Will the internet survive energy contraction?

[TFian]

While it is primarily genetic, it isn't something simple like, say, Huntington's Chorea. If you have the specific genetic error that indicates Huntington's, you will develop the disease. With autism, there appears to be multiple genes involved, interacting in ways we are still exploring, and there may be environmental triggers as well. The vaccine hypothesis has been thoroughly debunked, but that doesn't rule out everything.

Well yeah, the vaccine (mercury?) scare was just silly ramblings from people like Alex Jones.

I wonder how (if) more effective treatments will be in the future for it. I guess genetic engineering maybe? (As scary as that would be) Seems a difficult ailment to tackle. The future of medicine makes me shudder.

 

[TFian]

Peak Oil Theory, Data and DC Convention Deserve Our Attention

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-kreig/peak-oil-theory-data-and_b_756340.html

 

[TFian]

Some apes, plus dolphins and elephants, can recognise themselves in a mirror. That is not the same level of intelligence

http://current.com/news/91825903_sc...ld-be-treated-as-non-human-persons.htm?ref=nf

Dolphins have been declared the world’s second most intelligent creatures after humans, with scientists suggesting they are so bright that they should be treated as “non-human persons”.

Studies into dolphin behaviour have highlighted how similar their communications are to those of humans and that they are brighter than chimpanzees. These have been backed up by anatomical research showing that dolphin brains have many key features associated with high intelligence.

 

[PixyMisa]

Yes. Still not the same level of intelligence.

 

[TFian]

Yes. Still not the same level of intelligence.

Well ok. Very close though.

 

[GreyArea]

Thanks for the response GrayArea, I've thus far enjoyed your responses in this thread.

You're welcome.

I guess population really isn't much of a problem (globally). But isn't there the possibility global climate change will reduce the carrying capacity of earth?

I wouldn't say that population isn't a problem. PixyMisa already made some of the points I would.

And while no one in this thread appears to be claiming that it is solving itself, I want to note that saying such a thing would be an oversimplification. Women are solving overpopulation for us, and we help ourselves by supporting them. Their choices, which lead to the concluding phase of the demographic transition, are an under-reported story, which I try to bring up from time to time. It's also a reminder that authoritarian tactics (such as forced sterilization) or callous fatalism (hoping for mass death) are that much more unacceptable.

Population and climate change will stress human support systems (and maybe they already are if you can tease out the contributing factors). I expect those support systems will be stressed past the breaking point in some parts of the world. This leaves political problems (such as large refugee migrations) and technical challenges (such as building arable soil in thawing places newly receiving adequate rainfall for agriculture) for the luckier parts of the world. But I don't think that the data is anywhere clear enough to say that we are all doomed.

Some would say that our consumption patterns are already unsustainable. But that's not really a population question. It does, however, lead to the next point...

Also, GrayArea, if I may ask, what do you find so appealing about Viridian design? You've brought it up before, and while I brushed it off, I'm still interested why you think it's a model for the future.

I think that bright green environmentalism is a major part of the solution to our energy and climate problems. I agree with the bright green, "viridian" ideas that we need to change how we build our machines and infrastructure, that they have to be designed from the beginning to be more efficient and safer for the environment, and that new systems will be adopted more quickly and successfully if they are appealing to the general public.

Only a small part of the public will accept ways of life and tools that have the aura of the "hairshirt". I'm more willing than most to make sacrifices and be an early adopter, but even I have my limits. But we need everyone on board for this project to work. The next time Joe Schmoe needs to buy a new car, we need to make the electric car fit his practical needs and his aesthetic/social desires, or he'll go for the familiar gas car every time.

You've brought up culture several times in this thread. Some of what Sterling wrote about is a kind of social engineering, building better and greener tools for the 21st century that are so cool that no one will want to keep buying the same old obsolete, brutal-industrial, inefficient 20th century crap.

 

[Roboramma]

Have you read it? It's proven to be wrong in virtually all it's predictions.

I doubt that.

Argument from personal incredulity.

I read it more as an invitation for lionking to give evidence to support his assertion, like a single prediction from it that has been proven wrong.

Now, I don't doubt his assertion, based simply on the track record of the predictions that TFian has shown in this thread, but that's not much of an argument either.

 

[TFian]

Their choices, which lead to the concluding phase of the demographic transition, are an under-reported story, which I try to bring up from time to time.

Why do you think it's so underreported?

It's also a reminder that authoritarian tactics (such as forced sterilization) or callous fatalism (hoping for mass death) are that much more unacceptable.

Well, if it really is a problem, what's the problem with passive fatalism?

Population and climate change will stress human support systems (and maybe they already are if you can tease out the contributing factors). I expect those support systems will be stressed past the breaking point in some parts of the world. This leaves political problems (such as large refugee migrations) and technical challenges (such as building arable soil in thawing places newly receiving adequate rainfall for agriculture) for the luckier parts of the world. But I don't think that the data is anywhere clear enough to say that we are all doomed.

I'm not sure, it seems only time will tell how damaging the effects of climate change really are. I'm certainly not looking forward to the polar caps melting away.

I think that bright green environmentalism is a major part of the solution to our energy and climate problems. I agree with the bright green, "viridian" ideas that we need to change how we build our machines and infrastructure, that they have to be designed from the beginning to be more efficient and safer for the environment, and that new systems will be adopted more quickly and successfully if they are appealing to the general public.

I think the end is where we disagree with (appealing to the general public), which will bring me to what I say next.

Only a small part of the public will accept ways of life and tools that have the aura of the "hairshirt". I'm more willing than most to make sacrifices and be an early adopter, but even I have my limits. But we need everyone on board for this project to work. The next time Joe Schmoe needs to buy a new car, we need to make the electric car fit his practical needs and his aesthetic/social desires, or he'll go for the familiar gas car every time.

I think here's two cognitive problems people like JMG have noticed with the public. First is the technofix that continues BAU (business as usual). Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you suggesting that any of the car culture is going to last? That we can just electrify it and it'll continue? Keep in mind, Amory Lovins, someone you may know about and like, who's probably of the biggest proponents of the "technofix", made a prediction that by this year, a significant portion of the car fleet would be electrified. Turns out, it's no more than 5%. Second off, the desires of a particular consumer culture don't change physical realities, such as resource constrains, and the limits of a finite planet. If Joe sickpack wants a flying car that goes to Venus, it doesn't exactly mean it will ever become realized.

You may be interested in something JMG wrote "Becoming a Third World Country" It does partially address what you've brought up.

In the course of writing last week’s Archdruid Report post, I belatedly realized that there’s a very simple way to talk about the scope of the brutal economic contraction now sweeping through American society – a way, furthermore, that might just be able to sidestep both the obsessive belief in progress and the equally obsessive fascination with apocalyptic fantasy that, between them, make up much of what passes for thinking about the future these days. It’s to point out that, over the next decade or so, the United States is going to finish the process of becoming a Third World country.

The same biases that make such global changes invisible have impacts at least as sweeping here at home. Faith in progress, coupled with the tribute economy’s culture of entitlement I mentioned earlier, have made it nearly impossible for anybody in American public life to talk about the hard fact that America can no longer afford most of the social habits it adopted during its age of empire. It’s almost impossible to think of an aspect of daily life in America today that will not change drastically as a result. We will have to give up the notion, for example, that most Americans ought to go to college and get a “meaningful and fulfilling” job of the sort that can be done sitting at a desk. We will have to abandon the idea that it makes any sense to spend a quarter of a million dollars giving an elderly person with an incurable illness six more months of life. We will have to relearn the old distinction between the deserving poor – those who are willing to work and simply need the opportunity, or who have fallen into destitution through circumstances outside their control – and those who are simply trying to game the system. The great majority of us will get to find out what it’s like to make things instead of buying them, even when that means a sharp reduction in quality; to skip meals, or make do with very little, because the money to pay for anything more simply isn’t there; to treat serious illnesses at home because care from a doctor costs too much; I could go on for paragraphs, but I trust you get the idea.

The rest can be found here http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com/2010/02/becoming-third-world-country.html Though I think I quoted the most pertinent pieces.

You've brought up culture several times in this thread. Some of what Sterling wrote about is a kind of social engineering, building better and greener tools for the 21st century that are so cool that no one will want to keep buying the same old obsolete, brutal-industrial, inefficient 20th century crap.

I've actually read this his Viridian manifesto, and I actually found myself surprisingly in agreement with a number of pieces of it. However, I'm reluctant to think any of it will come to pass, with resource constraints, and the sheer inertia of our current culture. After all, I come from a "poor" country myself, so I can certainly visualize some of the path downwards we may take.

 

[PixyMisa]

Why do you think it's so underreported?

I don't think it is underreported, personally. I think that people don't pay attention to stuff unless it's dramatic, and certain doom by population explosion is a lot more dramatic than things being pretty much okay except in certain countries which are already hell-holes for the most part anyway.

Well, if it really is a problem, what's the problem with passive fatalism?

What is wrong with lying down in the mud and waiting to die?

Are you seriously asking that question?

I think here's two cognitive problems people like JMG have noticed with the public.

Cognitive problems?

First is the technofix that continues BAU (business as usual). Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you suggesting that any of the car culture is going to last?

Things will change. Things have been changing since the car was invented. Things were changing before the car was invented.

The only business as usual is change.

That we can just electrify it and it'll continue?

By that, do you mean do we think there will continue to be personal vehicles on the roads? Yes, absolutely.

Keep in mind, Amory Lovins, someone you may know about and like, who's probably of the biggest proponents of the "technofix", made a prediction that by this year, a significant portion of the car fleet would be electrified. Turns out, it's no more than 5%.

Sure. He was wrong. Never heard of the guy before now, though.

Second off, the desires of a particular consumer culture don't change physical realities, such as resource constrains, and the limits of a finite planet.

Actually, yes, they do.

Billiard balls. Elephants would have been extinct for the past century if we hadn't invented celluloid.
Railway ties. Untreated wood only lasts 5-10 years. Without the invention of creosote - made from the nasty goop left behind from producing coal gas - all the forests in North America would have been cut down just to keep the railways going.

This is precisely why you don't lie down in the mud and wait to die. These problems have solutions. All of them. Everything short of the heat death of the Universe we can either fix or work around.

If Joe sickpack wants a flying car that goes to Venus, it doesn't exactly mean it will ever become realized.

How much money does he have?

You may be interested in something JMG wrote "Becoming a Third World Country" It does partially address what you've brought up.

The rest can be found here http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com/2010/02/becoming-third-world-country.html Though I think I quoted the most pertinent pieces.

What you didn't quote was evidence. That's just some random guy's opinion. We don't care.

I've actually read this his Viridian manifesto, and I actually found myself surprisingly in agreement with a number of pieces of it. However, I'm reluctant to think any of it will come to pass, with resource constraints

What resource constraints?

and the sheer inertia of our current culture.

What inertia?

After all, I come from a "poor" country myself, so I can certainly visualize some of the path downwards we may take.

Read - or watch - some James Burke. Get a little historical perspective. If all you read is the unfounded rantings of doomsday prophets, it's only natural that you'll think that the only open question is how long it will be before we all starve in the dark.

The very best solution for this would be to get a civil engineering degree, but that's a lot of work.

 

[TFian]

I don't think it is underreported, personally. I think that people don't pay attention to stuff unless it's dramatic, and certain doom by population explosion is a lot more dramatic than things being pretty much okay except in certain countries which are already hell-holes for the most part anyway.

Hell holes haha. But that probably makes sense (the allure of dramatic stories)

What is wrong with lying down in the mud and waiting to die?

Are you seriously asking that question?

No, not quite. But if say, I'm going to die anyway, why not accept it?

Cognitive problems?

Sorry, wrong word I think. Forgive my english blunder. I think I mean more "mindsets".

Things will change.

I find no disagreement there.

The only business as usual is change.

I'm not so sure about that.

By that, do you mean do we think there will continue to be personal vehicles on the roads? Yes, absolutely.

I think so too, but I doubt they'll be cars.

Actually, yes, they do.

Well, within the limits of possibility yes. If I demand a device that lets me telepathically stop people's hearts at will, as cool as it may be, it doesn't mean it can be created.

This is precisely why you don't lie down in the mud and wait to die.

I'm not advocating that though.

How much money does he have?

What does it matter? Or do you think flying cars to Venus is a possibility?

What you didn't quote was evidence. That's just some random guy's opinion. We don't care.

Well it isn't completely absent of evidence, but it is largely opinions yes. Though it was more directed to GrayArea than a general direction.

What resource constraints?

Oil, lithium, phosphorous, helium, water, the limits of renewable, etc.

What inertia?

People are loathe to change, etc., that stuff.

Read - or watch - some James Burke. Get a little historical perspective.

I will do that.

If all you read is the unfounded rantings of doomsday prophets, it's only natural that you'll think that the only open question is how long it will be before we all starve in the dark.

JMG isn't a doomsday prophet per se. He just thinks life will be a lot harder in the future.

The very best solution for this would be to get a civil engineering degree, but that's a lot of work.

I almost did actually, but I picked another field instead.

 

[PixyMisa]

No, not quite. But if say, I'm going to die anyway, why not accept it?

What if you're only going to die if you accept it?

Sorry, wrong word I think. Forgive my english blunder. I think I mean more "mindsets".

Okay.

I'm not so sure about that.

What is it that you think isn't changing?

And what is your evidence for this?

Well, within the limits of possibility yes. If I demand a device that lets me telepathically stop people's hearts at will, as cool as it may be, it doesn't mean it can be created.

That one's easy. Expensive, but easy. Of course, you'll be out-bid by the people who don't want you to have such a device, so the point is moot.

I'm not advocating that though.

You may not be advocating it, but it is the position you've personally adopted throughout this thread.

What does it matter? Or do you think flying cars to Venus is a possibility?

Sure. Might be a rather large car, but sure.

Oil

Oil is used as (a) an energy source, and therefore fungible, and (b) a feedstock for chemical processing, for which there are plenty of alternatives.

lithium

We have enough lithium in known deposits for 400 years, without recycling or going to the great liquid mine we call "the ocean". The ocean has enough lithium to keep us going at current rates for... About ten million years.

Pardon me if I don't panic.

phosphorous

This one I'll partially grant you; the figures for production and reserves vary enough that there's room for concern. Not immediate, but possibly before the end of the century.

helium

There aren't that many uses for helium where it can't be replaced by something else, but it's a bit of a bugger because it actually escapes from the atmosphere and disappears into space.

water

There's plenty of water. There's even enough clean fresh water. It's just not where it's needed, or not reliable. Water is a problem, but it's a problem with straightforward solutions.

People are loathe to change, etc., that stuff.

Yes, you keep saying that, and I keep pointing out that it is complete nonsense.

200 years ago, the average birth rate in the United States was 7 per woman. Now it's 1.9.
200 years ago most people in the United States grew up and worked on a farm. Now just 2% of the population work in agriculture.

Everything changes. People most of all.

I will do that.

Cool! You can probably find some of his stuff on Youtube. He's made four main documentary series - Connections, the first, now pretty old, then The Day the Universe Changed, then Connections 2 and Connections 3.

I think you'll really enjoy them.

 

[TFian]

What if you're only going to die if you accept it?

Well, if I have a terminal case of cancer, there's not really much I can do about it. There's of course ways of prolonging my life a little longer, but in the end, I'm going to die.

What is it that you think isn't changing?

Actually I think a lot of things are changing, just differently than you.

That one's easy. Expensive, but easy.

Such a device is possible?

Of course, you'll be out-bid by the people who don't want you to have such a device, so the point is moot.

Well if we're discussing in the context that the buyer is limitlessly wealthy, that probably wouldn't matter

You may not be advocating it, but it is the position you've personally adopted throughout this thread.

To a degree yes. I'll be surprised if I live to 30.

Sure. Might be a rather large car, but sure.

I'm not talking a space ship, but a regular size car, that could fly to Venus. Unless the Jettsons are plausible...

Oil is used as (a) an energy source, and therefore fungible, and (b) a feedstock for chemical processing, for which there are plenty of alternatives.

Nothing as cheap or plentiful as petroleum.

We have enough lithium in known deposits for 400 years, without recycling or going to the great liquid mine we call "the ocean". The ocean has enough lithium to keep us going at current rates for... About ten million years.

Pardon me if I don't panic.

The 400 years is true, if there is no rise in demand. What lithium in the oceans?

There aren't that many uses for helium where it can't be replaced by something else

What are the replacements?

but it's a problem with straightforward solutions.

Like what?

Everything changes. People most of all.

Oh things change, just people resist it everytime. They'll be massive resistance when the first world has to give up that "higher" standard of living. It's not going to be pretty.

Cool! You can probably find some of his stuff on Youtube. He's made four main documentary series - Connections, the first, now pretty old, then The Day the Universe Changed, then Connections 2 and Connections 3.

I think you'll really enjoy them.

I'll keep note of that. I'll check them out after mid terms are over.

 

[PixyMisa]

Well, if I have a terminal case of cancer, there's not really much I can do about it. There's of course ways of prolonging my life a little longer, but in the end, I'm going to die.

There are only two things in life that are certain: Uwe Boll's next film will suck, and entropy will increase.

Such a device is possible?

With a bit of creative parameter fiddling, yes.

To a degree yes. I'll be surprised if I live to 30.

At the time I was born, my parents were expecting the imminent arrival of global thermonuclear war. That didn't happen either.

I'm not talking a space ship, but a regular size car, that could fly to Venus.

Regular size would be, what, 200 metres long? No problem!

Nothing as cheap or plentiful as petroleum.

There are fuel sources both cheaper and more plentiful than petroleum; they are just less convenient.

The 400 years is true, if there is no rise in demand. What lithium in the oceans?

There's 230 billion tons of lithium in the oceans. At that, it's not a major constituent. If we take up desalination in a major way, though, lithium will be one of the many useful byproducts.

What are the replacements?

Varies depending on the application; generally one of the other noble gases, hydrogen, or nitrogen.

Like what?

Dam the Ob, divert it south. Desalination. Collect those melting icecaps.

There's a billion billion tons of water on the Earth. We're not going to run out.

Oh things change, just people resist it everytime. They'll be massive resistance when the first world has to give up that "higher" standard of living. It's not going to be pretty.

President Carter already did that for us. It wasn't pretty, but it did happen.

 

[TFian]

There are only two things in life that are certain: Uwe Boll's next film will suck, and entropy will increase.

He's still making films? See what I mean, we are doomed!

With a bit of creative parameter fiddling, yes.

That's both scary and awesome...

Regular size would be, what, 200 metres long? No problem!

How would that work?

There are fuel sources both cheaper and more plentiful than petroleum; they are just less convenient.

And maybe out of reach.

There's 230 billion tons of lithium in the oceans. At that, it's not a major constituent. If we take up desalination in a major way, though, lithium will be one of the many useful byproducts.

Oh well ok, nevermind on the lithium then.

Dam the Ob, divert it south. Desalination. Collect those melting icecaps.

Collect them for what?

There's a billion billion tons of water on the Earth. We're not going to run out.

But what of fresh drinking water?

President Carter already did that for us. It wasn't pretty, but it did happen.

 

[PixyMisa]

Collect them for what?

Water! Soylent green is... I mean, the polar ice caps are water! Fresh, pure, ready-chilled! Lightly dusted with penguin poop!

But what of fresh drinking water?

Just brush off the penguin poop.

Yes, history's greatest monster, James Earl Carter, Jr. himself.

The key point for our discussion is the 1979 oil crisis.

 

[TFian]

Water! Soylent green is... I mean, the polar ice caps are water! Fresh, pure, ready-chilled! Lightly dusted with penguin poop!

But won't the melting ice caps have some pretty adverse effects..such as flooding?

Just brush off the penguin poop.

The key point for our discussion is the 1979 oil crisis.

Well..that was a more adaptable situation. Not so much now.

 

[excaza]

Well..that was a more adaptable situation. Not so much now.

Well, because you said so, it's true.

Continuing your series of baseless assertions, or are you going to substantiate something this time?

 

[TFian]

Well, because you said so, it's true.

Damn straight!

 

[PixyMisa]

But won't the melting ice caps have some pretty adverse effects..such as flooding?

Well, if they're going to do that, let's have them flood places that could do with a bit of flooding - like the Aral Sea, which isn't there anymore.

Well..that was a more adaptable situation. Not so much now.

Carter said that world oil supply would probably only be able to keep up with Americans' demand for six to eight more years.

In 1979 he said that.

Sound familiar?

 

[TFian]

Well, if they're going to do that, let's have them flood places that could do with a bit of flooding - like the Aral Sea, which isn't there anymore.

How could you direct it to do this?

In 1979 he said that.

Sound familiar?

Well he wasn't looking at the Hubbert curve then.