I disagree with the argument that we should not have renewable energy and that it would be better to have no energy.mikepepler wrote:What we're doing with renewable energy is like helping this person with their debt while ignoring the addiction, which is just as harmful to them. The root causes of the problem have to be addressed.
Deep Adaption
Moderator: Peak Moderation
-
- Posts: 2159
- Joined: 30 Jun 2015, 22:01
I think the question is, how likely is it that contemporary renewable energy deployments are putting us on a road to a 'sustainable' energy system? I fear it's more likely that their deployments will just support, prolong what is fundamentally an unsustainable energy system. The 'total damage' over, say the next 50 years *may* be greater due to renewable deployments vs a world without such deployments.johnhemming2 wrote:I disagree with the argument that we should not have renewable energy and that it would be better to have no energy.mikepepler wrote:What we're doing with renewable energy is like helping this person with their debt while ignoring the addiction, which is just as harmful to them. The root causes of the problem have to be addressed.
However, if a sustainable future energy system is possible (just unlikely), maybe we should be pushing ahead with renewables even though the chance of success is small.
-
- Posts: 4124
- Joined: 06 Apr 2009, 22:45
- mikepepler
- Site Admin
- Posts: 3096
- Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
- Location: Rye, UK
- Contact:
That's not what I'm saying. I'm arguing that renewable energy alone will not suffice, and is actually less important that fixing the root causes of the predicament. We should keep building renewable energy in case the root causes do get addressed, but it should probably not be the main priority.johnhemming2 wrote:I disagree with the argument that we should not have renewable energy and that it would be better to have no energy.mikepepler wrote:What we're doing with renewable energy is like helping this person with their debt while ignoring the addiction, which is just as harmful to them. The root causes of the problem have to be addressed.
Of course, as UE said above, the root causes won't acknowledged, never mind addressed, in time to make a difference - that time is in the past already. It would still be better to acknowledge them late, maybe it would help a remnant of humanity make it through to the other side...
-
- Posts: 4124
- Joined: 06 Apr 2009, 22:45
-
- Posts: 2159
- Joined: 30 Jun 2015, 22:01
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14287
- Joined: 20 Sep 2006, 02:35
- Location: Newbury, Berkshire
- Contact:
Could you articulate your view of the (a) predicament and (b) root causes?johnhemming2 wrote:This is where people tend to disagree as to what the predicament is and what the root causes of the predicament are and what the changes are that are proposed that will make any improvements.mikepepler wrote:less important that fixing the root causes of the predicament.
In fact it would be great is several people could write a few clear sentences on their own view of our predicament and its root causes. The differences in opinion might be illuminating.
Our predicament is over-population/over-consumption in a finite environment
The root cause is the evolution of a species that, like any other, will reproduce to the point of environmental constraints and which has also evolved the capacity to exceed the ordinary annual energy constraints and tap into stored energy - most notably in the form of hydrocarbons.
As for "greed" - all humans are "greedy" because all of life is "greedy". It's the natural way of life to be thus. Some humans are more greedy than others, to be sure, and some humans are more capable, for a variety of reasons, to be able to satisfy that greed, This is just the gausian distribution in action. Again, this is just a feature of life.
Unless something stops us - because we can't stop ourselves - we're f*cked.
The root cause is the evolution of a species that, like any other, will reproduce to the point of environmental constraints and which has also evolved the capacity to exceed the ordinary annual energy constraints and tap into stored energy - most notably in the form of hydrocarbons.
As for "greed" - all humans are "greedy" because all of life is "greedy". It's the natural way of life to be thus. Some humans are more greedy than others, to be sure, and some humans are more capable, for a variety of reasons, to be able to satisfy that greed, This is just the gausian distribution in action. Again, this is just a feature of life.
Unless something stops us - because we can't stop ourselves - we're f*cked.
Last edited by Little John on 26 Mar 2018, 17:04, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 4124
- Joined: 06 Apr 2009, 22:45
Yep, I am greedy and have the desire to acquire untold riches and power. Unfortunately I am also lazy and so have failed on both countskenneal - lagger wrote:One of the root causes is human greed and the desire of a few, by no means all, to acquire untold riches and power. Until we address the problem of the super rich, who are driving the growth model, we will get no where.
To become an extremist, hang around with people you agree with. Cass Sunstein
-
- Posts: 6595
- Joined: 07 Jan 2011, 22:14
- Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont
The predicament is running hard up against the limits to growth and the earths resources.
The root cause is the rise in the earths human population past 7.8 billion headed to 9.7 billion.
The secondary factor is the enormous use of energy by the Western developed countries. Much of this energy is needlessly wasted as shown by the USA's per capita consumption of 7032 Kg/year/cap. vs. the EU's 3800 average.
Secondary factor no. 2 is the desire of developing countries to achieve a Western lifestyle along with it's energy consumption rates.
No. 3 is the 28 African countries that will double in population by 2050 where there are already zero spare resources to feed them or improve their standard of living. Many of these presently consume less then 1000Kg/yr./cap.
Drastic birth control (one child per woman after age 21) would be the only non war solution to the population problem but that is impossible to achieve in the third world so starvation and war it will be.
Nothing else proposed has a chance of fixing the problem.
The root cause is the rise in the earths human population past 7.8 billion headed to 9.7 billion.
The secondary factor is the enormous use of energy by the Western developed countries. Much of this energy is needlessly wasted as shown by the USA's per capita consumption of 7032 Kg/year/cap. vs. the EU's 3800 average.
Secondary factor no. 2 is the desire of developing countries to achieve a Western lifestyle along with it's energy consumption rates.
No. 3 is the 28 African countries that will double in population by 2050 where there are already zero spare resources to feed them or improve their standard of living. Many of these presently consume less then 1000Kg/yr./cap.
Drastic birth control (one child per woman after age 21) would be the only non war solution to the population problem but that is impossible to achieve in the third world so starvation and war it will be.
Nothing else proposed has a chance of fixing the problem.
- RenewableCandy
- Posts: 12780
- Joined: 12 Sep 2007, 12:13
- Location: York
Clue: "this" isn't population...RenewableCandy, in 'The Price of Time' wrote:Nobody — as far as Verity knew at the time — had believed the problem her little sketch satirised was relevant, or even real.
Only recently had she found, on the Reference, a small group who had set themselves up to address it. She had added her name. She had no idea how one campaigned on such fundamental matters without appearing, well, totally Hatstand.
But desperate times...
She grabbed the phone,
“Tim, this is bigger than Energy. Don’t take that as an insult, please! This is... Put it this way: all the Renewables we could ever build won’t get us out of the mess we’re in if we don’t crack this. We’ll have energy but we’ll just run out of something else instead like food, or land. There’s even a bloke who says Oxygen, because of something to do with the sea—�
-
- Posts: 6595
- Joined: 07 Jan 2011, 22:14
- Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont
Well don't keep us in suspense. Which this is it?RenewableCandy wrote:Clue: "this" isn't population...RenewableCandy, in 'The Price of Time' wrote:Nobody — as far as Verity knew at the time — had believed the problem her little sketch satirised was relevant, or even real.
Only recently had she found, on the Reference, a small group who had set themselves up to address it. She had added her name. She had no idea how one campaigned on such fundamental matters without appearing, well, totally Hatstand.
But desperate times...
She grabbed the phone,
“Tim, this is bigger than Energy. Don’t take that as an insult, please! This is... Put it this way: all the Renewables we could ever build won’t get us out of the mess we’re in if we don’t crack this. We’ll have energy but we’ll just run out of something else instead like food, or land. There’s even a bloke who says Oxygen, because of something to do with the sea—�
Sorry I haven't gotten around to getting my hands on your book yet. I plan to but procrastination is now my main occupation.
-
- Posts: 4124
- Joined: 06 Apr 2009, 22:45
It is population vt.
Without the population the problems wouldn’t exist. It’s just playing with words.
India is short of water, not just a drought, much worse. Maybe something will happen there, as no amount of food aid could fix the problem.
Without the population the problems wouldn’t exist. It’s just playing with words.
India is short of water, not just a drought, much worse. Maybe something will happen there, as no amount of food aid could fix the problem.
To become an extremist, hang around with people you agree with. Cass Sunstein
- RenewableCandy
- Posts: 12780
- Joined: 12 Sep 2007, 12:13
- Location: York