Comments not related to oil or natural gas production in this thread please. Thank you.
5 thoughts to “Open Thread Non-Petroleum, December 27, 2024”
Biophysical limits to Growth:
Is anyone aware of a study by any national government, ever, that explores the apparent contradiction between two perennial goals: economic growth versus retaining a stable Earth System & an adequate resource base for future generations?
I’m aware of the extensive literature on “sustainable development” and the hope that we can have both (growth plus a healthy ecosystem) but what I’m searching for is a study that explores the contradiction including biophysical limits, the impossibility of endless growth, etc.
Is anyone aware of such a study?
I’m in Canada and have had no luck in finding a study by any of our federal departments.
Just wondering whether anyone is aware of such an analysis conducted elsewhere.
Perhaps the closest I’ve seen to a 1:1 match might be the work done by Simon Michaux (e.g. The Mining of Minerals and the Limits to Growth) for the Geological Survey of Finland.
There are other studies that approach aspects of this question such as EROI, but only from a more narrow perspective than you appear interested in.
I see that his study is 73 pgs which seems to be a fairly comprehensive examination of the issues. I will go through the study tomorrow.
The closest I’ve found so far from within Gov’t of Canada is a few of the studies published in various journals that were written by a veteran researcher within our Agriculture department.
But it’s only a few understated comments that point out the enviro harms that can result from the pressure on farmers to increase their yields in order to stay afloat financially.
What I’m hoping to find is an analysis that questions the wisdom of having, as an overt goal of governments, the pursuit of continuous economic growth/ increased GDP.
There are so many problems with such a study, you could write a book.
First, you need to define GDP. Such a study would seem to be based on an outdated definition, which includes only counting the volume of agricultural and manufactured goods. In fact, the majority of growth in developed countries is coming from services and quality improvements in agricultural and manufactured goods. Quality improvements generally don’t need more steel and fuel, just better design (which tends to come from laptops using maybe 50W*).
2nd, perpetual growth is unrealistic. Its persistence as an assumption really must be described as a “straw man”. Developing countries are very likely to follow the same path as the developed: growth in ag and goods which ends in a rough plateau. They may skip some of the goods consumption: no need for land lines and and an ICE vehicle for every home.
3rd, you have to clarify biophysical limits: peak Fossil Fuel, in particular, is not a realistic limit to growth. We can see that there is a scientific and economic consensus that net-zero is a necessary and practical goal, and does not necessarily limit the economy.
Similarly, it’s seems pretty clear that population growth will end pretty soon, and then reverse.
*”AI” is an interesting development, which is currently increasing the power used for certain information services. Developing a methodology to predict its future is a fairly new kind of project. You might want to take a look at Ray Kurzweil’s analyses & projections in his book “The singularity is closer”.
It’s worth noting that it uses electricity, and that solar power can provide at least 500x as much electricity as humans currently use – there’s really no evidence for a projection that human consumption will ever need to approach this limit.
After months of spewing anti immigrant hate and conspiracy theories, Elon Musk and MAGA are having a falling out over immigration.
“Elon Musk doesn’t support H-1B visas because it gets him the best employees, or because he has no other options, or because he can’t find qualified U.S. workers. He needs workers who are visa-insecure so he can abuse them.”
Elon Musk is perhaps the most hated man in America; Democrats, and now MAGA, both loath him. All he’s got left is the Fanbois.
Biophysical limits to Growth:
Is anyone aware of a study by any national government, ever, that explores the apparent contradiction between two perennial goals: economic growth versus retaining a stable Earth System & an adequate resource base for future generations?
I’m aware of the extensive literature on “sustainable development” and the hope that we can have both (growth plus a healthy ecosystem) but what I’m searching for is a study that explores the contradiction including biophysical limits, the impossibility of endless growth, etc.
Is anyone aware of such a study?
I’m in Canada and have had no luck in finding a study by any of our federal departments.
Just wondering whether anyone is aware of such an analysis conducted elsewhere.
Thanks for considering my question.
No, not exactly as you describe.
Perhaps the closest I’ve seen to a 1:1 match might be the work done by Simon Michaux (e.g. The Mining of Minerals and the Limits to Growth) for the Geological Survey of Finland.
There are other studies that approach aspects of this question such as EROI, but only from a more narrow perspective than you appear interested in.
Thank you, TH.
I see that his study is 73 pgs which seems to be a fairly comprehensive examination of the issues. I will go through the study tomorrow.
The closest I’ve found so far from within Gov’t of Canada is a few of the studies published in various journals that were written by a veteran researcher within our Agriculture department.
But it’s only a few understated comments that point out the enviro harms that can result from the pressure on farmers to increase their yields in order to stay afloat financially.
What I’m hoping to find is an analysis that questions the wisdom of having, as an overt goal of governments, the pursuit of continuous economic growth/ increased GDP.
There are so many problems with such a study, you could write a book.
First, you need to define GDP. Such a study would seem to be based on an outdated definition, which includes only counting the volume of agricultural and manufactured goods. In fact, the majority of growth in developed countries is coming from services and quality improvements in agricultural and manufactured goods. Quality improvements generally don’t need more steel and fuel, just better design (which tends to come from laptops using maybe 50W*).
2nd, perpetual growth is unrealistic. Its persistence as an assumption really must be described as a “straw man”. Developing countries are very likely to follow the same path as the developed: growth in ag and goods which ends in a rough plateau. They may skip some of the goods consumption: no need for land lines and and an ICE vehicle for every home.
3rd, you have to clarify biophysical limits: peak Fossil Fuel, in particular, is not a realistic limit to growth. We can see that there is a scientific and economic consensus that net-zero is a necessary and practical goal, and does not necessarily limit the economy.
Similarly, it’s seems pretty clear that population growth will end pretty soon, and then reverse.
*”AI” is an interesting development, which is currently increasing the power used for certain information services. Developing a methodology to predict its future is a fairly new kind of project. You might want to take a look at Ray Kurzweil’s analyses & projections in his book “The singularity is closer”.
It’s worth noting that it uses electricity, and that solar power can provide at least 500x as much electricity as humans currently use – there’s really no evidence for a projection that human consumption will ever need to approach this limit.
After months of spewing anti immigrant hate and conspiracy theories, Elon Musk and MAGA are having a falling out over immigration.
“Elon Musk doesn’t support H-1B visas because it gets him the best employees, or because he has no other options, or because he can’t find qualified U.S. workers. He needs workers who are visa-insecure so he can abuse them.”
Elon Musk is perhaps the most hated man in America; Democrats, and now MAGA, both loath him. All he’s got left is the Fanbois.