Steve Bull's Blog, page 8
January 4, 2025
Wild Free and Happy–free ebook by Richard Adrian Reese
Click here to download a PDF version of Wild Free and Happy.
As Richard states in his introduction;
“Greetings readers! Welcome to Wild Free & Happy! Please take a seat by my campfire. I have stories to tell. I want to explore the saga of our ancestors’ journey, the long and exciting voyage from tree dwelling primates to planet thrashing thunder beings.”
January 1, 2025
The Bulletin: December 26, 2024-January 1, 2025
Too Complex Not To Fail | how to save the world
Reporter Seymour Hersh on “How America Took Out the Nord Stream Pipeline”: Exclusive TV Interview
Dave Collum’s 2024 Year In Review, Part 1: What Is A Fact? | ZeroHedge
The Weaponization of Information and Digital Tools to Occupy and Derail Your Mind
My Substack Recommendations for 2025
2024: Year of the Coverup – by Matt Taibbi – Racket News
With Nuland in NED, Get Ready for More Color Revolution Bonanza – Global Research
An Unpopular Essay: What’s Ahead 2025-2035
Europe: The Fall of the Holy Renewable Empire :: Gatestone Institute
The Spies Who Hate Us ⋆ Brownstone Institute
European Gas Prices Soar As Putin Says A New Ukraine Transit Deal Is Unlikely | ZeroHedge
What a Year 2024 Was – The Honest Sorcerer
All Of Western Civilization Owns This Genocide
The Left is Now the Right – by Matt Taibbi – Racket News
Government Spending Will Cause The Next Financial Crisis | dlacalle.com
“Too Big to Care” and the Illusion of Choice
Science Snippets: Why Humans Dominate – by Guy R McPherson
The Looming False Flag That Could Ignite World War 3 in 2025
Ever Decreasing Circles – Why The Worldwide Banking Ponzi-Scheme Must Be Reset | ZeroHedge
THE FUTURE’S UNCERTAIN AND THE END IS ALWAYS NEAR – The Burning Platform
President Carter’s energy solutions 1977 – Peak Everything, Overshoot, & Collapse
December 30, 2024
Today’s Contemplation: Collapse Cometh CXCIV–US Peak Shale Oil & Gas: When the Walls Come Tumblin’ Down.
Tulum, Mexico (1986). Photo by author.This Contemplation has been prompted by a publication (see summary below) focused upon the apparent peaking of shale oil and gas production within the United States. The commentary on US shale extraction by the natural resources investment firm of Goehring & Rozencwajg began making the rounds within some of the Facebook Group circles I frequent upon its publishing on December 19th.
Here are a few thoughts I have had as I’ve read through the G&R analysis and taken some time to digest its implications and some of the accompanying commentary by others.
It’s quite possible that the peaking of extraction from US shale deposits could usher in a speeding up of some trends (especially geopolitical and economic) as we travel ever-forward towards global, societal collapse–especially given the consequences this will have for the global hegemon that is the United States since shale deposits decline very rapidly. And as much as some in the US like to believe that it is energy ‘independent’, it is not. Not even close. Despite the ‘shale miracle’, the US continues to import just under 10 million barrels of oil per day–it needs to import heavy and sour oil since most of its extraction is of the light type and its heavy oil production has been in decline since 1970.
I say ‘possible’ regarding the impact of this eventuality since the following thoughts are not absolute. It is my perception and interpretation of evidence based upon my years of reading and writing about societal collapse and related topics–particularly the peaking of our master resource, oil. But as with virtually everything, observations (even of agreed upon ‘facts’) are interpreted through the eyes of the beholder and can result in different conclusions, even diametrically-opposed ones.
In addition, no one can predict the future with much if any certainty so any assertions that I make must be kept in perspective. It could be these thoughts of mine are all sound and fury signifying nothing, or it could be a fairly accurate Nostradamus-like prediction–only time will tell. The evidence that supports a story of inevitable and impending societal collapse due very much to the also inevitable and impending end of the oil age is very compelling.
And this is not even our most dire predicament since resource depletion is but one of several symptom predicaments of our far more significant predicament of ecological overshoot–a predicament that has been expedited very much by our leveraging of a one-time, finite cache of photosynthetically-derived and ‘stored’ hydrocarbon energy.
Putting all that net surplus energy into the opposable-thumbed hands of a story-telling ape with significant anxiety and highly-complex brains was probably not the best of evolutionary ‘decisions’. Especially since the species was already on the path towards overshoot once it began experimenting with large, complex societies. Again, time will tell.
I have emphasised previously that energy is everything. Without it there is no life. Without the tremendous amounts of net surplus energy afforded humanity via hydrocarbons, the vast array of societal complexities (i.e., political, economic, cultural) and technologies that our modern societies currently have, depend upon, and take for granted would not likely exist. The human-contrived world would be a much simpler and smaller version of itself, and without much in the way of what we would define as modernity. It might resemble, if we were lucky, the eighteenth or early nineteenth century–just prior to the discovery of oil in the United States (and followed closely in other areas around the globe).
There certainly would not be 8+ billion of us, communities would depend upon their local resource base for the most part, and much (all?) of the energy-powered technologies we have would not exist. This is provided Nature was keeping our population growth in check and we hadn’t denuded our environments of its plant and wildlife, as seems to be our way as we continue our seemingly ever-present expansion. We would likely still be in overshoot in such a world, but certainly not to the extent we currently are. Our speed towards a much smaller cliff would be considerably slower. Hydrocarbons have afforded us the ability to speed up the journey tremendously and produce a cliff that is much, much higher than it would be otherwise.
So, it’s beginning to look like Peak Oil might be raising its ugly head again for an increasing number of people–not that it ever disappeared for some small number of us. Even when the shale ‘revolution’ began to pump up the volume about it being vanquished, some adherents drowned out that noise holding on to the geologic inevitability of a decline in production. The more dire consequences of Peak Oil had just been delayed, not avoided. You cannot forever ignore the increasing drawdown of a finite resource that becomes more and more difficult and expensive to retrieve–diminishing returns can be most unforgiving. But I have to say, a lot of people have tried and are still trying to deny biogeophysical reality, mostly by way of magical thinking–and I expect this to get even more prevalent as reality bites us ‘wise’ apes in the ass.
Peak Oil, in fact, arrived quite a number of years ago depending on what type of oil you are discussing; i.e., conventional vs. unconventional. Unconventional extractions (primarily deep sea drilling, bitumen mining, and hydraulic fracturing of shale deposits) have helped to kick-the-can-down-the-road for humanity (along with expansion of the Ponzi scheme that is our credit-/debt-based financial/monetary systems) but the time is quickly approaching (actually, it’s past time) when it’s going to have to face a major reconciliation with hard, physical limits.
Or is it? With the narrative management and distractions our ruling elite will employ, combined with the denial and bargaining that will take place amongst the masses, it may be that the notion gets buried in the stories of pending ‘saviours’ and hidden by the proliferation of distractions to keep the hoi polloi in ignorance and compliant.
‘Renewables’ will save us. Look over there, a war. Nuclear Fusion will save us. Look over there, aliens. A new ‘leader’ will save us. Look over there, another pandemic. Artificial Intelligence will save us. Look over there, enemy drones. ‘Free markets’ will save us. Look over there, Taylor Swift is performing again. Technology will save us. Look over there, it’s the first billion dollar contract for a sports player. Space travel will save us. Look over there, ‘democracy’ is at risk from within. Something will save us…because, heaven forbid, we should be open to and considering that maybe we need to be discussing not ‘saving’ industrial civilisation but preparing for the inevitable return to simpler living.
The implications of this analysis by G&R could be immensely monumental for our complex societies. It is a stark reminder of the finiteness of hydrocarbon resources and the increasing difficulty of facing this reality. It is not the first and probably won’t be the last of such reminders but, like previous ones, will be mostly ignored, denied, or rationalised away by those that don’t wish to face what is quickly approaching (or don’t want the masses to be aware).
The peaking of US shale and gas is particularly problematic given that it has been the marginal producer of oil production increases over the past decade or more. Virtually all demand growth has been met by this extraction.
SourceA decline in the overall production of oil/gas hydrocarbons will derail not only utopian dreams of an energy ‘transition’ (since all material extraction, refinement, and manufacturing processes are reliant on these resources; including all non-renewable, renewable energy-harvesting technologies and electrical-based products–including artificial ‘intelligence’), but also ramp up geopolitical maneuvering (including hot wars) over hydrocarbon resource reserves.
In fact, some of the consequences of this disaster-in-waiting have actually been with us and building for decades. Some Peak Oil analysts have argued that our ruling elite have been quite aware of the coming ‘challenges’ and have ‘planned’ accordingly, acting on their knowledge in a variety of ways.
Much of the geopolitical gamesmanship of the past half a century or more, for example, has likely been focused upon controlling hydrocarbon reserves. And as these finite reserves get dearer (both in quantity and price), the geopolitical maneuvering has been increasing in intensity–particularly around and within those regions where the remaining reserves exist. The coming wars (or should I say expansion of current ones) may also come with increasing ‘othering’ of those who reside close to ‘our’ resources.
A reminder of which nation states hold the most oil/gas reserves and where regime change operations/wars have occurred, are occurring, or will soon occur…and it’s not over some completely bullshit justification like ‘bringing democracy’ or ‘freedom’ to a region; it’s about expanding the racket that is war and about resources, especially hydrocarbon ones–our ‘rulers’ want to take it from their ‘rulers’. Keeping the gravy train rolling for the entitled few and ensuring the hoi polloi receive some of the spoils so as not to rise up against their ‘leaders’ are paramount–regardless of the impacts upon the masses or ecosystems of our planet.
Proven Oil Reserves: Top 15 Nation States
SourceProven Gas Reserves: Top 11 Nation States
SourceAccompanying this has also been a lot of denial and bargaining in the narratives being disseminated about the globe, such as the notion of finite limits being meaningless in light of human ingenuity and technological prowess–especially as it pertains to an energy ‘transition’. Depending upon who’s telling the story, everything will be electrified and powered by carbon-free ‘renewables’ and/or nuclear fission/fusion; or, if you really want to ‘jump the shark’, we’ll simply mine passing asteroids or migrate to another planet. Do you believe in magic?
The repercussions of Peak Oil/Gas and the loss of net surplus energy can only but alter our world in a myriad of ways–some of which can be imagined (simplification and localisation is approaching like a bat out of hell) but some that will be complete Black Swan Events for most.
The world is not going to be the same for A LOT of people once we are well into the consequences of Peak Oil/Gas. Not. Even. Close.
And the stories that will be told by us story-telling apes will be something to behold as things unfold–especially by those dominant apes that hold sway over the masses due to their positions atop our power and wealth structures. Our ‘elite’ wish to continue in those spots to maintain their privilege and prestige for as long as they possibly can by whatever means they have–and can get away with.
It is quite possible that the facade of ‘representative democracy’ will finally melt away as the elite consolidate their control over the wealth-generating/-extracting systems that provide their revenue streams (and thus positions of power and prestige). I expect to see the trend of increasing inequality continue and accelerate, as well as the expansion of narrative management to help justify/rationalise the above.
“None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.”
― Johann von Goethe, 1809
Narrative control is their preferred method as it is less resource intensive and tends to be more effective, but they will not be afraid to use obvious and intentional violence and oppression (framing it in terms that will be more acceptable to those not targeted–at least, for the moment; ponder how some activists/protesters have been vilified and oppressed in recent years). If you think censorship and narrative management is bad now, just wait.
Societies will crumble. Wars will be waged. Billions may perish. It’s not going to be pretty. Not. At. All.
On the positive side, as some have argued, the decline in hydrocarbon reserves may help to slow–and eventually will halt–some of the detrimental consequences of its use due to our extraction and refinement industries and the industrial production of material goods that leads to significant sink overloading and ecosystem destruction.
A reminder that hydrocarbons–especially oil–is THE master resource that supports the growth and maintenance of our societal complexities through its surplus net energy. The loss of this net energy surplus has huge ramifications for almost all aspects of modern, human existence, let alone the creation, maintenance, and distribution of mostly unnecessaryl consumer goods and services.
The production/procurement and distribution of food, potable water, and regional-shelter material-needs all depend significantly upon hydrocarbons. For so-called ‘advanced’ economies, little of these important needs are produced locally or within the natural environmental carrying capacity of regions. Virtually all the people of these economies are significantly dependent upon hydrocarbons in one way or another, even though most have no idea whatsoever.
“There are these two young fish swimming along and they happen to meet an older fish swimming the other way, who nods at them and says “Morning, boys. How’s the water?” And the two young fish swim on for a bit, and then eventually one of them looks over at the other and goes “What the hell is water?”
– David Foster Wallace, 2005
Some questions that persist in my mind’s eye as I contemplate the future:
What happens when we no longer have the ability to control/contain/manage those dangerous complexities like the hundreds/thousands of nuclear power plants, chemical production and storage facilities, and biolabs?What happens when competing polities, who hold thousands of thermonuclear weapons of mass destruction, feel threatened?What happens when diesel fuels are unavailable or so exorbitantly priced that food production and distribution systems break down for most?What happens in cold climates during winter when heating by hydrocarbons is unavailable?As individuals, even relatively well-organized collectives, we have little if any agency in affecting what happens in the future with regard to these potential threats. Even the ruling elite have little were they actually to go against their baser instincts of protecting their personal/familial interests. The wheels are in motion and there’s likely no stopping the slow-moving trainwreck that seems to be our trajectory.
So, grab some popcorn and get ready for all sorts of things to go sideways in a variety of ways in the years ahead. Socioculturally. Sociopolitically. Socioeconomically. We are in for some interesting times for sure.
As I stated at the close of my last Contemplation:
“Only time will tell how this all unfolds but there’s nothing wrong with preparing for the worst by ‘collapsing now to avoid the rush’ and pursuing self-sufficiency. By this I mean removing as many dependencies on the Matrix as is possible and making do, locally. And if one can do this without negative impacts upon our fragile ecosystems or do so while creating more resilient ecosystems, all the better.
Building community (maybe even just household) resilience to as high a level as possible seems prudent given the uncertainties of an unpredictable future. There’s no guarantee it will ensure ‘recovery’ after a significant societal stressor/shock but it should increase the probability of it and that, perhaps, is all we can ‘hope’ for from its pursuit.”
NOTE: Peak Oil was the topic that first grabbed me by the short hairs and pulled me into the rabbit’s hole of societal collapse and ecological overshoot almost 15 years ago. I rented the movie Collapse starring the late Michael Ruppert as my personal pick on a Friday afternoon movie hunt for our weekend family movie night (for me to watch, not the family) at our local Blockbuster back in 2010 and I haven’t viewed the world the same since watching it.
Additional Articles of Interest
Drill, Baby, Drill: Can Unconventional Fuels Usher In A New Era Of Energy Abundance?
The American Shale Patch Is All About Depletion Now
US Shale Nears Limits Of Productivity Gains
Summary of German Armed Forces Peak Oil Study
2005-2018 Conventional Crude Production On A Bumpy Plateau With A Little Help From Iraq
Peak Oil is Officially Here! World oil production peaked November of 2018.
A handful of my most recent Contemplations that have touched upon Peak Oil/Energy:
-Today’s Contemplation: Collapse Cometh CLXXV–Energy and Its Interconnections With Our Financialised Economic System. February 7, 2024. Website Medium Substack
-Today’s Contemplation: Collapse Cometh CLVII–Overshoot, Hydrocarbon Energy, and Denial: Avoiding the Pain. October 28, 2023. Website Medium Substack
-Today’s Contemplation: Collapse Cometh CLVI–Peak Oil, Complexity, Psychology, Magical Thinking, and War. October 26, 2023. Website Medium Substack
–Today’s Contemplation: Collapse Cometh CLV–Planetary Boundaries, Narrative Management, and Technology. October 23, 2023. Website Medium Substack
–Today’s Contemplation: Collapse Cometh CXLIX–Carbon Tunnel Vision And Resource/Energy & Ecological Blindness, Part 1, September 7, 2023. Website Medium Substack; Part 2. September 20, 2023. Website Medium Substack; Part 3. October 6, 2023. Website Medium Substack
–Today’s Contemplation: Collapse Cometh CXXXV–Collapse Now To Avoid The Rush: Our Long Emergency. June 6, 2023. Website Medium Substack
–Today’s Contemplation: Collapse Cometh CXXV–Hydrocarbons And The Maximum Power Principle: What Could Possibly Go Wrong? April 22, 2023. Website Medium Substack
And a handful that have touched upon the consequences of ‘collapse’:
–Today’s Contemplation: Collapse Cometh CLXXXV-Collapse = Prolonged Period of Diminishing Returns + Significant Stress Surge(s), Part 1. October 7, 2024. Website Medium Substack; Part 2. October 15. Website Medium Substack; Part 3. October 23. Website Medium Substack; Part 4. October 28. Website Medium Substack
–Today’s Contemplation: Collapse Cometh CLXIX–Fiat Currency Devaluation: A Ruling Elite ‘Solution’ to Growth Limits. December 11, 2023. Website Medium Substack
–Today’s Contemplation: Collapse Cometh CLXVI-Societal ‘Collapse’: Past is Prologue. November 27, 2023. Website Medium Substack
–Today’s Contemplation: Collapse Cometh CXLVIII–What Do Previous Experiments In Societal Complexity Suggest About ‘Managing’ Our Future. September 1, 2023. Website Medium Substack
–Today’s Contemplation: Collapse Cometh CXLIII–Ruling Caste Responses to Societal Breakdown/Decline. August 3. Website Medium Substack
–Today’s Contemplation: Collapse Cometh CXXXI–Sociopolitical Agency, Narrative Control, and Collapse. May 22, 2023. Website Medium Substack
The Depletion Paradox
Excerpt from Third Quarter Natural Resource Market Commentary
Goehring & Rozencwajg: Natural Resource Investors
December 5, 2024
https://blog.gorozen.com/blog/the-depletion-paradox
-US shale oil and gas production appears to have peaked in November 2023
-G&R models suggest that the decline is set to accelerate
-most view this prediction skeptically, believing higher prices and more drilling will counter declines
-G&R assert that “The primary forces behind the current downturn are neither policy-related nor purely economic—they are geological and inexorable. Depletion, not market dynamics or regulatory overreach, is the central culprit.” (p. 7)
-US conventional crude oil production provides a historical example of what is likely to occur
-crude peaked in 1970 and the OPEC crisis occurred in 1973 prompting the US government to expedite permitting and increase drilling
-despite a significant increase in oil prices and drilling, production declined and history seems to be repeating for the US shale patch
King Hubbert–A History
-in 1956, MK Hubbert (Shell geologist) predicated a peak of US conventional oil extraction to take place in 1970; most were skeptical
-assuming hydrocarbon basins were finite in nature, Hubbert argued that extraction flow would follow a set trajectory–a bell-shaped curve
-Hubbert also developed a method (linearisation) of estimating ultimate recoverable reserve amounts that allowed him to predict a production peak (see Figure 2)
-production stopped growing due to production dynamics and basin depletion
Explaining Hubbert–From Macro to Micro
-Hubbert’s logistic curve has been powerfully predictive but criticised since no one understands why
-it appears that the growth curve results from new wells being added during the early phase of basin extraction with each new well adding to total production
-as time passes, however, mature wells begin to decline in productive capacity and overall growth of production only continues if new well production exceeds older well decline
-eventually, new well production cannot offset the decline of mature wells and extraction plateaus then begins to fall and cannot be reversed by investment in more wells
-“It underscores a fundamental truth: growth is bound not just by resources but by the interplay between new additions and inevitable declines. Higher prices and technological advancements may influence the pace, but they can’t alter the underlying dynamics that eventually lead to a plateau in production.” (p. 12)
-even when production appears robust, depletion is inevitable
More Realistic Examples
-extraction is constrained by two decisions: where and how much to drill
-cautious, slow drilling characterises the early drilling phase in a new basin with activity ramping up once potential is realised
-activity slows once the best spots have been drilled, with subsequent wells being less productive
Conventional US Production–A Case Study
-from 1900 to 1945, US drilling was steady as production soared
-during the 1950s, drilling activity grew (+70%) but productivity did not keep pace (+20%) as depletion rates of mature wells increased
-the 1960s witnessed a drilling focus upon the best basins resulting in a doubling of productivity
-this increase rolled over (peaked) in 1970 as the best regions matured and began declining (falling 75% by the mid-1980s) despite a surge in drilling
Turning to Shales
-shale basins require more drilling due to their extensive layout, with productivity varying widely across a basin
-their production profile begins with high extraction rates followed by a steep decline and prolonged low-rate output tail
-this defies Hubbert linearisation but instead shows a logarithmic relation allowing precise extrapolation of production and peak production timing
Enter Neural Networks
-G&R began developing their own AI in 2019 to help model shale production using well design, subsurface geology, and regional trends (and has been revised over the years to include a larger variety of more precise information)
-predictive curves perfectly match actual production and see peak/rollover around when 28% of recoverable reserves have been extracted; current extraction estimates are at or beyond this point
-“Indeed, total shale oil and gas production likely peaked late last year. Both are already down 1%, and our models predict year-over-year production declines will turn sharply negative within six months.” (p. 21)
Depletion Paradox Redux
-the coming decline in production is occurring at a difficult time given that since 2010, global oil demand has been met almost exclusively by shale extraction, helping to suppress US prices by 80% relative to global prices and grow natural gas-fired electricity production and LNG exports
-inferior geology cannot be remediated
-the 1970s saw production plummet despite higher prices and more drilling, and we are likely going to experience the same for shale
-“In the end, the paradox remains—depletion is an unstoppable force, and it is becoming harder and harder to keep up.” (p. 22)
The more detailed summary notes for this article can be found here.
A collection of graphs, charts, and text screenshots of interest. The data shows the significant increase in U.S. shale oil and gas production since the 1990s.
The rollover/peak of this production has huge implications for not just the US but the entire globe as most production increases over the past two decades have come as a result of US shale extraction. The notion that production can continue to meet increasing demand via investment, increased drilling, and/or new technologies is increasingly being questioned–especially by this G&R commentary.
The world is not prepared for a decline/fall in oil and gas production. It has been lulled into complacency, denial, and bargaining via mass marketing of a faulty narrative. The piper has finished playing and must now be paid. Humanity must not sit down at the banquet of consequences that have accumulated over the past two centuries…
Shit is about to get real…
OIL
https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=847&t=6
https://www.dallasfed.org/research/economics/2019/0820
GAS
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shale_gas_in_the_United_States
Natural gas production in the United States from 1998 to 2023 (in billion cubic meters)
https://www.statista.com/statistics/265331/natural-gas-production-in-the-us/
If you’ve made it to the end of this contemplation and have got something out of my writing, please consider ordering the trilogy of my ‘fictional’ novel series, Olduvai (PDF files; only $9.99 Canadian), via my website or the link below — the ‘profits’ of which help me to keep my internet presence alive and first book available in print (and is available via various online retailers).
Attempting a new payment system as I am contemplating shutting down my site in the future (given the ever-increasing costs to keep it running).
If you are interested in purchasing any of the 3 books individually or the trilogy, please try the link below indicating which book(s) you are purchasing.
Costs (Canadian dollars):
Book 1: $2.99
Book 2: $3.89
Book 3: $3.89
Trilogy: $9.99
Feel free to throw in a ‘tip’ on top of the base cost if you wish; perhaps by paying in U.S. dollars instead of Canadian. Every few cents/dollars helps…
https://paypal.me/olduvaitrilogy?country.x=CA&locale.x=en_US
If you do not hear from me within 48 hours or you are having trouble with the system, please email me: olduvaitrilogy@gmail.com.
You can also find a variety of resources, particularly my summary notes for a handful of texts, especially Catton’s Overshoot and Tainter’s Collapse: see here.
Released September 30, 2024
It Bears Repeating: Best Of…Volume 2
A compilation of writers focused on the nexus of limits to growth, energy, and ecological overshoot.
With a Foreword by Erik Michaels and Afterword by Dr. Guy McPherson, authors include: Dr. Peter A Victor, George Tsakraklides, Charles Hugh Smith, Dr. Tony Povilitis, Jordan Perry, Matt Orsagh, Justin McAffee, Jack Lowe, The Honest Sorcerer, Fast Eddy, Will Falk, Dr. Ugo Bardi, and Steve Bull.
The document is not a guided narrative towards a singular or overarching message; except, perhaps, that we are in a predicament of our own making with a far more chaotic future ahead of us than most imagine–and most certainly than what mainstream media/politics would have us believe.
Click here to access the document as a PDF file, free to download.
Contemplation title hat-tip to John Mellencamp:
December 29, 2024
Today’s Contemplation: Collapse Cometh CL–Carbon Tunnel Vision and Resource/Energy & Ecological Blindness, Part 2
September 20, 2023 (original posting date)
Mexico (1988). Photo by author.As I stated at the close of Part 1:
“We have, as a rationalising but not rational story-telling ape, created myths about our place in the universe and how we have contributed to it. Over the past several centuries, and certainly during the most recent one, we story-tellers have weaved narratives that it is our human ingenuity — particularly around technology — that has led to our expansion and apparent ‘successes’ (not the leveraging of a one-time cache of easily-accessible, storable, and transportable dense energy).
Along the way, we have lost sight of our place and dependence upon Nature, and how fundamentally important its complexities are to our very survival. As a result, many continue to cheerlead that which is most dangerous to our and every species existence on this planet; ignoring or rationalising away the signals being sent.”
This story-telling aspect of our species appears to be applicable to every sociocultural institution or school of thought that humans use to help them interpret, understand, and explain the universe and its workings.
As this paper that reviews the evidence surrounding the “…mainstream narrative for achieving socially just ecological sustainability” reminds:
“…humans are storytellers by nature. We socially construct complex sets of facts, beliefs, and values that guide how we operate in the world. Indeed, humans act out of their socially constructed narratives as if they were real. All political ideologies, religious doctrines, economic paradigms, cultural narratives — even scientific theories — are socially constructed ‘stories’ that may or may not accurately reflect any aspect of reality they purport to represent. Once a particular construct has taken hold, its adherents are likely to treat it more seriously than opposing evidence from an alternate conceptual framework.”
Before unpacking the psychology behind this phenomenon, let’s consider the concept of ‘energy blind spots’.
Energy Blind Spots
The term ‘blind spot’ arises from the idea that there exists a “spot within one’s range of vision but where one cannot see”. It’s initial use was physiological in nature but just as the word ‘blind’ had become used to suggest confusion or not controlled by reason, ‘blind spot’ became a reference to other more figurative aspects of life (e.g., morals, intellectual pursuits, general understanding) that one could not see, was confused about, or just simply ignored — the ‘carbon tunnel vision’ I discuss in Part 1 is an example.
In the sense of ‘energy’, it’s the inability to connect the fact that energy is the fundamental underpinning of all life and life processes but also, as Nate Hagens argues (in this video), our tendency to misattribute or ignore the ‘power’ derived from the energy sources we depend upon: “To our ancestors, the benefits from carbon energy would’ve appeared indistinguishable from magic. And instead of appreciating this giant one-time windfall, we developed stories that our newfound wealth and progress had emerged purely from human ingenuity. We had become energy blind.”
Hagens goes on to point out that everything requires energy from animal physiological functioning to human economic systems and everything in between. The ‘benefits’ that energy — particularly the one-time cache of easily-accessible/recoverable, dense, storable, and transportable hydrocarbon fuels — provides to human complex systems is, in human time scales, virtually indistinguishable from magic (see this video).
One barrel of oil, for example, can provide the equivalent of 4–5 years of human labour, but since we have been growing the supply and creating enormous surplus energy we hardly — if at all — take note of the tremendous impact and benefits of this energy source. It has been taken for granted, particularly as it pertains to our expansion of complex socioeconomic systems and technology. And this extremely unique period of our human existence (where we are drawing down a finite resource to ‘power’ our expansion well beyond the natural environmental carrying capacity of our planet) has been normalised within our social zeitgeist. It is the way things have been and will continue to be…to infinity and beyond.
Much gets discounted/ignored/misattributed by most people in their thinking (or, rather, non-thinking) about the hydrocarbon energy that goes into our existence: the millions of years necessary to create it; the complexity of accessing, extracting, refining, and distributing it; the pollution streams that arise from our extraction and use; and, all the energy that is lost in these processes — let alone the significant complexities of the socio-economic and -political aspects (from financial/monetary manipulation to resource wars).
While we appear to have more of this resource each year, we are also growing in both our population and economies resulting in less actual energy available per capita (NB: this metric has plateaued since 2018 when oil production hit its peak) and the very important surplus energy it provides to ‘fuel’ our continuing pursuit of growth (see Dr. Tim Morgan’s website for great insight into this aspect). But rather than consider these aspects of our energy windfall, we instead tend to focus upon our technology and economies (especially in terms of money) believing our current living arrangements have no limit.
In doing so, we fail to consider the drawdown of this finite resource and also the diminishing returns we are encountering as the cheap and easy-to-access reserves have mostly been extracted. To counter this (and other stressors) we have greatly expanded debt and manipulated interest rates. These financial/monetary manipulations have aided our efforts to access perhaps the last of our reserves via tight/shale oil extraction[1].
This has also helped to make it appear that our reserves are boundless — it’s simply our technology and politics holding back endless extraction — ignoring, of course, the significant fall-off in extraction experienced with these shale wells and thus the necessity to increase exponentially the drilling to maintain rates[2]. As Hagens argues, we are simply widening the straw to drawdown more quickly a finite quantity of our most important energy resource.
In addition, these shale oil reserves are drawn from the source rock that feeds other deposits; and once these are used up there are no other places to extract from except perhaps bitumen deposits — an extremely ecologically-destructive and energy-intensive process[3].
Most people’s views of energy production — be it from hydrocarbons or non-renewable, renewable energy-harvesting technology — is rather simplistic; in fact, the vast majority probably don’t even think about it at all as with most complex processes in today’s world and thus the ‘magical’ nature that arises with our technologies.
Hydrocarbon refining is rather complex and energy intensive (with intensity and complexity depending upon the source material) with the various products the result of distillation, cracking, reforming, treating, and blending. Basically, crude oil is heated in a distilling column that vapourises the various chemicals with each condensing at different temperatures as it rises in the distiller. Collection trays then siphon off each product.
As some products are in greater demand than others, ‘cracking’ (so named as it breaks up longer hydrocarbon molecules) is used to convert certain liquids. ‘Reforming’ is the process used to increase product quality and volume for some of these liquids. Natural contaminants (e.g., sulphur, nitrogen, various heavy metals) are removed by binding them with hydrogen (produced by the reforming process) and then used in other industries. Finally, ‘blending’ of various refined liquids is carried out to create the different products that get used to power our vast array of technologies.
Another brick in this energy wall that gets lost for most people is the vast array of products that get produced from hydrocarbons[4]. It’s one thing to argue that non-renewable, renewable energy-harvesting technologies will replace our hydrocarbons, it’s quite another to then look at the products — some of them quite important to our modern complexities, others quite superfluous — and imagine how these will be produced without oil and gas.
There are compelling stories, especially from economic schools of thought, that virtually everything is ‘replaceable’ if there is the demand — ignoring/denying, of course, the biogeophysical limits that exist upon a finite planet (to say little of the Laws of Thermodynamics).
Perhaps among the most important hydrocarbon inputs (and ones that are most people are blind to) include those into our modern, industrial agricultural and transportation systems (especially those involved in our long-distance supply chains). While there exist competing narratives about whether these inputs can be replaced by non-hydrocarbon ones, the scale and economy of such a transition are often glossed over or completely ignored — I find this particularly true for those advocating for the immediate cessation of hydrocarbon energy extraction and use — and with no real plan in place for the consequences of this approach.
The ‘Green’ or ‘Third Agricultural Revolution’, for example, has been made almost entirely possible because of the Haber-Bosch Process. This industrial-scale process for the creation of agricultural fertilisers, herbicides, and pesticides (as well as other non-agricultural products) converts atmospheric nitrogen to ammonia by a reaction with hydrogen that is produced using natural gas as the feedstock but also requiring significant oil and coal inputs.
And while some have argued that the non-renewable hydrocarbon inputs for this undertaking can be replaced by ammonia production via concentrated solar energy (ignoring the same complexities and ecological destructiveness that accompanies the production, distribution, maintenance, and disposal/reclamation of these non-renewable, renewable energy-harvesting technologies), all such bargaining does is attempt to sustain a population well above the natural carrying capacity — a predicament created by our leveraging of hydrocarbons.
As Vaclav Smil highlights in this essay on our population explosion:
“What is the most important invention of the twentieth century? Aeroplanes, nuclear energy, space flight, television and computers will be the most common answers. Yet none of these can match the synthesis of ammonia from its elements…the world’s population could not have grown from 1.6 billion in 1900 to today’s six billion [over eight today] without the Haber–Bosch process.”
Removing the hydrocarbon inputs into our global food supplies would be catastrophic without a well-planned and in-place substitute readily available — and probably one that could not support current population levels, let alone be created in a short period of time. And, because of how the world works, such a withdrawal of these inputs would be felt most horrifically by the disadvantaged members of our species.
Blindness to the importance of hydrocarbon energy to almost all of our complex systems is leading us to offer narratives that most assuredly are making our predicament of ecological overshoot worse. They mostly depend upon tales that highlight human ingenuity, especially with respect to technology, and offer ‘solutions’ to maintain for the most part our status quo systems and complexities.
Perhaps the most mainstream stories are that that rally around alternative energy production and technologies but that continue to depend upon ecologically-destructive industrial processes.
Why do we do this? Why do we construct stories that, depending upon one’s perspective, could be considered suicidal in nature? This I will explore in Part 3.
NB: Note that I did not go into detail about our ‘resource- and ecological-blindness’ but remained focussed upon our energy blindness in this essay. My discussion was already getting longer than originally planned so I decided to leave those aspects since the principles are virtually identical.
In our attempts to simplify our perspective on complexities, we create stories to aid our understanding and then view the world through the lens of our socially-constructed narratives that tend to ignore/deny/rationalise away aspects that don’t fit into our preconceived paradigm/worldview/schema. This is as true for material resources and the ecological impacts of our extractive enterprises as it is for the energy aspect.
[1] See this recent article on US shale oil extraction.
[3] See this, this, this, this, and/or this.
[4] See this, this, this, and/or this.
If you’ve made it to the end of this contemplation and have got something out of my writing, please consider ordering the trilogy of my ‘fictional’ novel series, Olduvai (PDF files; only $9.99 Canadian), via my website or the link below — the ‘profits’ of which help me to keep my internet presence alive and first book available in print (and is available via various online retailers).
Attempting a new payment system as I am contemplating shutting down my site in the future (given the ever-increasing costs to keep it running).
If you are interested in purchasing any of the 3 books individually or the trilogy, please try the link below indicating which book(s) you are purchasing.
Costs (Canadian dollars):
Book 1: $2.99
Book 2: $3.89
Book 3: $3.89
Trilogy: $9.99
Feel free to throw in a ‘tip’ on top of the base cost if you wish; perhaps by paying in U.S. dollars instead of Canadian. Every few cents/dollars helps…
https://paypal.me/olduvaitrilogy?country.x=CA&locale.x=en_US
If you do not hear from me within 48 hours or you are having trouble with the system, please email me: olduvaitrilogy@gmail.com.
You can also find a variety of resources, particularly my summary notes for a handful of texts, especially Catton’s Overshoot and Tainter’s Collapse: see here.
It Bears Repeating: Best Of…Volume 1
A compilation of writers focused on the nexus of limits to growth, energy, and ecological overshoot.
With a Foreword and Afterword by Michael Dowd, authors include: Max Wilbert; Tim Watkins; Mike Stasse; Dr. Bill Rees; Dr. Tim Morgan; Rob Mielcarski; Dr. Simon Michaux; Erik Michaels; Just Collapse’s Tristan Sykes & Dr. Kate Booth; Kevin Hester; Alice Friedemann; David Casey; and, Steve Bull.
The document is not a guided narrative towards a singular or overarching message; except, perhaps, that we are in a predicament of our own making with a far more chaotic future ahead of us than most imagine–and most certainly than what mainstream media/politics would have us believe.
Click here to access the document as a PDF file, free to download.
Today’s Contemplation: Collapse Cometh CXLIX–Carbon Tunnel Vision and Resource/Energy & Ecological Blindness, Part 1
September 7, 2023 (original posting date)
Mexico (1988). Photo by author.In my attempt to ‘market’ the article compilation that was recently published, I joined a couple of Facebook Groups in order to post about the document. I subsequently posted my last Contemplation (that shares my thoughts on the extreme difficulties, if not impossibility, of a ‘managed’ contraction by our species) and received some ‘interesting’ comments within one climate-change group, many of which I attempted to respond to (I’ve included some of these conversations at the end of this post).
Most comments were perhaps only marginally connected to my post. They tended to extoll the virtues of technological ‘solutions’ to climate change (not that I discussed climate change).
In reflecting on the ‘pushback’ to my post and my responses to comments, it would appear that the thinking behind the comments were mostly due to what could be viewed as resource/energy and ecological blindness, as well as carbon tunnel vision. These cognitive ‘blinders’, along with much in the way of rampant ‘marketing’ for technological ‘solutions’, have resulted in many viewing the world along the lines of: ‘human ingenuity and technology’ can, will, and is, saving us from ourselves. And, most certainly, the ‘gate-keepers’ for this particular group.
And the following is not to denigrate the perspectives that pushed back against mine (even if some of them wandered into ad hominem territory). We all believe what we believe based on the ‘best’ (and favoured) information available to us, and then we go to significant lengths to rationalise and ‘protect’ our beliefs. All of us.
As this has become a much longer Contemplation than the ‘ideal’ short ones I aim for, it will be at least in two parts (it may be longer as I’ve only jotted down a few brief notes for Part 2).
Carbon Tunnel Vision
There is an evolutionary-advantageous tendency for humans to view our universe through rather narrow keyholes. It’s quite normal and ubiquitous. It is the way we attempt to perceive, in relatively simple terms, the exceedingly complex world that we exist within.
In our attempts to understand the world, we rely upon experience, deductions, and external sources of information (e.g., social milieu). We make relatively quick assessments of the significantly complex world about us and make choices (e.g., should I flee or fight?) or form beliefs using a variety of heuristics (mental shortcuts). This leads to us focussing upon a narrow array of information out of all that is available — usually that which supports our ‘needs’ at the time — and ignoring for the most part superfluous inputs.
Once we’ve gravitated towards a decision or particular interpretation of our environment, we continue to view the world through this lens. We justify/rationalise our decision and/or cling to our beliefs, particularly if it has served us well or it is held by the majority of people. We tend to disregard that information/evidence that challenges our decision/beliefs, creating a bias that serves to reinforce our interpretation of things and maintain the image of ourselves as rational, perceptive, and ‘objective’ individuals.
As Wikipedia states: “Tunnel vision metaphorically denotes a collection of common heuristics and logical fallacies that lead individuals to focus on cues that are consistent with their opinion and filter out cues that are inconsistent with their viewpoint.”
The ‘bias’ that many people (not all) seem to have, including those that have concerns about the impacts of a changing climate and/or atmospheric sink overloading, is what appears to be a hyper-focus upon carbon emissions. To oversimplify, there appear to be two main viewpoints on the issue. There exist many who hold that carbon emissions are not a problem at all because not only have they been higher in the past but they are what our planet’s vegetation requires as food. In stark opposition are those who argue that our fossil fuel burning is leading to excessive emissions that are causing both extreme weather events and long-term global climate anomalies, especially global warming.
As the following graphic demonstrates (with respect to particular aspects of the issue of ‘sustainability’) this tendency to narrow our perspective can prevent the acknowledgement of so many other aspects of our world — and the graphic only includes some of the many others that could be considered, such as land-system change and biogeochemical flows. Perhaps most relevant is that this tunnel vision keeps many from recognising that humans exist within a world of complex systems that are intertwined and connected in nonlinear ways that the human brain cannot fathom easily, if at all.
My own bias leads me to the belief that this hyper-focus on carbon emissions is leading many well-intentioned people to overlook the argument that atmospheric overloading is but one symptom predicament of our overarching predicament of ecological overshoot. As a result, they miss all the other symptom predicaments (e.g., biodiversity loss, resource depletion, soil degradation, geopolitical conflicts, etc.) of this overshoot and consequently advocate for ‘solutions’ that are, in fact, exacerbating our situation.
This rather narrowed perspective tends to be along the lines that if we can curtail/eliminate carbon emissions — usually through a shift in our technology to supposed ‘carbon-free’ ones — then we can avoid the negative repercussions that accompany the extraction and burning of fossil fuels, most prominently climate change. For many this is the only (or, at least, the most prominent) issue that needs to be addressed to ensure our species’ transition to a ‘sustainable’ way of living.
So, let’s try for a moment to open up this rather narrow keyhole and take in a wider perspective. Let’s look at how some of the other significant planetary boundaries are being broached.
When one opens the keyhole wider, the concern with carbon emissions/climate change may be seen as an outsized one in comparison to boundaries that appear to have been more significantly broached, such as: novel entities, biosphere integrity, land-system change, biogeochemical flows, and fresh water change.
This is not to say that the boundary of climate change is not important, it’s to try to better understand why a hyper-focus on carbon emissions is problematic: it’s one of several tipping points that need our attention, and not even the worst. The most pressing areas that we appear to have overshot beyond climate change include:
· Biogeochemical flows: agriculture and industry have increased significantly the flow of phosphorous and nitrogen into ecological systems and overloaded natural sinks (e.g., atmosphere and oceans)
· Novel entities: geologically-novel (i.e., human-made) substances that can have large-scale impacts upon Earth system processes (e.g., chemicals, plastics, etc.) have grown exponentially, even to the point of some existing in all global water supplies
· Biosphere integrity: human demand for food, water, and natural resources are decimating ecosystems (clearing land for mining and agriculture, for example, may have the worst impacts)
· Freshwater change: global groundwater levels in particular have been significantly altered by human activity and expansion (especially our drawdown of aquifers that exceed significantly their replenishment)
· Land-system change: human conversion of land systems (e.g., solar farms, agriculture, etc.) has impacts upon several of the other boundaries (i.e., biosphere integrity, biogeochemical flows, freshwater change) and the significantly important hydrological cycle
Azote for Stockholm Resilience Centre, based on analysis in Wang-Erlandsson et al 2022.Carbon tunnel vision tends to help minimise, or at worst, ignore these other predicaments of our ecological overshoot. In fact, what I sense and what some of my conversations did suggest is that the issue of ecological overshoot itself is completely off the radar for these commenters. One, in fact, admitted he had never read Catton’s book on the subject but in ‘skimming over’ the summary notes I sent a link for he simply saw “a bunch of vague assertions…didn’t learn anything…probably heading towards a hard wall…”. He then added for effect: “I don’t see any solutions from you. I do see almost entirely your focus on smearing renewables with the exact same material the Deniers and carbon pollution people do. Exactly the same.”
Again, my own bias suggests to me that the reason for this hyper-focus (perhaps the most significant one) has been manufactured by a ruling caste and others that have created a means of monetising carbon emissions, mostly through carbon taxes and cheerleading greater industrial production via a narrative around ‘green/clean’ energy technologies. For, if we were to address those boundaries that have been more severely broached and that require curtailing of the causes contributing to this overshoot (which is human growth — economic and population), we would need to curtail industrialisation and its associated revenue streams significantly; something that would undermine greatly the power and wealth structures that benefit a large but very privileged minority class of humans.
And the marketers of this particular point of view know full well the psychological mechanisms that are effective in ‘persuading’ the masses to hold it and support it — especially the human tendency to defer to expertise/authority and engage in groupthink (see my 6-part series on Cognition and Belief Systems). It should be no surprise, given these tendencies, that the profit-/revenue-seekers amongst us have leveraged them to market the narrative, and associated industrial products, extolling the virtues of them while downplaying/denying/obfuscating the ecologically-destructive nature of what they are marketing.
Even those aware of this issue can fail to see the connection to industrial technology, cheerleading ‘sustainable’ development/practices and ‘clean/green’ (and supposedly) non-fossil fuel-based technologies[1].
As the Energy Blind animated presentation on Nate Hagen’s The Great Simplification website suggests: “…To our ancestors, the benefits from carbon energy would have appeared indistinguishable from magic and instead of appreciating this one-time windfall we developed stories that our newfound wealth and progress had emerged purely from human ingenuity. We had become energy blind.”
This energy blindness (along with ecological blindness) is what I will discuss in Part 2.
We have, as a rationalising but not rational story-telling ape, created myths about our place in the universe and how we have contributed to it. Over the past several centuries, and certainly during the most recent one, we story-tellers have weaved narratives that it is our human ingenuity — particularly around technology — that has led to our expansion and apparent ‘successes’ (not the leveraging of a one-time cache of easily-accessible, storable, and transportable dense energy).
Along the way, we have lost sight of our place and dependence upon Nature, and how fundamentally important its complexities are to our very survival. As a result, many continue to cheerlead that which is most dangerous to our and every species existence on this planet; ignoring or rationalising away the signals being sent.
As I stated to another in a subsequent discussion about another post within the same FB Group that was, again, extolling the virtues of ‘green/clean’ technology:
“We’re going to have to agree to disagree over this. Ideally we would not be debating which industrial-produced transport vehicles or energy sources are ‘better’; they are all horrible. We can’t even get a handle on the growth that is killing our planet so this debate, in that context, is meaningless — especially in a world where the dominant species is in Overshoot. Degrowth, especially in our technologies and industries is where our focus should be. Relocalising everything but especially food production, potable water procurement, and regional shelter needs. All else is superfluous at this point.”
Some examples of comments that suggest ‘narrow keyhole’ perspectives:
Electric Vehicles
KFT: DS what really annoys me is the belief that someone’s time is far too precious to spend it charging an ev. Clearly way more precious than the quality of life of their children. You are correct, people refuse to use their agency.
Me: EVs are no help to ecological overshoot; in fact, they are as bad as ICE vehicles.
KFT: nonsense. Evs cancel out their manufacturing carbon in the first year of driving. ICE vehicles add carbon for their lifetime. By the way evs are likely to last much longer than ICE vehicles further reducing their manufacturing footprint. Ev batteries are 95% recyclable, gasoline is 0% recyclable unless they perfect carbon capture. I don’t anticipate that. By the way people who won’t charge an ev sure as hell won’t ride a bicycle. Just FYI I was bike commuting while you were very likely still in diapers so I know a bit about it.
DS: that’s def not true unless you cherry pick emissions and ignore externalities. in fact, it’s literally impossible for an car to “cancel out” their emissions, that’s literally not scientifically possible and a gross misunderstanding.
and even then, lithium mining still causes drought and leaches brine into natural habitat. mining still chops down rainforests and kills animals. electric vehicles are even more deadly than gas vehicles, even very large animals can’t survive a 7,000lb truck at 45 MPH or higher
Me: I think you need to scratch below the surface of the ‘green/clean’ marketing of EVs and the entire ‘electrification of everything’ narrative. I suggest starting with this article by Dr. Bill Rees: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/15/4508. I would also suggest this compilation of articles by a number of writers on ecological overshoot (in particular read Max Wilbert’s entitled ‘Climate Profiteers Are the New War Profiteers’): https://olduvai.ca/?page_id=65433. PS — you must be quite old given I’m 10+ years into retirement.
Also: https://www.skynews.com.au/opinion/chris-kenny/weve-got-a-problem-here-electric-vehicles-require-a-lot-of-minerals-to-produce/video/e6e3a6c000f8a7890657d5cba2f17324
Overshoot and Food Production
Me: It would appear that you don’t understand that overshoot is a predicament without a solution. The best we might hope for is to mitigate some of the inevitable consequences.
DS: I don’t agree with that, you may not like the solutions but they are available. apathy is the biggest problem we face in society now
Me: DS I don’t agree that there is a ‘solution’ to overshoot except what Nature is going to provide. Most of the ‘solutions’ proposed by homo sapiens make our predicament worse, particularly if they involve more complex technologies/industrial production. In an ‘ideal’ world we could degrow our species and its impacts; unfortunately, we don’t live in an ideal world and most of the ‘decision-makers’ are steering us in an unsustainable and destructive trajectory because there are power and wealth structures that provide their revenue streams and must be maintained regardless of costs (especially environmental). Given that the ruling castes of large, complex societies have been doing this for the 10,000+ years, I see no chance we will do anything different. Of course, only time will tell…
DS: the world currently produces enough food for 16 billion humans
you think reducing food production to 8 billion peoples will make the predicament worse?
Me: Our food production is going to be reduced a lot more than 50% once fossil fuels are no longer available…and the estimates of how many we can feed currently vary tremendously: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2230525-our-current-food-system-can-feed-only-3-4-billion-people-sustainably/
DS: I have no idea why you think that
earth’s agricultural capacity is …..insane…. the Netherlands is the second largest exporter of food in the world next to the USA.
Me: Look into fossil fuel inputs into agricultural. Pesticides. Fertilizer. Herbicides. Diesel machinery. The list goes on. Here’s a paper just on inputs in the UK: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2935130/
DS: I can literally do this for ever
indoor agricultural reduces herbicides and pesticides by 95–100%
Technology
DS: you literally said there is no solution to prevent overshoot, I have to assume you’re a techno-solutionist, basically you’re in the same group as elon musk who believes the future of humanity is on mars
Me: No, technology is what has put us in Overshoot. More of it only exacerbates the predicament.
DS: technology is the only way to survive overshoot, I think overshoot should be avoided. you said we can’t stop overshoot
Me: Please read some of Erik Michael’s work at: https://problemspredicamentsandtechnology.blogspot.com/?m=1.
DS: I’m sorry but this is bullshit
“This new series is critical of the Just Stop Oil Movement, specifically for how the movement makes no real sense to anyone who understands the predicament we are actually part of. Just stop oil means stopping the energy that civilization rests and depends upon — do this and civilization also stops, meaning that 7 billion people and countless millions of other animal species die in rather short order.”
“Just Stop Oil is a British environmental activist group. Using civil resistance, direct action, vandalism and traffic obstruction, the group aims for the British government to commit to ending new fossil fuel licensing and production”
Steve Bull let me repeat that to make sure
“THE GROUP AIMS FOR THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT TO COMMIT TO ENDING NEW FOSSIL FUEL LICENSING AND PRODUCTION”
I really don’t think it’s worth my effort to debunk this gish gallop, I specifically used my self agency to live in a 15 minute city and it’s possible if people choose it
you should honestly stop reading this bullshit blog
Me: Your 15 minute city is based and depends upon fossil fuels. It cannot survive without it.
DS: that’s also bullshit, buses can run on biofuel, buses can literally run on garbage. my neighbor Mesa Arizona literally fuels their garbage trucks with garbage, they make a fuel from gases.
Me: And the production of said buses and garbage trucks?
DS: most of the production can be done with materials like hemp and because hemp is efficient at phytoremediation it creates a completely closed carbon cycle.
by the way, carbon neutrality does not require eliminating 100% of fossil fuels, we can create strict environmental standards and reduce production by 90% -100%
KP: Advanced technologies helping humankind reduce our footprint is what Ecomodernism is about.
Without killing billions we can reduce the population footprint and travel to the stars. This preserves wild spaces and restores natural biodiversity.
And to top it all off:
Space: The Final Frontier
JN: You said, “technology is what has put us in Overshoot. More of it only exacerbates the predicament”
Yes, because and as long as we are trapped on this ‘closed system’ planet we call Earth. But if we can escape the gravity trap we will have unlimited resources in Space.
Interesting statement:
“‘Opting out’ in today’s world is more difficult as there are no more ‘New Worlds’ to exploit for their resources”
Comment: Collapse Cometh? Yes, unless we do something! But why in 148 years? Not sure if this is saying that opting out is ‘giving up’ or a ‘solution’? Yes, we need a new frontier to explore — and we don’t have any territory left on Earth to do that. The areas still remaining ‘unexploited’ must be preserved to save the biosphere and cannot be used for ‘exploitation’.
And why using the term ‘opting out’? Why not word it as part of a solution instead?
There are new worlds to exploit in Space. 148 years is plenty of time to set that up — as long as we have an economic system that will allow it! We need a space colonization and mining program as a solution to the human dilemma — which is lack of territory on Earth to ‘exploit’ and to ‘blow the fuse’…
Our species needs to become a space faring species, with future colonization in space and with mining of minerals on the Moon, Mars, and the Asteroids.
‘Why the human race must become a multiplanetary species’
(https://www.weforum.org/…/humans-multiplanetary-species/)
If you’ve made it to the end of this contemplation and have got something out of my writing, please consider ordering the trilogy of my ‘fictional’ novel series, Olduvai (PDF files; only $9.99 Canadian), via my website or the link below — the ‘profits’ of which help me to keep my internet presence alive and first book available in print (and is available via various online retailers).
Attempting a new payment system as I am contemplating shutting down my site in the future (given the ever-increasing costs to keep it running).
If you are interested in purchasing any of the 3 books individually or the trilogy, please try the link below indicating which book(s) you are purchasing.
Costs (Canadian dollars):
Book 1: $2.99
Book 2: $3.89
Book 3: $3.89
Trilogy: $9.99
Feel free to throw in a ‘tip’ on top of the base cost if you wish; perhaps by paying in U.S. dollars instead of Canadian. Every few cents/dollars helps…
https://paypal.me/olduvaitrilogy?country.x=CA&locale.x=en_US
If you do not hear from me within 48 hours or you are having trouble with the system, please email me: olduvaitrilogy@gmail.com.
You can also find a variety of resources, particularly my summary notes for a handful of texts, especially Catton’s Overshoot and Tainter’s Collapse: see here.
It Bears Repeating: Best Of…Volume 1
A compilation of writers focused on the nexus of limits to growth, energy, and ecological overshoot.
With a Foreword and Afterword by Michael Dowd, authors include: Max Wilbert; Tim Watkins; Mike Stasse; Dr. Bill Rees; Dr. Tim Morgan; Rob Mielcarski; Dr. Simon Michaux; Erik Michaels; Just Collapse’s Tristan Sykes & Dr. Kate Booth; Kevin Hester; Alice Friedemann; David Casey; and, Steve Bull.
The document is not a guided narrative towards a singular or overarching message; except, perhaps, that we are in a predicament of our own making with a far more chaotic future ahead of us than most imagine–and most certainly than what mainstream media/politics would have us believe.
Click here to access the document as a PDF file, free to download.
Today’s Contemplation: Collapse Cometh CXXXI–Sociopolitical Agency, Narrative Management, And Collapse
May 22, 2023 (original posting date)
Mexico (1988). Photo by author.Today’s reflection is a comment I left in response to an article by Bruce Wilds at his Advancing Time site that discusses the increasing anger building across the planet with respect to growing government oppression and the media’s role in suppressing this through purposeful omission of it.
My comment:
Having studied pre/history for some years I’ve come to the conclusion that none of this is novel or unique. It’s just different than in the past as the ruling caste’s scope is wider and the tools they manipulate/leverage are different.
One avenue has been the manipulation of our sense of agency (something all humans desire to have). The elite have sold us the narrative that we have such agency because of our ‘democratic’ sociopolitical systems and the ‘choices’ we make at the ballot box. That’s simply nonsense.
As is the idea that our ruling caste (especially their frontline propagandists — the political system) puts front and foremost the welfare and prosperity of the hoi polloi. Their primary concern/motivation is the control/expansion of the wealth-generation/-extraction systems that ensure their revenue streams and thus positions of power and prestige.
This has been the way since our first large, complex societies provided differential access to and control of net surpluses to a minority of ‘functionaries’ that helped to organise re/distribution of these resources.
I am also convinced that as we run up against the diminishing returns inherent in resource extraction/use (especially energy, the fundamental resource supporting all these complexities) we will (and are) witnessing a tightening-of-the-screws by the elite since they can no longer rely almost exclusively upon narrative control (their preferred method as it tends to be more efficient and economical, and prevents social unrest) but must increase their use of coercion (mostly via legislation) to keep the masses in ignorance and feeding their insatiable desires for power and wealth.
How this ends is anybody’s guess but in every iteration to date in our experiments with large, complex societies, diminishing returns has led to eventual ‘collapse’ where the masses find the ‘costs’ of remaining in the elite-controlled system greatly outweigh the ‘benefits’ and opt out in whatever way they can.
If you’ve made it to the end of this contemplation and have got something out of my writing, please consider ordering the trilogy of my ‘fictional’ novel series, Olduvai (PDF files; only $9.99 Canadian), via my website or the link below — the ‘profits’ of which help me to keep my internet presence alive and first book available in print (and is available via various online retailers).
Attempting a new payment system as I am contemplating shutting down my site in the future (given the ever-increasing costs to keep it running).
If you are interested in purchasing any of the 3 books individually or the trilogy, please try the link below indicating which book(s) you are purchasing.
Costs (Canadian dollars):
Book 1: $2.99
Book 2: $3.89
Book 3: $3.89
Trilogy: $9.99
Feel free to throw in a ‘tip’ on top of the base cost if you wish; perhaps by paying in U.S. dollars instead of Canadian. Every few cents/dollars helps…
https://paypal.me/olduvaitrilogy?country.x=CA&locale.x=en_US
If you do not hear from me within 48 hours or you are having trouble with the system, please email me: olduvaitrilogy@gmail.com.
You can also find a variety of resources, particularly my summary notes for a handful of texts, especially Catton’s Overshoot and Tainter’s Collapse: see here.
It Bears Repeating: Best Of…Volume 1
A compilation of writers focused on the nexus of limits to growth, energy, and ecological overshoot.
With a Foreword and Afterword by Michael Dowd, authors include: Max Wilbert; Tim Watkins; Mike Stasse; Dr. Bill Rees; Dr. Tim Morgan; Rob Mielcarski; Dr. Simon Michaux; Erik Michaels; Just Collapse’s Tristan Sykes & Dr. Kate Booth; Kevin Hester; Alice Friedemann; David Casey; and, Steve Bull.
The document is not a guided narrative towards a singular or overarching message; except, perhaps, that we are in a predicament of our own making with a far more chaotic future ahead of us than most imagine–and most certainly than what mainstream media/politics would have us believe.
Click here to access the document as a PDF file, free to download.
Today’s Contemplation: Collapse Cometh CXLIII–Ruling Caste Responses to Societal Breakdown/Decline
August 3, 2023 (original posting date)
Mexico (1988). Picture by author.Today’s Contemplation is composed of my comments on two different FB posts I came across yesterday.
The first is a reply to a comment to a MSN article regarding a possible Covid-19-type lockdown scenario based upon the declaration of a climate emergency. The second to an observation regarding Big Tech narrative management.
EF:
Warning: Doomer Alert…. IMHO Carter is the only prez in my living memory that ‘got it’ and tried (very unsuccessfully) to push an agenda of reasonable austerity to curb consumption growth rates. Almost 50yrs later and while trending along predicted curves (a la Club of Rome), we’re deeper in the muck than the 1970s predictions. This rumoured ‘climate emergency’ response is suspiciously a thinly veiled cover for “oh crap, there really is no more cheap energy and we can’t get away with unjust resource wars anymore, the sheeple are on to us”. How would the White House propose moving forward? Are they going to demand all nations take action? Let’s see them try that with China, etc. (or a small town
), or perhaps Biden’s handlers are just ignorant enough to think they can launch a political solution that only addresses national actions. It’s all likely irrelevant anyhow. The lag in climate response to radical step function changes its decades long, and we haven’t yet even experienced the fallout from GHG warming from the time of Carter’s presidency. People think this is a hot, dry, fiery summer? Pffft. Hold my beer. The only ‘solution’ in the pipeline is one that’s neither voluntary, nor negotiable and deferrable. Collapse (due to PO) is going provide the radical step function change needed for the climate to respond. But, those of us alive today will never see the warming reversal, we’ll just be the last generation to experience life awash with the fruits of petroleum’s positive effects and be the first to experience exponential declines in late life standards of living as supply chains dry up or rot from corruption among the elites pining for control and insulation to their own losses. Our offspring will ride an accelerating journey over the cliff, and maybe some of their offspring will experience some reversal in 50–60yrs. Doubtful they’ll take notice, life is likely to be days filled with foraging for nutrition and fending off would be pillagers.
Me:
Yes, we (the entire globe) needed to step down our expansion and frivolous habits decades ago (probably even longer, like with the first few complex societies millennia ago) but the narratives at the time of Carter’s attempt and the Club of Rome’s warning were increasingly influenced (and directed) by profit-seekers selling a Star Trek-type future full of technology and human ingenuity to counter the ‘doomers’[1].
It was difficult if not impossible to offset the ‘hopeful’ stories that were already circulating and those that arose in response to these warnings. Just as it still is today. The tales pushing ‘sustainability’ and/or further growth ‘powered’ by ‘renewables’ and those repeated ‘breakthroughs’ in fusion power and the like are ever present and everywhere — and they receive one hell of a lot more airtime than those that challenge the utopian future (to say little of most people’s propensity to be optimistic and/or hopeful, and defer to the tales weaved by the ‘experts/authority’ figures peddling them).
The various world governments, however, have known about this endgame of energy decline and eventual ‘collapse’ probably some time ago[2] but have (as sociopolitical ‘leaders’ tend to do with virtually every impending consequence of stupid decisions they have ‘led’, particularly economic) kicked-the-can-down-the-road while continuing to skim and scam what they can while they can, as has happened for millennia with every societal decline. They most certainly seem to be using the ‘climate emergency’ as ‘cover’ to continue their extractive schemes, dialling it down for the masses while attempting to sustain (possibly expand) their share of an ever-disappearing energy pie. And, I would argue that they have fastened upon carbon emissions as THE devil to trounce upon because they not only discovered a means of monetising this ever-present element but they have latched upon profit-gaining technologies that they have marketed as THE ‘solution’ to this particular aspect of human existence.
No surprise since pursing a ‘degrowth’ world (a powering down and simplification of pretty well everything in our complex societies) would put all their current wealth-generation/-extraction schemes in jeopardy — too say little about undercutting the foundation of the Ponzi-type scheme our financialised economic systems have become. Admitting that our overarching predicament is ecological overshoot and that in order to mitigate (or at least begin to reduce) the unavoidable fallout of this phenomena would require killing the goose laying the golden eggs for the ruling caste — as well as for all of us caught up in the scam.
Pre/history, however, shows pretty convincingly that we will experience the typical patterns that accompany all such declines. For example, living standards for the masses will deteriorate due to ever-increasing price inflation (mostly due to currency debasement as a result of money ‘printing’/credit creation) and because taxes will expand as the ruling caste attempts to sustain/expand their own standards. And, it is likely we will witness an increase/expansion of authoritarian/totalitarian sociopolitical systems as sociobehavioural control is attempted and expanded to deal with increasing unrest.
SH:
This is interesting… I posted a link to a Dr. John Campbell video in which he goes over some recent peer reviewed scientific research, from a noteworthy science journal… and Facebook warns that their “independent fact checkers have identified the research as being “false information”… Under the video in question, YouTube posts a notice that recommends consulting the CDC for the verity of the scientific research he’s reading from. Apparently Facebook and YouTube don’t know how science works… If the CDC and “independent fact checkers” are not getting their information from the latest peer reviewed science, then there’s something terribly wrong…
Me:
Unfortunately, and as like so much else in our world, science has become quite politicised. It has not only been ‘infiltrated’ (like media) by those seeking to ‘manage’ social narratives but has increasingly controlled ‘incentives’ (i.e., grants, tenure) to ensure supportive ‘evidence’ exists. Perhaps worst of all it has attacked one of the foundations of the scientific process: skepticism. Big tech and ‘science’ have become tools of the ruling caste to steer the beliefs and thus behaviours of the masses. I expect this trend to continue and worsen as our decline speeds up.
Both of my responses (as is much of my thinking around these and related topics) are guided by archaeologist Joseph Tainter’s text The Collapse of Complex societies. Most importantly, in the case of these posts, is what the archaeological record suggests are the responses to societal breakdown/decline by the ruling caste.
Some of what Tainter argues as far as sociopolitical ‘collapse’ is concerned include:
-increasing numbers of citizens detaching from the larger sociopolitical entities and pursuing their own goals as they perceive the costs of participation as outweighing significantly the perceived benefits
-greater legitimisation activities and/or control (especially sociobehavioural) in an attempt to decrease inefficiencies and thereby prolong/sustain complexities; although, this becomes increasingly difficult as rising marginal costs due to declining resources sap economic strength
-this economic decline sees a concomitant rise in peasant revolts or, more often, apathy towards the well-being of the polity increases resulting in local entities breaking away from the centre (perhaps even militarily toppled)
-societal reserves are used to counter unexpected stresses or even just to maintain ‘normal’ operations
-greater investment is made in education and research and development but inflation and increased taxes increase the likelihood of collapse due to ever-increasing diminishing returns
The cyclical ‘collapse’ of complex societies is a result of our ‘success’. In addressing the ‘problems’ that arise from living in large, complex societies we not only create greater complexity (and thus fragility and dependency) but we increasingly drawdown the various resources we depend upon for supporting our living and we contribute, through our waste production, to a polluting of our environment. All of this results in diminishing returns on our investments in this ‘problem solving’ approach to living. These diminishing returns increase over time leading to an eventual ‘pillaging’ of surpluses and reserves, resulting in decreased living standards — particularly for the masses. Unrest increases leading the elite to implement increasing draconian approaches to their ‘rule’. Eventually more and more citizens opt out of the system through either migration or withdrawal of support for their ‘rulers’. Inevitably, sociopolitical collapse ensues requiring just the passage of time or a stress surge that can no longer be offset as societal reserves have been exhausted.
Throw ecological overshoot onto this inevitable decline process and not only are the cards irreversibly stacked against global industrial society but the possibility of any further such complex society arising from our ashes is significantly depressed given the level of resource drawdown and environmental degradation.
Infinite growth. Finite planet. What could possibly go wrong?
[2] See this, this, this, and/or this.
If you’ve made it to the end of this contemplation and have got something out of my writing, please consider ordering the trilogy of my ‘fictional’ novel series, Olduvai (PDF files; only $9.99 Canadian), via my website or the link below — the ‘profits’ of which help me to keep my internet presence alive and first book available in print (and is available via various online retailers).
Attempting a new payment system as I am contemplating shutting down my site in the future (given the ever-increasing costs to keep it running).
If you are interested in purchasing any of the 3 books individually or the trilogy, please try the link below indicating which book(s) you are purchasing.
Costs (Canadian dollars):
Book 1: $2.99
Book 2: $3.89
Book 3: $3.89
Trilogy: $9.99
Feel free to throw in a ‘tip’ on top of the base cost if you wish; perhaps by paying in U.S. dollars instead of Canadian. Every few cents/dollars helps…
https://paypal.me/olduvaitrilogy?country.x=CA&locale.x=en_US
If you do not hear from me within 48 hours or you are having trouble with the system, please email me: olduvaitrilogy@gmail.com.
You can also find a variety of resources, particularly my summary notes for a handful of texts, especially Catton’s Overshoot and Tainter’s Collapse: see here.
It Bears Repeating: Best Of…Volume 1
A compilation of writers focused on the nexus of limits to growth, energy, and ecological overshoot.
With a Foreword and Afterword by Michael Dowd, authors include: Max Wilbert; Tim Watkins; Mike Stasse; Dr. Bill Rees; Dr. Tim Morgan; Rob Mielcarski; Dr. Simon Michaux; Erik Michaels; Just Collapse’s Tristan Sykes & Dr. Kate Booth; Kevin Hester; Alice Friedemann; David Casey; and, Steve Bull.
The document is not a guided narrative towards a singular or overarching message; except, perhaps, that we are in a predicament of our own making with a far more chaotic future ahead of us than most imagine–and most certainly than what mainstream media/politics would have us believe.
Click here to access the document as a PDF file, free to download.
Today’s Contemplation: Collapse Cometh CXLVIII–What Do Previous Experiments in Societal Complexity Suggest About ‘Managing’ Our Future
September 1, 2023 (original posting date)
Mexico (1988). Photo by author.What Do Previous Experiments in Societal Complexity Suggest About ‘Managing’ Our Future
Viewing ‘degrowth’ through my archaeology/anthropology lens (and primarily via archaeologist Joseph Tainter’s thesis laid out in The Collapse of Complex Societies[1]) there are a number of societal factors that stymie, if not make impossible, the idealised ‘managed contraction’ advocates tend to market it as. Purposeful ‘simplification/decline’ has never been wantonly experienced for a complex society outside of short-term, imposed ‘austerity’ (e.g. wartime, when the chairs are rearranged to ‘support’ the military[2]). All ‘contractions/collapses’ appear to have been ‘imposed’ by systemic ‘forces’ beyond the scope and control of the people experiencing it.
First, there is the ruling caste of a large, complex society that is HIGHLY motivated to maintain its power/control, especially over the wealth-generation/-extraction systems that provide its revenue streams. The notion that any of this class of society would willingly give their privileges up for the benefit of society-at-large is naïve at best[3]. In cases of ‘collapse’, society’s power-brokers place the burden of ‘contraction’ upon the masses via currency devaluation, increased taxes, forever wars, increased totalitarianism, narrative management, etc.. They continue to ensure their slice of the pie by taking from the disadvantaged/non-influential masses. While I guess one could call this ‘managed’, it is ‘managed’ in a way that protects the elite and their privileged positions but continually leads to a degradation of the living standards for most[4]. Of course, since ‘collapse’ is invariably unstoppable, the ‘rulers’ are simply amongst the last to experience societal decline, and usually because the support systems that sustain society’s complexities (and, thus, their positions atop the power/wealth structures) have been weakened beyond repair as more and more citizens ‘opt out’ due to the costs to remain outweighing the perceived benefits. And once a tipping point of withdrawn citizen support is reached, collapse of complexity ensues.
Second, there is Tainter’s contention that it is primarily diminishing returns on investments in complexity (i.e., problem solving via increased sociopolitical complexity) that invariably leads to ‘collapse’ [5]. This occurs because humans tend to employ the easiest and cheapest ‘solutions’ when first addressing ‘problems’. Our ‘solutions’ not only intensify complexity (i.e., result in more ‘problems’ that require attention) but grow our material/resource requirements (especially energy) thus increasing the ‘cost’ of our problem-solving behaviours. As costs increase and more issues arise that require attention, we experience diminishing returns on our investments and are forced to direct increasing amounts of material resources towards our problem solving, eating into surpluses. Once surpluses are exhausted, everyday operating ‘costs’ begin to suffer and living standards for the majority begin to wane. A gradual decline in complexity ensues. Any unexpected stress surge can push society off the cliff towards a complete breakdown of societal complexity. Alternatively, it is simply the passage of time before things have broken down to a point when one could label the situation an example of ‘collapse’.
Third, Tainter’s thesis is basically economic in nature. As societal investments encounter the Law of Marginal Utility due to ever-increasing costs of problem solving and its associated complexity, society experiences declining living standards. Eventually, participants opt out of the arrangement (i.e., social ‘contract’) — usually by migrating — resulting in a withdrawal of the support/labour necessary to maintain the various complex systems. ‘Opting out’ in today’s world is more difficult as there are no more ‘New Worlds’ to exploit for their resources, nor seemingly endless reserves of fossil fuels to support humans living beyond the natural environmental carrying capacity — to say little about the loss of skills/knowledge to survive without the complex systems in place (particularly procurement of potable water and food) and the overloading of sinks and biodiversity loss that reduces the carrying capacity of an area. Leaving the workforce or ‘downsizing’ significantly seems to be how some are ’opting out’ given modern constraints.
Fourth, to offset our increasing experience with diminishing returns, especially as it pertains to energy, we have employed significant debt-/credit-based fiat currency expansion to increase our drawdown of important resources among other perceived ‘needs’ — just as past societies have accomplished via geopolitical expansion and/or currency debasement. In the modern iteration, this has resulted in our globalised and financialised, highly-complex economic system increasingly taking on a Ponzi-like nature. Such schemes require perpetual growth to prevent them from imploding, not only to deal with the increased debt of ‘borrowing/creating’ currency, but to expand the resource/energy base. Maintaining this approach, however, will and is bumping up against limits to what is possible. Infinite growth is not possible (except via magical thinking) on a finite planet.
Fifth, to sustain a society’s complexity as it bumps up against limits to expanding its problem-solving ability (particularly its finite resource requirements), surpluses are drawn upon as mentioned above in the second point. The drawdown of these surpluses puts society at greater risk of being incapable of reacting to a sudden stress surge that may expedite the ‘collapse’ of complexity. A true Seneca Cliff-type decline/simplification/unravelling/collapse that cannot be ‘managed’, regardless of wishes.
Sixth, Tainter raises the unprecedented aspect of today’s technological innovations, but they too are susceptible to the Law of Marginal Utility (diminishing returns). He stresses that using a new energy source to help fund continuing economic growth can help stave off, but not eliminate, declining marginal productivity. Perhaps more importantly, a new energy source may not help eliminate diminishing returns in other areas (e.g. agricultural production). And once diminishing returns sets in for a society, collapse requires merely the passage of time. New energy sources, however, do little to address the issues that arise from expanded technology use–particularly the finiteness of the materials required and the overloading of planetary sinks that occur from their extraction and processing (see more on this below).
Seventh, pre/historic evidence also demonstrates a peer polity competition trap where competing ‘states’ drive the pursuit of complexity (regardless of environmental and/or human costs) for fear of absorption by a competing state. In such situations, ever-increasing costs create ever-decreasing marginal returns that end in domination by one state, or collapse of all competing polities. Where no or an insufficient energy subsidy exists, collapse of the competing states occurs at about the same time.
Little to none of the above takes into consideration our current overarching predicament: ecological overshoot (and all of its symptom predicaments such as biodiversity loss, resource depletion, sink overloading, etc.).
Having significantly surpassed the natural environmental carrying capacity of our planet, we have strapped booster rockets to the issue of complex society ‘collapse’.
We have chosen to employ a debt-/credit-based economic system to more quickly extricate finite resources from the ground in order to meet current demands rather than significantly reduce stealing them from the future. We have created belief systems that human ingenuity and finite resource-based technologies are god-like in their abilities to alter the Laws of Thermodynamics (especially in regard to entropy) and biological principles such as overshoot.
It is my contention that no amount of purposeful contraction can alter the trajectory we are on. We might, at best, mitigate to some marginal degree the coming storm for small, local regions/communities. But we cannot halt the consequences that accompany overshoot.
There are many (most?) that will remain in denial about all of this. Our propensity to avoid anxiety-provoking thoughts guarantees it. Magical thinking, particularly in regard to human ingenuity and our technological prowess, will continue. We cannot help ourselves. By denying our biological nature and proclivities, we guarantee failure in ‘managing’ a ‘graceful’ fall from our elevated heights.
I would love to see homo sapiens extricate themselves and the planet from the ecological overshoot trap we have set for ourselves through our expansionary ‘successes’. I have next to no faith that we can escape, however, particularly on a global scale. Not only does the ‘average’ individual have little to no agency in any of this but adaptive systems become ever more complex as they grow requiring increasing resource inputs and becoming more fragile as a result.
Add to this growing complexity the fact that large, complex systems with their nonlinear feedback loops and emergent phenomena are, by their very nature, impossible to control. Every attempt to control/manipulate such systems invariably leads to more ‘problems’ and thus more ‘solutions’ leading to more complexity and further finite resource drawdown, sink overloading, biodiversity loss, etc.. And this says little about the sociopathic ruling caste whose primary motivation is to sustain current power/wealth structures regardless of human and environmental costs; or even if it results in thermonuclear war.
Given we cannot control complex systems, we also cannot predict them well (if at all) and thus we cannot forecast the future with any certainty. But there exist physical laws and limits, biological/evolutionary principles, and pre/historical examples/experiments that all point towards a future quite different from the optimistic ones painted by those who believe we have control over such things.
So, I repeat my ‘advice’ from my last Contemplation:
Yes, spread the message about ‘degrowth’. Encourage a managed contraction of the human experiment. But understand, we’re in a predicament without solutions and time is not on our side. Get through the grieving as quickly as you can and move on to some actions that will help to mitigate the inevitable consequences for your family/friends/local community. And, make as certain as you can that the actions do not exacerbate our predicament by feeding the monster that is continued growth.
If you’ve made it to the end of this contemplation and have got something out of my writing, please consider ordering the trilogy of my ‘fictional’ novel series, Olduvai (PDF files; only $9.99 Canadian), via my website or the link below — the ‘profits’ of which help me to keep my internet presence alive and first book available in print (and is available via various online retailers).
Attempting a new payment system as I am contemplating shutting down my site in the future (given the ever-increasing costs to keep it running).
If you are interested in purchasing any of the 3 books individually or the trilogy, please try the link below indicating which book(s) you are purchasing.
Costs (Canadian dollars):
Book 1: $2.99
Book 2: $3.89
Book 3: $3.89
Trilogy: $9.99
Feel free to throw in a ‘tip’ on top of the base cost if you wish; perhaps by paying in U.S. dollars instead of Canadian. Every few cents/dollars helps…
https://paypal.me/olduvaitrilogy?country.x=CA&locale.x=en_US
If you do not hear from me within 48 hours or you are having trouble with the system, please email me: olduvaitrilogy@gmail.com.
You can also find a variety of resources, particularly my summary notes for a handful of texts, especially Catton’s Overshoot and Tainter’s Collapse: see here.
It Bears Repeating: Best Of…Volume 1
A compilation of writers focused on the nexus of limits to growth, energy, and ecological overshoot.
With a Foreword and Afterword by Michael Dowd, authors include: Max Wilbert; Tim Watkins; Mike Stasse; Dr. Bill Rees; Dr. Tim Morgan; Rob Mielcarski; Dr. Simon Michaux; Erik Michaels; Just Collapse’s Tristan Sykes & Dr. Kate Booth; Kevin Hester; Alice Friedemann; David Casey; and, Steve Bull.
The document is not a guided narrative towards a singular or overarching message; except, perhaps, that we are in a predicament of our own making with a far more chaotic future ahead of us than most imagine–and most certainly than what mainstream media/politics would have us believe.
Click here to access the document as a PDF file, free to download.
[1] See: https://olduvai.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Collapse-of-Complex-Societies.pdf
[2] Actually, it’s the armament manufacturers producing the weapons and the financial institutions providing the capital that receive the lion’s share of any ‘support’ (i.e., funding). The masses are ‘persuaded’ to sacrifice for the ‘greater good’, ignoring Brigadier General Smedley Butler’s assertion that war is a racket to help enrich a few at the expense of the many. See: https://ia801004.us.archive.org/6/items/warisaracketelectronicresourcetheantiwarclassicbyam/War%20is%20a%20racket%20[electronic%20resource]%20%20the%20antiwar%20classic%20by%20Am.pdf
[3] Although they constantly virtue-signal that this is exactly what they are doing with their policies and ‘investments’, such declarations actually serve to help legitimise their power/control.
[4] Remember George Carlin’s warning: “It’s a big club and you ain’t in it!” See:
[5] ‘Collapse’, here, is defined as a loss/decline of sociopolitical complexity that results in other systems failing, such as the rule of law, economic interactions such as energy-averaging systems/trade, art and literature, etc..
December 26, 2024
Today’s Contemplation: Collapse Cometh CXXXV–Collapse Now To Avoid the Rush: The Long Emergency
Mexico (1988). Photo by author.Collapse Now To Avoid the Rush: The Long Emergency
Today’s Contemplation has been prompted by yet another conversation I have had with a person who prefers not to believe the stories I tell about our predicament. Which I am totally fine with. I attempt to present my case and once the person devolves into personal attacks, childish suggestions, or simply ignores/denies the evidence (usually by way of never actually addressing the points I raise), I tend to end the dialogue with an agreement to disagree. We all believe what we want to believe so little point in belabouring the discussion with someone entrenched in their narrative.
Of the rhetorical fallacies that tend to be used against me when I highlight skepticism towards certain narratives, the latest is something along these lines: You want/wish for ‘collapse’ and a massive die-off…why don’t you start by eliminating yourself.
The thing I wish to stress is that I DO NOT wish for any type of decline/collapse, and I’ve most certainly never advocated for it to happen. I am as dependent upon our complexities as the next person, although I am working to lessen that.
As I more-or-less replied to the person: I do not want what I am writing about to occur; I am a student of pre/history observing the world and sharing my story about what I see and occasionally making suggestions on what might be wise actions to help mitigate it. In other words, ‘collapse’ appears to be happening so let’s try to prepare for it.
Do I argue for certain ‘strategies’ that would seem prudent given the biological and pre/historical precedents that suggest where our future is likely headed? Absolutely. If you have the slightest appreciation of the precautionary principle, and even some awareness of what has befallen previous complex societies throughout pre/history and how they have ‘handled’ similar situations, you would too.
But this does not mean I am looking forward to the long emergency/long descent (or worse) that appears increasingly to be where humanity is headed. In fact, given the argument that we are significantly into ecological overshoot this time around the argument for preparatory actions is quite called for. In fact, much of what I argue for is because I believe it would be wise for humanity to pay heed to John Michael Greer’s advice to ‘collapse now and avoid the rush’ so that we are better prepared for the future that we are likely going to get, whether we wish it or not.
If you’re not familiar with Greer’s reasoning for this phrase, I suggest reading the above linked post. For those who wish my take, here it is…
Industrial society (and all the complexities it entails) has been possible primarily because of the “…immense supply of cheap, highly concentrated fuel with a very high net energy…” To replace this foundational energy source in order to maintain our complex, industrial society “…has turned out to be effectively impossible.” While a ‘managed descent’ may have been possible 50+ years ago, sociopolitical decisions (along with continuing unchecked population growth) have closed off that option and instead pushed us significantly into overshoot.
Rather than thoughtfully descend (i.e., the type of ‘managed’ decline the Degrowth movement advocates), we have burned through our fundamental energy resource believing a story that the laws of physics and geology can be suspended via socioeconomic abstractions, human ingenuity, and our technological prowess.
Pre/historical evidence suggests our ‘fall’ will not be sudden in nature (commonly thought of as a ‘collapse’) for “…civilizations take an average of one to three centuries to complete the process of decline and fall…”. This ‘fall’ — that appears to have already begun and will pick up steam — will not be smooth but a series of crises across space and time, with relatively stable interludes (perhaps even some ‘recovery’) between them.
There are still choices to be made in the face of this, particularly between clinging to current lifestyles until the floor drops out from beneath that to learning the knowledge and practising the skills necessary to live well in a world of declining energy and complexities.
“Collapse now, in other words, and avoid the rush.”
What are some of the suggestions Greer makes?
Figure out how to live after the next crisis arrives and begin to live that way now. For example, if your income may be in jeopardy, begin living with less now. Get out of debt. Find much less expensive shelter. Learn practical skills so you can meet your own needs or barter with others. Weatherise your home so utilities cost less. Begin growing some of your own food.
While some envision living on an off-grid homestead away and insulated from the various crises, it is better to look at where one lives currently and how that can be made more resilient and/or self-sufficient. Take note of local resources, including human ones.
As for the utopian dream of a fanciful, high-tech future, Greer argues “There’s quite a lot of money to be made these days insisting that we can have a shiny new future despite all evidence to the contrary, and pulling factoids out of context to defend that increasingly dubious claim; as industrial society moves down the curve of decline, I suspect, this will become even more popular, since it will make it easier for those who haven’t yet had their own personal collapse to pretend that it can’t happen to them.”
And as he concludes: “… if you’re trying to exempt yourself from the end of the industrial age, nothing you can do can ever be enough. Let go, let yourself fall forward into the deindustrial future, and matters are different.”
I would tend to agree with Greer as far as the idea of a cataclysmic future being improbable, not impossible, just highly unlikely on a global scale. There are such issues as nuclear war or a large meteor strike that could occur but are far less likely (although nuclear war is appearing more probable than a large meteor hitting the planet for when hasn’t the latest, greatest weaponry not been used during war).
The highest possibility of ‘collapse’ comes from the process that archaeologist Joseph Tainter lays out in The Collapse of Complex Societies. Basically, as we encounter increasing diminishing returns on our investments in complexity, fewer and fewer benefits are accrued from our support of/investments into the sociopolitical systems that organise our society and a point arises where more and more people withdraw that support until the complexities can no longer function properly and supportive subsystems begin to fail.
As Tainter points out, a society can go a very long time experiencing this decline, with each step down in living standards being relatively minor and, with time, are accepted and adapted to as the ‘new normal’.
I have highlighted in a few multipart posts what may befall humanity as we stumble into the unknowable future:
Infinite growth. Finite Plant. What could possibly go wrong? Parts One & Two.
Energy Future. Parts 1, 2, 3, & 4.
That Uncertain Road. Parts 1 & 2.
And how the psychological mechanisms we have evolved impact our beliefs around all this:
Cognition and Belief Systems in a ‘Collapsing’ World: Part One
Cognition and Belief Systems: Part Two — Deference to Authority
Cognition and Belief Systems: Part Three — Groupthink
Cognition and Belief Systems: Part Four — Cognitive Dissonance
Cognition and Belief Systems: Part Five — Justification Hypothesis
Cognition and Belief Systems: Part Six — Sociopolitical ‘Collapse’ and Ecological Overshoot
And please note that I do refer to this inevitable simplification as ‘collapse’ not because I believe it will be a sudden, punctuated, and global event but because I tend to view the process in a broader, temporal perspective. While our ‘collapse’ may play out over a number of human generations (and be barely noticeable to many except in the sense of the past being ‘better’), in the grand scope of human 200,000–300,000 year existence, a century or three is a bump in a long and winding road.
View the following graph. If you feel this is sustainable and growth can continue because, you know, human ingenuity, you can ignore everything I’ve written above and carry on. If, however, this suggests to you an impending (or passed) tipping point of unsustainability, then you need to consider the story I’ve shared…and how you will react and act.
As I conclude in one of the posts linked above:
“And, I offer no ‘solution’ to any of the above. I have increasingly come to hold that this is all one humungous predicament without a ‘solution’. The best we might hope for is to increase local self-sufficiency of communities and cross our fingers that some might make it through the impending transition that will be the result of complex society collapse compounded by ecological overshoot. On the other hand, all the other species on our planet might be hoping for our extinction given our track record of destructive tendencies…”
If you’ve made it to the end of this contemplation and have got something out of my writing, please consider ordering the trilogy of my ‘fictional’ novel series, Olduvai (PDF files; only $9.99 Canadian), via my website or the link below — the ‘profits’ of which help me to keep my internet presence alive and first book available in print (and is available via various online retailers).
Attempting a new payment system as I am contemplating shutting down my site in the future (given the ever-increasing costs to keep it running).
If you are interested in purchasing any of the 3 books individually or the trilogy, please try the link below indicating which book(s) you are purchasing.
Costs (Canadian dollars):
Book 1: $2.99
Book 2: $3.89
Book 3: $3.89
Trilogy: $9.99
Feel free to throw in a ‘tip’ on top of the base cost if you wish; perhaps by paying in U.S. dollars instead of Canadian. Every few cents/dollars helps…
https://paypal.me/olduvaitrilogy?country.x=CA&locale.x=en_US
If you do not hear from me within 48 hours or you are having trouble with the system, please email me: olduvaitrilogy@gmail.com.
You can also find a variety of resources, particularly my summary notes for a handful of texts, especially Catton’s Overshoot and Tainter’s Collapse: see here.
Released September 30, 2024
It Bears Repeating: Best Of…Volume 2
A compilation of writers focused on the nexus of limits to growth, energy, and ecological overshoot.
With a Foreword by Erik Michaels and Afterword by Dr. Guy McPherson, authors include: Dr. Peter A Victor, George Tsakraklides, Charles Hugh Smith, Dr. Tony Povilitis, Jordan Perry, Matt Orsagh, Justin McAffee, Jack Lowe, The Honest Sorcerer, Fast Eddy, Will Falk, Dr. Ugo Bardi, and Steve Bull.
The document is not a guided narrative towards a singular or overarching message; except, perhaps, that we are in a predicament of our own making with a far more chaotic future ahead of us than most imagine–and most certainly than what mainstream media/politics would have us believe.
Click here to access the document as a PDF file, free to download.
Today’s Contemplation: Collapse Cometh CXXV–Hydrocarbons And The Maximum Power Principle: What Could Possibly Go Wrong?
Mexico (1988). Photo by author.Hydrocarbons And The Maximum Power Principle: What Could Possibly Go Wrong?
Today’s Contemplation is a sharing of the response by a Facebook Friend, Schuyler Hupp, whose occasional commentary on posts in our mutual Facebook Group, Peak Oil, I have come to appreciate for their insightfulness and conciseness regarding humanity’s predicament. I could share a number of these going back for some time but felt this latest one was particularly good.
Question.
[Global Warming] You have a substance that when burnt releases a gas that makes it warmer, you burn as much as you can to make your car go broom broom and feed 8 billion people. Would it get warmer?
In response to the above question posed by a mutual FB Friend, Schuyler had the following to say:
Burning hydrocarbons on a massive scale, and for a century or more… That’s exactly what an army of engineers would propose if you actually wanted to warm the climate… Though they would warn that the long term outcome would be difficult if not impossible to predict or control, due to the complexity and the number of variables, both known and unknown… However, they would also warn that there would be a very real possibility for the climate being forced into a new steady state equilibrium that might not be compatible with human life. They would also be the first to point out that fossil hydrocarbons, i.e. ancient sunlight, are a finite mineral resource, and that their quality and the net energy return would become uneconomical after about 150 years or so, and thus it would not represent a sustainable energy paradigm, not to mention all of the damage to ecosystems that would result from the pollution, or the population growth that would result from their introduction, with humans essentially being slaves to their innate Maximum Power Principle behavioral instincts… and that population Overshoot would ensue, thus condemning the entire planet to a future of ecological collapse…
I have little to add to Schuyler’s response, except to stress that we appear to be in a predicament of ecological overshoot that has only an outcome, not a possible ‘solution’ — something almost everyone wishes to have laid out before them, seemingly to help them in their denial of reality to abolish the stress such an inevitable trajectory brings. This is usually accomplished through a kind of magical thinking that humans stand above and beyond nature, and can thus control it — usually via our technology — and then demand that the dominant, story-telling apes within our sociopolitical systems act to save us.
[NOTE: the links in the above paragraph will take you to articles by another FB Friend, Erik Michaels, who has been doing deep dives into these subjects for a number of years and posts at Problems, Predicaments, and Technology — a site I highly recommend.]
I’m pretty certain that there is no Plan B possible; in fact, I’m not even sure there was ever a Plan A…except, perhaps, to pursue our reproductive ‘success’ in adapting to our immediate environment of the moment for as long as possible (and this does not imply there is a predetermined evolutionary ‘goal’ involved aside from successful gene duplication).
If you’ve made it to the end of this contemplation and have got something out of my writing, please consider ordering the trilogy of my ‘fictional’ novel series, Olduvai (PDF files; only $9.99 Canadian), via my website or the link below — the ‘profits’ of which help me to keep my internet presence alive and first book available in print (and is available via various online retailers).
Attempting a new payment system as I am contemplating shutting down my site in the future (given the ever-increasing costs to keep it running).
If you are interested in purchasing any of the 3 books individually or the trilogy, please try the link below indicating which book(s) you are purchasing.
Costs (Canadian dollars):
Book 1: $2.99
Book 2: $3.89
Book 3: $3.89
Trilogy: $9.99
Feel free to throw in a ‘tip’ on top of the base cost if you wish; perhaps by paying in U.S. dollars instead of Canadian. Every few cents/dollars helps…
https://paypal.me/olduvaitrilogy?country.x=CA&locale.x=en_US
If you do not hear from me within 48 hours or you are having trouble with the system, please email me: olduvaitrilogy@gmail.com.
You can also find a variety of resources, particularly my summary notes for a handful of texts, especially Catton’s Overshoot and Tainter’s Collapse: see here.
Released September 30, 2024
It Bears Repeating: Best Of…Volume 2
A compilation of writers focused on the nexus of limits to growth, energy, and ecological overshoot.
With a Foreword by Erik Michaels and Afterword by Dr. Guy McPherson, authors include: Dr. Peter A Victor, George Tsakraklides, Charles Hugh Smith, Dr. Tony Povilitis, Jordan Perry, Matt Orsagh, Justin McAffee, Jack Lowe, The Honest Sorcerer, Fast Eddy, Will Falk, Dr. Ugo Bardi, and Steve Bull.
The document is not a guided narrative towards a singular or overarching message; except, perhaps, that we are in a predicament of our own making with a far more chaotic future ahead of us than most imagine–and most certainly than what mainstream media/politics would have us believe.
Click here to access the document as a PDF file, free to download.
