Will the internet survive energy contraction?

[TFian]

No, you just seem to use the term to mean the very last of a particular resource, that's all. In your example, as the mice are nearing peak grain, that's around the time that they'll have the most grain available to them for the least effort expended.

It still doesn't mean we're not wasting and running out of it, which almost everybody agrees with.

Don't worry, "clever", "smarter", "different" and... "Speciest"(?!) are just words. As such they have ever-shifting, subjective meanings attached to them, which means that we actually agree. Also, "apes" and "suggest".

Are you suggesting we are more intelligent than animals?

What a peculiar view of economy you have. It sounds like you believe cities are there for people to grudgingly travel to and sustain.

Yes, is that inaccurate?

Before I answer your question about transportation (which I know little about except that I think we need less of it), could you tell me why you think people would do that?

Do what?

 

[TubbaBlubba]

It's his full title. And that depends on how you define "cult".

A closed society practicing rituals.

 

[TFian]

A closed society practicing rituals.

No, I'm not part of any closed society.

 

[TubbaBlubba]

But you do practice rituals?

Another question: Every time you discuss the House of Lords, do you type out 'The Right Honourable the Lords Spiritual and Temporal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled'?

 

[TFian]

But you do practice rituals?

Define rituals?

Another question: Every time you discuss the House of Lords, do you type out 'The Right Honourable the Lords Spiritual and Temporal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled'?

Actually, yes I would. If you noticed, I generally refer to Guy McPherson by his full title, Professor Emeritus Guy R. McPherson.

 

[PixyMisa]

It still doesn't mean we're not wasting and running out of it, which almost everybody agrees with.

Right. But your predictions, and most of all, your timeframe, are simply not supported by the facts.

Are you suggesting we are more intelligent than animals?

Yes.

Yes, is that inaccurate?

Yes.

Do what?

Why do you think people live in cities?

 

[TFian]

PixyMisa, what do you feel about this quote from JMG's book "EcoTechnic future"?

It’s quite likely, therefore, that deindustrial societies that can no longer build a hydroelectric plant or a computer could still maintain the less demanding knowledge and resource base needed to keep them running, in the same way that Dark Age societies all over Europe used and repaired Roman aqueducts they could never have built themselves. The resulting salvage societies will have advantages that purely ecotechnic societies will not, and so these human ecologies will spread wherever the supply of potential salvage allows them to function. Still, their time will pass; many of the legacies of the industrial age will not be renewable, and when they’re gone, they’re gone.

 

[PixyMisa]

That it is completely irrelevant to the discussion.

He's saying here that after civilisation collapses, we'll be able to scrounge around in the rubble and find the occasional prize.

We're saying that he has presented no evidence whatsoever that civilisation is going to collapse in the first place.

 

[TFian]

That it is completely irrelevant to the discussion.

He's saying here that after civilisation collapses, we'll be able to scrounge around in the rubble and find the occasional prize.

We're saying that he has presented no evidence whatsoever that civilisation is going to collapse in the first place.

Why is it irrelevant?

He's not saying it will collapse, he's describing a slow decline, in the process of 3 centuries actually.

 

[PixyMisa]

Why is it irrelevant?

He's not saying it will collapse, he's describing a slow decline, in the process of 3 centuries actually.

It's still irrelevant.

If you want to argue that civilisation will decline, discussing what will happen after the decline is irrelevant. You have to show that the decline will happen in the first place.

That's what we're waiting for: Evidence to support any of the predictions you have made.

 

[TFian]

May I ask a couple of questions? How old are you, and where do you live? Just approximately - age group and general geographic area are fine, whatever you're willing to share. Because what you assume are universal truths simply don't apply to most of the planet and most of history.

I'm 21 actually, and I live in California.

 

[PixyMisa]

Worst possible combination!

Not for an age to be or a place to live - both of those are great. But for a perspective on the rest of the world... The rest of the world is not like California. The rest of the Western World is not like California. Even the rest of the United States is not like California.

Nor is the rest of history anything like the last 20 years; even 1970 was shockingly different. A typical mid-range 2010 car has more computing power than the entire Apollo Program.

You've been born into the fastest period of technological change in human history; things are changing so fast that you don't even notice it - change is part of the background for you.

I'd suggest again that you see if you can dig up some James Burke, either his books or his TV series. Connections and The Day the Universe Changed would be perfect. The Day the Universe Changed was available legitimately online, but I'm not sure if it still is.

 

[TFian]

Worst possible combination!

Not for an age to be or a place to live - both of those are great. But for a perspective on the rest of the world... The rest of the world is not like California. The rest of the Western World is not like California. Even the rest of the United States is not like California.

Nor is the rest of history anything like the last 20 years; even 1970 was shockingly different. A typical mid-range 2010 car has more computing power than the entire Apollo Program.

You've been born into the fastest period of technological change in human history; things are changing so fast that you don't even notice it - change is part of the background for you.

I'd suggest again that you see if you can dig up some James Burke, either his books or his TV series. Connections and The Day the Universe Changed would be perfect. The Day the Universe Changed was available legitimately online, but I'm not sure if it still is.

Well I'll concede you have a point on the birth comment. I remember back growing up in the 90s, when it was still rare that anyone had a home computer (though I think I remember digging up a commodore sometime years ago..), let alone anything like the Internet. I had never heard of Usenet. Now, you can access the Internet on a portable phone. So yes, I rely solely on others experiences when it comes to past times.

 

[ThatSoundAgain]

It still doesn't mean we're not wasting and running out of it, which almost everybody agrees with.

I agree that we're running out of oil. Have been since the day we started using it, since it's a finite resource.

I was just pointing out that "peak grain" wouldn't appear very special to the mice in your example, and, them being mice and all, they probably wouldn't run the calculation.

Are you suggesting we are more intelligent than animals?

For some definitions of intelligence. Specifically ones that include the ability to figure out how to use fossil fuels in the first place. And to research alternatives when needed.

What sort of intelligence are you talking about?

What a peculiar view of economy you have. It sounds like you believe cities are there for people to grudgingly travel to and sustain.

Yes, is that inaccurate?

Very. Even though I'm no economist I was able to conclude that inside of fifteen seconds. As a city dweller I can tell you that no one is forcing me to live here or to somehow spend my time and meagre resources holding together an urban centre that would otherwise collapse.

No, I live and work here because that's where the skills I have happen to pay off. In short, I'm richer and more productive here than I would be were I not in the city. Most other people, like me, are here because they're selfish and have decided that it makes them richer and / or happier. They've weighed the pros and cons, and converged to live here.

Cities are a net source of wealth, not something humans invent and then assign each other to keep up just for the sake of having them.

Before I answer your question about transportation (which I know little about except that I think we need less of it), could you tell me why you think people would do that?

Do what?

Sorry, I mean: Why would people grudgingly go and sustain a city if they didn't feel they were better off there?

 

[W.D.Clinger]

Also, we are not clever apes, we are no smarter than many different animal species. To suggest otherwise is speciest.

Your claim that "we are no smarter than many different animal species" suggests you have little experience with other animal species.

Btw, I have a question for you. Many here say electric rail is a substitute for petroleum based transportation. Yet, electric rail couldn't support the enormous masses that flood into the business districts of cities every day. Business districts which require SUBURBS so that people can commute there to work, because the city itself REQUIRES the INCOME to sustain itself economically!

And yet, on a typical working day in New York City, roughly 1.5 million people commute by rail.

Btw: You were so busy getting your facts wrong that you forgot to ask your question.

 

[Dancing David]

Hmm, I don't think so.

Global energy consumption of the internet is estimated at 3-5%, but growing very rapidly.

http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk...owing-report-finds/(energysavingtrust)/697758

Dead link.

http://www.fastcompany.com/1601894/greenpeace-cloud-computing-greenhouse-gas-emissions-to-triple

And how much energy will be saved in not using other techniques?

You know like not manufacturing a CD, or transporting it or going to buu it?

Rememeber that sources on 'Internet' consumption often consider the PC and monitor to be on eight hours a day , and not even being sued by the Internet.

So where the heck is that 3% from? No other source gives that figure.

 

[Dancing David]

Because it's not? Read it before such a quick judgment.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...697758&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=ubuntu

And it says 3% of world energy consumtion where? That is a press release about the Greenpeace report!

It says an increase in CO₂ 3x from cloud computing, a portion of the internet. It DOES NOT say for the ENTIRE INTERNET.

So even if we say that global energy consumption of the internet is 1% that does not mean it will increase by 3x, that means a portion of it will increase by 3x, so it cloud computing is .1 of interenet energy, the total increase will be from 1% to 1.2%.

 

[Dancing David]

Here's another good link on the Germen study. The Germen government is getting serious about peak oil, when will Jref accept it as reality?

http://www.energybulletin.net/stories/2010-09-02/german-military-study-warns-potential-energy-crisis

And no where does it say "cars will no longer have gasoline in 2013". does it, it is talking about teh transition to the future, where does it give the time frame TFian?

 

[Dancing David]

What part of the report contradicts what the Grand ArhcDruid predicts?

Your burden, your claim!
Which part supports the AD?
Which part of it says 'society will collapse to agrarian levels of technology', BTW where does Germany get its petroleum from now? And how is that going to change drastically in the future with alternatives?

 

[Dancing David]

He's not so concerned about what happens in 15-20 years, but moreso 50-100 years. His predictions of a decline into an agrarian/ecotechnic future are likely to be realized.

As he says

And you said empty highways by 2013!

50-100 years is a long trasition time.