mood:
Fai_Ryy

Discoholic 🪩
DEAR READER
todays bird
Not today Justin
ojovivo

ellievsbear
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her

⁂
No title available
Xuebing Du

JVL
I'd rather be in outer space 🛸
No title available
YOU ARE THE REASON
One Nice Bug Per Day
art blog(derogatory)

Product Placement
we're not kids anymore.
Peter Solarz
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from South Africa
seen from Malaysia

seen from Saudi Arabia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from United States
@welcometotheanthropocene
mood:
Report: “ghastly future of mass extinction, declining health and climate-disruption upheavals”
“The planet is facing a ‘ghastly future of mass extinction, declining health and climate-disruption upheavals’ that threaten human survival because of ignorance and inaction, according to an international group of scientists, who warn people still haven’t grasped the urgency of the biodiversity and climate crises.”
As a January the Guardian article informs, 17 experts, including scientists from Mexico, Australia, and the US wrote a report in Frontiers in Conservation Science which references more than 150 studies detailing the world’s major environmental challenges. Here are the main points:
"The planet is in a much worse state than most people – even scientists – understood. ... The delay between destruction of the natural world and the impacts of these actions means people do not recognize how vast the problem is."
Large populations and their continued growth drive soil degradation, biodiversity loss, the growing toxification of ecosystems, increasing chances of pandemics, etc.
"The enormity of the problem requires far-reaching changes to global capitalism, education and equality. These include abolishing the idea of perpetual economic growth, properly pricing environmental externalities, stopping the use of fossil fuels, reining in corporate lobbying, and empowering women."
“The report follows years of stark warnings about the state of the planet from the world’s leading scientists, including a statement by 11,000 scientists in 2019 that people will face ‘untold suffering due to the climate crisis’ unless major changes are made. In 2016, more than 150 of Australia’s climate scientists wrote an open letter to the then prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, demanding immediate action on reducing emissions. In the same year, 375 scientists – including 30 Nobel prize winners – wrote an open letter to the world about their frustrations over political inaction on climate change.”
“The report comes months after the world failed to meet a single UN Aichi biodiversity target, created to stem the destruction of the natural world, the second consecutive time governments have failed to meet their 10-year biodiversity goals.”
Doesn't all this mean that scientists should stop just writing warnings, and move on to some new, more radical actions?
The Limits to Growth (1972): THE WHOLE BOOK OUTLINE
Chapter 1. The Nature of Exponential Growth
The mathematics of exponential growth
Models and exponential growth
World population growth
World economic growth
Chapter 2. The Limits to Exponential Growth
Food
Nonrenewable resources
Pollution (exponentially increasing pollution, unknown upper limits, natural delays in ecological processes, global distribution of pollutants, pollution limits)
A finite world
Chapter 3. Growth in the World System
The feedback loop structure
Quantitative assumptions (per capita resource use, desired birth rate, pollution effect on lifetime, the usefulness of the world model)
World model behavior
Chapter 4. Technology and the Limits to Growth
Technology in the world model (energy and resources, pollution control, increased food yield and birth control, the overshoot mode)
Technology in the real world (technological side-effects, problems with no technical solutions, a choice of limits)
Chapter 5. The State of Global Equilibrium
Deliberate constraints on growth
The equilibrium state
Growth in the equilibrium state
Equality in the equilibrium state
The transition from growth to global equilibrium
The main argument of the book:
The possibilities of human consumption continuous growth have been exhausted and timely action is essential in order to avert a planetary collapse. Both unchanged population growth and industrial capital growth will dramatically worsen the conditions for humanity within the coming century. If we want to prevent the collapse, we have to change our social norms and policies in terms of childbirth, resource consumption, and waste recycling.
Limits to Growth: Chapter V
Outline:
DELIBERATE CONSTRAINTS ON GROWTH. "Either the birth rate must be brought down to equal the new, lower death rate, or the death rate must rise again. All of the 'natural' constraints to population growth operate in the second way-they raise the death rate. Any society wishing to avoid that result must take deliberate action to control the positive feedback loop-to reduce the birth rate."
"The policies that produced the behavior shown in figure 46 are: 1. Stabilization of population by setting the birth rate equal to the death rate in 1975. Stabilization of industrial capital by setting the investment rate equal to the depreciation rate. 2. Resource consumption per unit of industrial output is reduced to one-fourth of its 1970 value. 3. The economic preferences of society are shifted more toward services such as education and health facilities and less toward factory-produced material goods. 4. Pollution generation per unit of industrial and agricultural output is reduced to one-fourth of its 1970 value. 5. The above policies alone would result in a rather low value of food per capita, but some people would still be malnourished if the traditional inequalities of distribution persist. To avoid this situation, high value is placed on producing sufficient food for all people. Capital is therefore diverted to food production even if such an investment would be considered 'unprofitable.' 6. This emphasis on highly capitalized agriculture, while necessary to produce enough food, would lead to rapid soil erosion and depletion of soil fertility, destroying long-term stability in the agricultural sector. Therefore the use of agricultural capital has been altered to make soil enrichment and preservation a high priority (policy example: use of capital to compost urban organic wastes and return them to the land - a practice that also reduces pollution). 7. The average lifetime of industrial capital must be increased, implying better design for durability. This policy also tends to reduce resource depletion and pollution."
THE EQUILIBRIUM STATE. "Equilibrium means a state of balance or equality between opposing forces. In the dynamic terms of the world model, the opposing forces are those causing population and capital stock to increase and those causing population and capital stock to decrease. ... The word 'capital' should be understood as service, industrial, and agricultural capital combined. If we want to maintain the equilibrium state during 20 or 50 years, the rates and levels must be adjusted to ensure that the capital investment rate will not be limited by resource availability during that time span, or that the death rate will not be uncontrollably influenced by pollution or food shortage. The longer a society prefers to maintain the state of equilibrium, the lower the rates and levels must be." By choosing a fairly long time horizon for equilibrium existence, and a long average lifetime as a desirable goal, the authors suggested a minimum set of requirements for it: "1. The capital plant and the population are constant in size. The birth rate equals the death rate and the capital investment rate equals the depreciation rate. 2. All input and output rates - births, deaths, investment, and depreciation - are kept to a minimum. 3. The levels of capital and population and the ratio of the two are set in accordance with the values of the society. They may be deliberately revised and slowly adjusted as the advance of technology creates new options. ... An equilibrium defined in this way does not mean stagnation. The three points above define a dynamic equilibrium, which need not and probably would not 'freeze' the world into the population-capital configuration that happens to exist at the present time."
GROWTH IN THE EQUILIBRIUM STATE. "Population and capital are the only quantities that need be constant in the equilibrium state. Any human activity that does not require a large flow of irreplaceable resources or produce severe environmental degradation might continue to grow indefinitely" (e.g. education, art, music, religion, basic scientific research, athletics, and social interactions). All of these "human activities depend very strongly on two factors: 1) the availability of some surplus production after the basic human needs of food and shelter have been met"; 2) leisure time. "In any equilibrium state the relative levels of capital and population could be adjusted to assure that human material needs are fulfilled at any desired level. Since the amount of material production would be essentially fixed, every improvement in production methods could result in increased leisure for the population - leisure that could be devoted to any activity that is relatively nonconsuming and nonpolluting. Technological advance is both necessary and welcome in the equilibrium state. A few obvious examples of the kinds of practical discoveries that would enhance the workings of a steady state society include: new methods of waste collection, to decrease pollution and make discarded material available for recycling; more efficient techniques of recycling, to reduce rates of resource depletion; better product design to increase product lifetime and promote easy repair, so that the capital depreciation rate would be minimized; harnessing of incident solar energy, the most pollution-free power source; methods of natural pest control, based on more complete understanding of ecological interrelationships; medical advances that would decrease the death rate; contraceptive advances that would facilitate the equalization of the birth rate with the decreasing death rate."
EQUALITY IN THE EQUILIBRIUM STATE. "One of the most commonly accepted myths in our present society is the promise that a continuation of our present patterns of growth will lead to human equality." The authors of The Limits to Growth demonstrated in various parts of their book that "present patterns of population and capital growth are actually increasing the gap between the rich and the poor on a worldwide basis."
THE TRANSITION FROM GROWTH TO GLOBAL EQUILIBRIUM. The authors stated that "neither the world model nor their own thoughts had been developed in sufficient detail to understand all the implications of the transition from growth to equilibrium." However, they expressed the hope that "intensive study and debate would proceed simultaneously with an ongoing program of action."
Good morning and happy the first day of summer 😊
Limits to Growth: Chapter IV
Outline:
Techno-optimism. "The history of human effort contains numerous incidents of mankind's failure to live within physical limits, it is success in overcoming limits that forms the cultural tradition of many dominant people in today's world. Since the recent history of a large part of human society has been so continuously successful, it is quite natural that many people expect technological breakthroughs to go on raising physical ceilings indefinitely. These people speak about the future with resounding technological optimism. However, technology can relieve the symptoms of a problem without affecting the underlying causes. Faith in technology as the ultimate solution to all problems can thus divert our attention from the most fundamental problem – the problem of growth in a finite system – and prevent us from taking effective action to solve it."
TECHNOLOGY IN THE WORLD MODEL. "There is no single variable called 'technology' in the world model. We must represent each proposed technology separately in the model, considering carefully how it might affect each of the assumptions we have made about the model elements."
Energy and resources.
Pollution control. "The advent of nuclear power neither increased nor decreased the average amount of pollution generated per unit of industrial output. The ecological impact of nuclear power is not yet clear: while some by-products of fossil fuel consumption" (e.g. CO₂ and sulfur dioxide), "will be decreased, radioactive by-products will be increased. Resource recycling will certainly decrease pollution from solid waste and from some toxic metals." However, "a changeover to nuclear power will probably have little effect on most other kinds of pollution (e.g. by-products of most manufacturing processes, thermal pollution, and pollution arising from agricultural practices)."
Increased food yield and birth control. In figure 42 authors apply increased land yield and perfect birth control simultaneously. "Here humans are utilizing a technological policy in every sector of the world model to circumvent in some way the various limits to growth. The model system is producing nuclear power, recycling resources, and mining the most remote reserves; withholding as many pollutants as possible; pushing yields from the land to undreamed-of heights; and producing only children who are actively wanted by their parents. The result is still an end to growth before the year 2100. In this case growth is stopped by three simultaneous crises. Overuse of land leads to erosion, and food production drops. Resources are severely depleted by a prosperous world· population (but not as prosperous as the present US population). Pollution rises, drops, and then rises again dramatically, causing a further decrease in food production and a sudden rise in the death rate. The application of technological solutions alone has prolonged the period of population and industrial growth, but it has not removed the ultimate limits to that growth."
The overshoot mode. Although the authors have many reservations about the simplifications in their world model, it has led them to one conclusion that appears to be justified under all the assumptions they had tested. "The basic behavior mode of the system is exponential growth of population and capital, followed by collapse."
TECHNOLOGY IN THE REAL WORLD.
Technological side-effects. "Dr. Garrett Hardin has defined side-effects as 'effects which I hadn't foreseen or don't want to think about.' The social side-effects of new technologies (which the 1972-year-model does not indicate) are often the most important in terms of the influence of technologies on people's lives. For example, the Green Revolution – the utilization of new seed varieties, combined with fertilizers and pesticides – was designed to be a technological solution to the world's food problems. The intended effect of the Green Revolution – increased food production seems – to have been achieved. Unfortunately, the social side-effects have not been entirely beneficial in most regions where the new seed varieties have been introduced. Where these conditions of economic inequality already exist, the Green Revolution tends to cause widening inequality. Large farmers generally adopt the new methods first. They have the capital to do so and can afford to take the risk."
Problems with no technological solutions. "A technical solution may be defined as 'one that requires a change only in the techniques of the natural sciences, demanding little or nothing in the way of change in human values or ideas of morality.' Numerous problems today have no technical solutions. Examples are the nuclear arms race, racial tensions, and unemployment. Even if society's technological progress fulfills all expectations, it may very well be a problem with no technical solution, or the interaction of several such problems, that finally brings an end to population and capital growth."
A choice of limits. "Is it better to try to live within a self-imposed restriction on growth? Or is it preferable to go on growing until some other natural limit arises, in the hope that at that time another technological leap will allow growth to continue still longer? ... Not blind opposition to progress, but opposition to blind progress: ... many of the technological developments mentioned in the book – recycling, pollution control devices, contraceptives – will be absolutely vital to the future of human society if they are combined with deliberate checks on growth."
"Three questions should be answered before any technology is widely adopted: 1) What will be the side-effects, both physical and social, if this development is introduced on a large scale? 2) What social changes will be necessary before this development can be implemented properly, and how long will it take to achieve them? 3) If the development is fully successful and removes some natural limit to growth, what limit will the growing system meet next? Will society prefer its pressures to the ones this development is designed to remove?"
Commercial interests behind uncontrolled deforestation
A new data-based report by Forest Policy Trade and Finance Initiative shows the rate of illegality when it comes to clearing tropical forests for commercial agriculture is extreme, and is increasing.
“While subsistence agriculture and logging still contribute to deforestation, commercial-scale agricultural expansion is now recognized as by far the single largest driver of deforestation worldwide and thus also of greenhouse gas emissions from land-use change.”
Limits to Growth: Chapter III
Outline:
"Extrapolation of present trends is a time-honored way of looking into the future, especially the very near future, and especially if the quantity being considered is not much influenced by other trends that are occurring elsewhere in the system."
"None of the five factors (population, capital, food, nonrenewable resources, and pollution) we are examining here is independent. Each interacts constantly with all the others. Population cannot grow without food, food production is increased by growth of capital, more capital requires more resources, discarded resources become pollution, pollution interferes with the growth of both population and food. The five basic quantities are joined by still other interrelationships and feedback loops. Clearly, it is not possible to assess the long-term future of any of these levels without taking all the others into account. Yet even this relatively simple system has such a complicated structure that one cannot intuitively understand how it will behave in the future, or how a change in one variable might ultimately affect each of the others."
The four main authors' steps in constructing the world model: 1) They "first listed the important causal relationships among the five levels and traced the feedback loop structure." To do so they "consulted literature and professionals in many fields of study dealing with the areas of concern-demography, economics, agronomy, nutrition, geology, and ecology, for example." 2) Then they "quantified each relationship as accurately as possible, using global data where it was available and characteristic local data where global measurements had not been made." 3) With the computer, they "calculated the simultaneous operation of all these relationships over time. We then tested the effect of numerical changes in the basic assumptions to find the most critical determinants of the system's behavior." 4) Finally, they "tested the effect on our global system of the various policies that are currently being proposed to enhance or change the behavior of the system."
"The world model is not inflexible – it is an evolving model that is continuously criticized and updated as our own understanding increases."
Behavior modes: "the tendencies of the variables in the system (e.g., population or pollution) to change as time progresses. A variable may increase, decrease, remain constant, oscillate, or combine several of these characteristic modes."
"A major purpose in constructing the world model has been to determine which behavior modes will be most characteristic of the world system as it reaches the limits to growth. This process of determining behavior modes is 'prediction' only in the most limited sense of the word. The output graphs reproduced in this book show values for world population, capital, and other variables on a time scale that begins in the year 1900 and continues until 2100. These graphs are not exact predictions of the values of the variables at any particular year in the future. They are indications of the system's behavioral tendencies only."
Limits of specification of the world model: national boundaries are not recognized; distribution inequalities of food, resources, and capital are included implicitly in the data but they are not calculated explicitly nor graphed in the output; world trade balances, migration patterns, climatic determinants, and political processes are not specifically treated. In terms of exact predictions, the output is not meaningful.
"The relationships shown in figures 24 and 25 are typical of the many interlocking feedback loops in the world model. Other loops include such factors as the area of cultivated land and the rate at which it is developed or eroded, the rate at which pollution is generated and rendered harmless by the environment, and the balance between the labor force and the number of jobs available. The complete flow diagram for the world model, incorporating all these factors and more, is shown in figure 26."
World model behavior. "The behavior mode of the system shown in figure 35 is clearly that of overshoot and collapse. In this run the collapse occurs because of nonrenewable resource depletion. The industrial capital stock grows to a level that requires an enormous input of resources. In the very process of that growth it depletes a large fraction of the resource reserves available. As resource prices rise and mines are depleted, more and more capital must be used for obtaining resources, leaving less to be invested for future growth. Finally investment cannot keep up with depreciation, and the industrial base collapses, taking with it the service and agricultural systems, which have become dependent on industrial inputs. Population, with the delays inherent in the age structure and the process of social adjustment, keeps rising. Population finally decreases when the death rate is driven upward by lack of food and health services."
"If we assume optimistically that new discoveries or advances in technology can double the amount of resources economically available, a computer run under that assumption looks in the following way":
– Please give me a plastic bag also
– It's already inside
a topical meme from Russian internet
Quests for growth curves: population & life quality
In September 2014 Dr. Graham Turner, University of Melbourne's Melbourne Sustainable Society Institute, and journalist Cathy Alexander posted an article based on data from the UN (its department of economic and social affairs, Unesco, the food and agriculture organization, and the UN statistics yearbook), US national oceanic and atmospheric administration, the BP statistical review, and elsewhere. That data was plotted alongside the Limits to Growth scenarios.
“These graphs show real-world data (first from the MIT work, then from the fresh data), plotted in a solid line. The dotted line shows the Limits to Growth 'business-as-usual' scenario out to 2100. So far, the data is quite similar to the book’s forecasts.”
The authors conclude: “It may be too late to convince the world’s politicians and wealthy elites to chart a different course. So to the rest of us, maybe it’s time to think about how we protect ourselves as we head into an uncertain future.”
Limits to Growth: Chapter II
Outline:
World sustainability depends on both physical (economic + demographical factors) and social necessities (e.g. peace and social stability, education, employment, and steady technological progress).
Neither this book nor the author's world model at this stage in its development can deal explicitly with social factors (except insofar as the information about the quantity and distribution of physical supplies can indicate possible future social problems).
Food, resources, and a healthy environment are necessary but not sufficient conditions for growth. Even if they are abundant, growth may be stopped by social problems.
Although total world agricultural production is increasing, food production per capita in the nonindustrialized countries is barely holding constant at its inadequately low level.
if the world's people did decide to pay the high capital costs, to cultivate all possible arable land, and to produce as much food as possible, how many people could theoretically be fed?
Even if society did decide to pay the necessary costs to gain new land or to increase the productivity of the land already cultivated, the rising population would quickly bring about another "crisis point." And each crisis point will cost more to overcome.
Even if the choice were consistently to produce food as the first priority continued population growth, we would rapidly come to the point where all available resources are devoted to producing food, leaving no further possibility of expansion.
Arable land is just one potential limit among other limits (e.g. the availability of fresh water) to food production.
Possibly, we have a chance to avoid or extend these limits by technological advances that remove dependence on the land or that create new sources of fresh water. The problem is that the factories and raw materials to produce synthetic food, the equipment, and energy to purify sea water must all require physical resources.
The world usage rate of every natural resource is growing exponentially. For many resources the usage rate is growing even faster than the population, indicating both that more people are consuming resources each year and also that the average consumption per person is increasing each year (the exponential growth curve of resource consumption is driven by both the positive feedback loops of population growth and of capital growth).
Given present resource consumption rates and the projected increase in these rates, the great majority of the currently important nonrenewable resources will be extremely costly 100 years from now. This statement remains true regardless of the most optimistic assumptions about undiscovered reserves, technological advances, substitution, or recycling, as long as the demand for resources continues to grow exponentially.
Pollution is another exponentially increasing quantity in the world system. The natural ecological systems can absorb many of the effluents of human activity and reprocess them into substances that are usable by, or at least harmless to, other forms of life. When any effluent is released on a large enough scale, however, the natural absorptive mechanisms can become saturated.
The measured amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing exponentially, apparently at a rate of about 0.2 percent per year. Only about one half of the CO2 released from burning fossil fuels has actually appeared in the atmosphere – the other half has apparently been absorbed, mainly by the surface water of the oceans.
By the laws of thermodynamics, essentially all of the energy used by man must ultimately be dissipated as heat. If the energy source is something other than incident solar energy (e.g., fossil fuels or atomic energy), that heat will result in warming the atmosphere, either directly, or indirectly through radiation from water used for cooling purposes. Locally, waste heat or "thermal pollution" in streams causes disruption in the balance of aquatic life. But thermal pollution may have serious climatic effects, worldwide, when it reaches some appreciable fraction of the energy normally absorbed by the earth from the sun.
Nuclear power will produce yet another kind of pollutant –radioactive wastes. Since nuclear power now provides only an insignificant fraction of the energy used by man, the possible environmental impact of the wastes released by nuclear reactors can only be surmised.
Carbon dioxide, thermal energy, and radioactive wastes are just three of the many disturbances man is inserting into the environment at an exponentially increasing rate. The toxic metals (lead and mercury) are released into waterways and into the atmosphere from automobiles, incinerators, industrial processes, and agricultural pesticides.
No upper bounds have been indicated for the exponential growth curves of pollutants because it is not known how much we can perturb the natural ecological balance of the earth without serious consequences. We do know, however, that there is an upper limit. It has already been surpassed in many local environments. This ignorance about the limits of the earth's ability to absorb pollutants should be enough reason for caution in the release of polluting substances. Any pollution control system based on instituting controls only when some harm is already detected will probably guarantee that the problem will get much worse before it gets better. Systems of this sort are exceedingly difficult to control because they require that present actions be based on results expected far in the future.
The surest way to reach that upper limit globally is to increase exponentially both the number of people and the polluting activities of each person.
Vicious circle: it may be that technological developments will allow the expansion of industry with decreasing pollution, but only at a high cost. A country can postpone the payment of such costs to increase the present growth rate of its capital plant, but only at the expense of future environmental degradation, which may be reversible only at a higher cost than it would be earlier.
Limits to Growth: Chapter I
Outline:
Exponential population growth: population increases in size by a constant proportion at each instant in time; the instantaneous rate of change of a quantity with respect to time is proportional to the quantity itself.
An exponential increase is deceptive because it generates immense numbers very quickly (unlike ordinary linear growth).
It is useful to think of exponential growth in terms of doubling time or the time it takes a growing quantity to double in size. There is a negative mathematical relationship between the rate of growth, and the time it will take a quantity to double in size.
Exponential growth is a dynamic phenomenon, which means that it involves elements that change over time. When many different quantities are growing simultaneously in a system, however, and when all the quantities are interrelated in a complicated way, analysis of the causes of growth and of the future behavior of the system becomes very difficult indeed.
On a world average the gain around the positive feedback loop (fertility) has decreased only slightly while the gain around the negative feedback loop (mortality) is decreasing. If we continue to succeed in lowering mortality with no better success in lowering fertility than we have accomplished in the past, in 60 years (the 2030s) there will be four people in the world for every one person living today.
The more capital there is, the more wears out on the average each year; and the more that wears out, the less there will be the next year. This negative feedback loop is exactly analogous to the death rate loop in the population system. As in the population system, the positive loop is strongly dominant in the world today, and the world's industrial capital stock is growing exponentially.
Interest rate: a constant that determines the speed of the process in case of exponential growth. The higher the interest rate the faster the amount of money in the bank increases.
The process of economic growth, as it is occurring today, is inexorably widening the absolute gap between the rich and the poor nations of the world. ("The rich get richer and the poor get children.")
Limits to Growth: Introduction
Outline:
U Thant: a Burmese diplomat and the third secretary-general of the United Nations from 1961 to 1971.
A model, according to the authors, is an ordered set of assumptions about a complex system; an attempt to understand some aspect of the infinitely varied world by selecting from perceptions and past experience a set of general observations applicable to the problem at hand.
There are three types of models distinguished in the text: mental models, physical models, mathematical models.
The world model, elaborated by the authors, is a mathematical model built specifically to investigate five major trends of global concern. The model was constructed to understand the causes of these trends, their interrelationships, and their implications as much as one hundred years in the future.
The major global concerns are accelerating industrialization, rapid population growth, widespread malnutrition, depletion of nonrenewable resources, and a deteriorating environment.
The authors' predictions: 1) If the present growth trends continue unchanged, the limits to growth on this planet will be reached within the next one hundred years. The most probable result will be a rather sudden and uncontrollable decline in both population and industrial capacity. 2) It is possible to alter these growth trends and to establish a condition of ecological and economic stability that is sustainable far into the future. The state of global equilibrium could be designed so that the basic material needs of each person on earth are satisfied and each person has an equal opportunity to realize his individual human potential. 3) If the world's people decide to strive for this second outcome rather than the first, the sooner they begin working to attain it, the greater will be their chances of success.
The Origin of "Limits to Growth" - Interview with Dennis Meadows
Outline:
Can planet Earth still be saved or is it too late?
MIT, 50 years ago
The Club of Rome members are politicians scientists economists financial experts and writers from around the world. Their common aim is concern and responsibility for humanity's future. The CoR is trying to find out how our life on Earth will develop and how to ensure a future worth living
A team of 16 people worked for almost 2 years
Limits to Growth is the summary of a complex study on the key question what will our future look like if the world population keeps growing and industrialization pollution food production and exploitation of natural resources continue
Meadows team simulated the seemingly limitless growth in a complicated computer model with revolutionary results what we said is that exponential growth will take us to the limits very soon (in 21 century)
The unabated use of oil and natural resources clearing of forests and overfishing will result in the extinction of species and the disappearance of landscapes our planet can only take so many harmful emissions like CO2 without any long-term damage so there are limits to what our planet can endure without grave consequences
All ecological movements founded in the 70s used limits to growth as the basis of their reasoning
Meadows: absolutely no possibility of avoiding collapse. Globally we are something like 60-70% above sustainable levels even making very optimistic calculations about what is sustainable
Absolutely impossible to continue this level of energy consumption and this degree of material welfare neither in Germany, nor in the United States, nor in other countries. We could change our cultural and social norms in a way that gave an attractive future, BUT we don't choose it
The leaders of the west of the industrials are desperately trying to do everything they can to maintain the current situation so that means there we won't avoid the collapse
Why "anthropocene"? Actually, what is it?
In 2000 Paul J. Crutzen and Eugene F. Stoermer proposed the term “anthropocene” as an appropriate name for the new geological epoch, stating that “the impacts of current human activities ... will remain a major geological force for many millennia”.
The tone of their article is quite optimistic – it implies that humanity will deal with this challenge. They end their article with the following message: “To develop a world-wide accepted strategy leading to sustainability of ecosystems against human induced stresses will be one of the great future tasks of mankind, requiring intensive research efforts and wise application of the knowledge thus acquired in ... information society. An exciting, but also difficult and daunting task lies ahead of the global research and engineering community to guide mankind towards global, sustainable, environmental management.”
At the moment, there is no well-established consensus among scientists on what historical point deserves to be considered as the beginning of the Anthropocene era. The beginning of European colonization, the industrialization of Western economies, and the invention of the atomic bomb are the most likely candidates. This discussion is worthless, to be honest – anyway, we can agree that it began with the advent of Modernity. What is much more important is the discussion about the measures we can take to make our co-existence with nature more harmonious and sustainable than it is.
Like Crutzen and Stoermer, many scientists still share techno-optimistic ideas in relation to environmental disasters and the future of humanity. However, the situation is just getting worse and worse. Even scientific authority does not convince people who are impactful in mass production and state policy to promote urgent and radical systemic changes. The reason is discouragingly banal: the global restructuring of the economy and politics is not beneficial for the elites. Nobody wants to lose either power or wealth.
I am not eagerly against the idea of progress as such. But I insist that technical progress is not saving and, moreover, it is ultimately destructive when separated from progress in social justice. The ecological issue is, first of all, a political issue.
Literature:
Paul J. Crutzen, and Eugene F. Stoermer, The Anthropocene in "Global change newsletter." (2000), 17-18.
Hello! I'm Violetta, a SAS student from the sociology & anthropology major. I'm primarily interested in political sociology/anthropology. This blog page was created to reflect my thoughts and my progression during the Limits to Exponential Growth course run by prof Liz Pásztor (May - June 2021). However, I intend to continue posting here relevant texts and materials after the end of the course.