The future holds - abundance??

17 posts / 0 new
Last post
Damnthematrix's picture
Damnthematrix
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 3998
I think he will be sorely disappointed

I think he will be sorely disappointed with his future!  He has obviously never heard of resource depletion, and doesn't understand exponential growth.

In short he needs to the Crash Course.....

Dogs_In_A_Pile's picture
Dogs_In_A_Pile
Status: Martenson Brigade Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 4 2009
Posts: 2485
Damnthematrix wrote: I think

Damnthematrix wrote:

I think he will be sorely disappointed with his future!  He has obviously never heard of resource depletion, and doesn't understand exponential growth.

In short he needs to the Crash Course.....

Maybe he has a different definition of abundance and just doesn't know it.

I'm counting on an abundant future because of resource depletion, not instead of or despite.....

ewilkerson's picture
ewilkerson
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 18 2010
Posts: 390
To Breathe The Air During a Mountain Hike.

It seems so many people, not particularly on our site, are clinging/expecting this "progress" to continue.  Well, wonder if the whole of Industrialization has been all wrong..  We have set up a system that can not continue as much as people would like, but was it the right system to begin with.  I have NEVER seen anything mankind has invented or built that can compare to what  Mother Nature gave us.  It will be difficult, and many people will not like it, but the new world, ideas, and types of relationships we can create out of what is left can be the most magnificent thing man has ever done.

Ernest

Damnthematrix's picture
Damnthematrix
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 3998
disappointed with his future

Dogs_In_A_Pile wrote:

Maybe he has a different definition of abundance and just doesn't know it.

I'm counting on an abundant future because of resource depletion, not instead of or despite.....

I agree......  WE have abundance here, but we don't even own an iPhone.

My take on abundance is to do more with less, whereas he talks of doing more with more people to boot.

Mike

xraymike79's picture
xraymike79
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 24 2008
Posts: 2040
The cult of mankind's techno-fix gadgetry

Nice commercial for cell phones and computers.

Has this guy Barber ever heard of Jevons Paradox? 

Higher efficiency through technology only leads to more consumption, increased population.

Ever-increasing technology also leads to higher complexity and more problems that need to be solved.

At some point the problems overwhelm the system and collapse occurs, as it has throughout history to every civilization that has ever existed on this planet. There's no getting around that.

This guy is part of the cult which has an unfailing belief in mankind's techno-fix gadgetry.

Damnthematrix's picture
Damnthematrix
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 3998
My Great Hope for the Future

My Great Hope for the Future

So far on Do the Math, I’ve put out a lot of negative energy—whatever that means. Topics have often focused on what we can’t do, or at least on the failings or difficulties of various ambitious plans. We can’t expect indefinite growth—whether in energy, population, or even growth of the economic variety. It is not obvious how we maintain our current standard of living once fossil fuels begin their inexorable decline this century. And as I’ve argued before, achieving a steady-state future implies approximate equity among the peoples of the Earth, so that maintaining today’s global energy consumption translates to living at one-fifth the power currently enjoyed in the U.S.

In this post, I offer a rosy vision for what I think we could accomplish in the near term to maximize our chances of coming out shiny and happy on the tail end of the fossil fuel saga. I’m no visionary, and this exercise represents a stretch for a physicist. But at least I can sketch a low-risk, physically viable route to the future. I can—in part—vouch for its physical viability based on my own dramatic reductions in energy footprint. I cannot vouch for the realism of the overall scheme. It’s a dream and a hope—a fool’s hope, really—and very, very far from a prediction or a blueprint. I’ve closed all the exits to get your attention. Now we’ll start looking at ways to nose out of our box in a safe and satisfying way.

<MORE>

jneo's picture
jneo
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 7 2009
Posts: 734
    Very interesting

Very interesting presentation.  Two books I plan on reading that go hand in hand with the video.  

1.  The lights in the Tunnel and 2. Abundance: The Future is Better than you Think.  

Has anyone read these titles?

land2341's picture
land2341
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 20 2009
Posts: 402
Diamandis versus Barber

xraymike79 wrote:

Nice commercial for cell phones and computers.

Has this guy Barber ever heard of Jevons Paradox? 

Higher efficiency through technology only leads to more consumption, increased population.

Ever-increasing technology also leads to higher complexity and more problems that need to be solved.

At some point the problems overwhelm the system and collapse occurs, as it has throughout history to every civilization that has ever existed on this planet. There's no getting around that.

This guy is part of the cult which has an unfailing belief in mankind's techno-fix gadgetry.

Mike, Diamandis the guy in the vid, is NOT Benajamin Barber who while not touching directly on resource depletion nails the inability of humans to manage technological change.  

So far no one has really answered the question.  If Diamandis is right and we have the technology to reduce our fuel use by such a degree that we can handle the other issues readily,  can humanity manage the switch?  I don't think so.  

jumblies's picture
jumblies
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 13 2010
Posts: 244
Paul Gilding: The Earth is full

Paul Gilding's presentation at TED.

Have we used up all our resources? Have we filled up all the livable space on Earth? Paul Gilding suggests we have, and the possibility of devastating consequences, in a talk that's equal parts terrifying and, oddly, hopeful.

land2341's picture
land2341
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 20 2009
Posts: 402
point counterpoint

Have you checked out the TED conversations??  Paul Gilding is on there debating his point versus Diamandis'.

xraymike79's picture
xraymike79
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 24 2008
Posts: 2040
Diamandis and Barber

land2341 wrote:

xraymike79 wrote:

Nice commercial for cell phones and computers.

Has this guy Barber ever heard of Jevons Paradox? 

Higher efficiency through technology only leads to more consumption, increased population.

Ever-increasing technology also leads to higher complexity and more problems that need to be solved.

At some point the problems overwhelm the system and collapse occurs, as it has throughout history to every civilization that has ever existed on this planet. There's no getting around that.

This guy is part of the cult which has an unfailing belief in mankind's techno-fix gadgetry.

Mike, Diamandis the guy in the vid, is NOT Benajamin Barber who while not touching directly on resource depletion nails the inability of humans to manage technological change.  

So far no one has really answered the question.  If Diamandis is right and we have the technology to reduce our fuel use by such a degree that we can handle the other issues readily,  can humanity manage the switch?  I don't think so.  

Sorry about the name confusion. I see now that 'Jihad vs Mcworld' is the book written by Barber. I like the title. Mcworld is a great term for our globalized capitalist economy. If there are such heralded miracle technologies on the horizon as suggested by Diamandis, they aren't coming fast enough to stave off what's on the horizon.

land2341's picture
land2341
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 20 2009
Posts: 402
Rare earth really rare?

I was also just reading more on the rare earth metals and elements. Clearly some elements classified as rare are not rare at all, meremly difficult to extract with very poor ROEI quotients.  But, many of the techological advances espoused in thie clip need large quantities of rare earth elements......   Does anyone know where this issue stands?

Damnthematrix's picture
Damnthematrix
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 3998
Canada's Tar Sands: So Destructive its Well-Paid Workers quit

Amidst all the political wrangling over the Keystone XL pipeline, some may lose sight of what the fight is ultimately about. And that, of course, is one of the most environmentally devastating projects ever undertaken: the tar sands mining operation in Alberta, Canada. Today, a Reddit user who says he was until recently a well-paid tar sands worker, shared the following video—along with why he quit his job over moral objections to the destruction his work was helping to cause.

land2341's picture
land2341
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 20 2009
Posts: 402
This video is so sad

I strongly suspect future generations will hate us.

Just the idea that we are refusing to do serious work to change our approach to energy rather than keeping up what we are doing.

I think the future can be abundance,  just not abundance of stuff to entertain us and distract us while the world dies around us.  

dshields's picture
dshields
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 24 2009
Posts: 599
Sorry

xraymike79 wrote:

Nice commercial for cell phones and computers.

Has this guy Barber ever heard of Jevons Paradox? 

Higher efficiency through technology only leads to more consumption, increased population.

Ever-increasing technology also leads to higher complexity and more problems that need to be solved.

At some point the problems overwhelm the system and collapse occurs, as it has throughout history to every civilization that has ever existed on this planet. There's no getting around that.

This guy is part of the cult which has an unfailing belief in mankind's techno-fix gadgetry.

I do not always agree with xraymike but this time I do.  CM is right.  You can not run a system designed to operate in an infinite world mapped on to a finite world.  I once read an article by a person who took the time to figure out what happens if every family (one or more people in a unit) decided to buy a refrigerator.  It is impossible.  There simply are not sufficient resources for everyone to have a refrigerator.  A car is even more out of the question.  Techno fantasy fixes will not fix this. 

jneo's picture
jneo
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 7 2009
Posts: 734
    The movement of the

The movement of the kind of money we are using or a money system itself is a problem.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DuampumYoc

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments