had a known amount of resources and then we kept utilizing that stock of resources.....well, then we'd use them all up. You could even estimate the amount of a resource, divide it by the rate of consumption and then exactly estimate when you'd use up the resource. This is the approach Hubbert and his ilk used to make the estimate that peak oil would occur ca. 2000-2010.
But now we know they were wrong. This approach didn't work because a whole new source of oil was found in tight oil shales.
Cheers!
Newfie wrote:Plant,
While it’s true the end limit keeps moving that does not mean there is not some ultimate limit we will reach eventually. The faster we go the sooner we get there. And even if there is no hard limit, which I think is more likely, there surely is a limit to sustained extraction. And the more we use the sooner we get there and the more that get there the bigger the collapse.
The theory or process does not need to be perfect in every respect to form a much better model of the world than the one we are currently using.
pstarr wrote:"LED light bulbs sure make a huge difference over time, in terms of energy conservation. "
No they don't. They make a minuscule difference. Residential use ...
Newfie wrote:Make any sense to you?
Is there any actual proof that putting a guy in jail increases the GDP?
Cog wrote:
But I do not trust government to manage much of anything, the corrupt and evil thing that government is, without completely botching that task as well. I prefer the harsher, but ultimately fairer mistress of nature letting humans know when they have consumed the resources they need to survive. Yes, the downside is much more severe. But I value the freedom I have, and not the control I would suffer under a government managed power down.
Cog wrote:In a regimented society, the citizens will do just enough to get their allotment and no more. There is no personal motive in supporting the collective unless you are absolutely forced to by gunpoint.
But on the other hand, if you are free to innovate based on cost or lack of resources, then you are personally more motivated to succeed.
Return to Conservation & Efficiency
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests