Civilization and succession | EnergyBulletin.net | Peak Oil News Clearinghouse "Thus humanity is no more exempt from ecological processes than from the law of gravity. The invention of airplanes doesn’t mean that gravity no longer affects us; it means that if we use a lot of energy, we can overcome the force of gravity and lift ourselves off the ground for a while. The same principle holds with the laws of ecology. Using an immense amount of energy, we lifted a minority of the world’s population high above the subsistence level for a while, but that doesn’t mean that ecological laws no longer affect us. It means that for three hundred years, we’ve been able to push past the limits normally imposed by those laws, by burning up huge amounts of fossil fuels. When the fossil fuels are gone, the laws will still be there."

Humans, particularly those who live in highly industrialized societies, often consider themselves somehow above the laws of nature that govern other forms of life on earth. In that regard, we see ourselves as minor gods or at least devinely gifted creatures. What is too often overlooked is that human existence was effectively constrained by the same natural limits as other creatures for 99% of human history. It has only been since the last two hundred years that the discovery and exploitation of enormous stores of finite energy allowed us to temporarily able to overcome natural constraints on food production, disease control, etc. and expand exponentually. The question is, when that one-time gift of energy begins to dwindle how will we respond to the reimposition of nature's laws?

It'll be very Darwynian, and we'll all be very stinky. It'll be like the pioneer days. Most women are gonna hate it, or at least my Sister will because the foo foo designers she likes will die first hopefully. We'll have to learn how to survive in a Jeffersonian Aggregarian society, but wait.......with hydroelectric electricity won't we still have some power, and what about solar? Hey.....was this a trick question? You're just trying to get me to think?

__________________
“I think every good Christian ought to kick Falwell right in the ass.”-Barry Goldwater

Busted!

Yes, so very true. I myself will admit that, at one point, I felt as if I was "above" the laws of nature, but when you take into fact and realize all the things that happen to humans (I.E. Hurricane Katrina, tornados, etc.) then you realize that we are merely "pawns" in a game of chess which is controlled by nature. Without nature, we'd die. So, technically, we rely on nature, which in turn illustrates that we re not necessarily "Gods," which many think humans are.

When the one-time gift dwindles down, people will go into shock and panic, and ideas will start to fly of ways to prevent it and or come up with another "gift" of energy. There would be mass controversy over the ideas and massive criticism, which could lead to many problems. All in all, many people would suffer, because when the new ideas came into effect, they wouldn't necessarily know what to believe and what not to. Leading to them having trouble whether to use the new forms of energy.

Thats a good point this article makes. Even though the conclusion might be worth to discuss.

One thing is for sure, the fossil fuels gave us such huge amounts of cheap energy, we won't see so soon again when they start to cease (ie get so expensive that they are no advantage anymore). I guess the question put by this article is, what we do then.

Well obviously we will have to cut back our energy consumption again. But not back to stone age.

What the article misses is the factor of technological progress. That means not only the alternative energy sources will keep improving the more as the more we will be in urgent need of them, and on the other side it will help us cutting down the energy imput for the same task. Just think about how much energy you needed to run a steam locomotive and how much an up to date train needs for the same task.

But all together it will be a tough call. It will be definitely no easy game to raise efficiency of both energy production and consumption so high as to maintain the same level of wealth also when the fossils will be gone or of not a large worth anymore...


Ok, I am going to name only one technology that is already nowadays revolutionizing the construction sector. Houses that need not much more than a few inhabitants and the heat of a few electric devices (computer, TV, oven) for heating and during summer they are constructed in a way that it cools down the inside temperature 5-10°C below the hot temperature outside with only a minimal energy consumption (for a fan to move air). And just to bring this into relation to the large picture: 40% of the entire energy consumption is used for houses.

__________________
"Every country gets the cuisine it deserves"

It will indeed be a tough call. People will have to learn to sacrifice certain things they use for recreation or enjoyment to be able to maintain the energy that we need for the necessities. And like you said Slartibartfas, we don't have to revert back to the stone age type of necessity, but we will need to cut back on excessive amounts.

There are other little things, that if people used them more often, would help with energy consumption. There are many ways people can cut back or help with the consumption of all energy. It's just, society in general doesn't pay much attention or care too much about it as long as they have what they want and need. But when the time comes, I guarantee people will look back and regret not taking into fact the many alternatives they could've used.

Yes, I see you are talking about consciousness for that type of things in the broad public.

Thats actually one of the main differences I witnessed on my journey between the US and Europe.

But I think this is already on the change in the US towards the better. I mean just take for example this environment discussion in the US, the very fact of its sheer existence is already a major change as just a few years ago, it was simply non-existent. A non issue that might have only scratched on the surface when some Americans talked about why Europeans are such a sort of weird eco-extremists...

Americans need double as much energy as Europeans. But you know the problem? Even if you get down onto European levels, you have to know that if all people would live like Europeans, we still would need two earths. Well thats already two earths less than we would need if all people would live "the American way" but its still one too much. And I fear those calculations even the more base on existing fossil fuels, not depleted deposits.

__________________
"Every country gets the cuisine it deserves"

Yes, it is a great step, that there is even the discussion. A small step in a very long plan of action that will be needed to take place when the time is right. Baby steps though, we cannot rush right into it, as that would most definitely backfire. But yes, it is towards the better that people even consider it an issue now adays.

Americans need double if not triple as much as pretty much any other nation in the world. In the end, it will be a great accomplishment by Americans or it will turn into great turmoil. It all depends on how the public reacts, how the government handles the reaction and can be constructive, etc.

Energy is not the big deal. We can produce energy very easily now. The real question will arise in the near future. How do we feed ten billion people? How do we feed twenty? Food will be the problem. Sure, you can drive your electric car around the world. People can event new forms of power plants to light the world. But how will you feed it?

>>>>>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
--- "The worst deaf is the one who doesn't want to hear." ---

--- "In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king." ---

--- “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.” ---
ß-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<<<<<<

When discussing the issue of energy with others I often hear them say that whatever energy shortage may happen our technology will save the day. For awhile I thought the same way. However, I have learned that technology and energy are not one in the same. There is a point of rapidly deminishing returns on technological improvements beyond which it becomes increasingly difficult and expensive to achieve even small advancements in energy efficiency. There is also a built in lag time from the onset of energy scarcity and price increases to any significant improvement in energy use efficiency. As an example, it would take about 20 years to replace the existing fleet of U.S. autos with a more efficient form of autos that are significantly more fuel efficient. And even while this may be happening, a growing population and increasing demand for more goods negates whatever fuel savings that may be achieved.

We are hugely invested in hydrocarbon-based energy as the foundation for modern life. Even if there was a new, abundant source of energy readily available it would take decades to shift from the current infrastructure to what would be a much different energy foundation. Homes, transportation systems, settlement patterns, employment, work skills, education, etc., etc. would have to be readjusted to a new energy regime. As in any major economic shift, there would be a period of adjustment and unavoidable dislocation for some. At this point there is no indication that we will have a fully fuctioning system up and running by the time oil production becomes a serious concern. Technology will not forestall the shockwaves that will be generated by declining oil production.

I truly believe we can successfully adjust to the challenges that will soon face us with the decline in oil production. It may not be easy, but it probably won't be as difficult as some fear. Life will certainly be different. Whatever the challenges, the best way to meet them is to face them.