Quote:
|
Pollution is nothing but the resources we are not harvesting. We allow them to disperse because we've been ignorant of their value,
|
I agree with that one! Very "Cradle to Cradle" in the design sense.
However, I have to disagree on the 'not running out' thing. I understand that cost increases around the peak and then decline of resources. What do you think will happen to the American economy when oil 'suddenly' costs $300 a barrel in about 5 years... rationing during 10? The crisis hits not at the end of a resource's lifespan, but about half way when the conventional 'easy' reserves run out and the rest of the resource is non-conventional, not as densely packed, concentrated, and easy to extract. The rate of extraction peaks. The oil/metal/mineral in question can no longer meet demand. Prices rise... substitution for new products occurs, use of the product scales back... and industries transform or die.
What about this, based on 2% growth in consumption run from USGS reserves data?
Quote:
What will the world be like when we have run out of copper or steel? The average building today relies upon a great quantity of these resources for its construction. Faced with these facts, we can easily imagine a future in which industry has completely re-engineered its handling of material resources. After all, there seems to be no other choice.
1Brown, Lester, Plan B 2.0, New York: W. W. Norton, 2006. p. 109
|
Or read this
New Scientist article.
We need to be careful distinguishing between 'reserves' and 'resources'.
Reserves are what is economically extractable with today's technology. Resources are all the 'stuff' that is there, but may not be extractable at a cheap enough price to meet the large volume of demand.
Mining hydrogen from Jupiter is
not a
reserve, it's a
fantasy resource for now. I am talking about the end of all 'conventional reserves' of non-renewable minerals and metals —*and I'm afraid that unless a Star Trek 'Replicator' arrives in your daughter's lifetime, then it
probably is going to happen. A similar idea is flow rates to meet demand. All the Tar Sands and unconventional oil sources in the world are not going to stop 'peak oil' because they simply cannot be extracted fast enough. I'm shocked and amazed that Canada can do 1 million barrels a day from Tar Sands... that's AMAZING! AND they are talking about scaling it up to maybe 3 MILLION barrels of oil a day by 2015! That's utterly GOBSMACKING! Wow!
But the problem is that world demand for is expected to increase by at least 1mbd / year after 2010. Even tar sands amazing growth will pale into insignificance compared to the rising demand from India and China and of course the west's 2% exponential growth rate. Alternative, non-conventional gluggy foul high sulfur oil is simply not going to flow as fast as the conventional stuff, nor will it sell for the same cheap price. The age of cheap oil is over — the age of sweet oil is turning sour. It's just a fact. It doesn't mean the end of the world, the end of humanity or even the dieoff graph above, but it does mean huge changes starting within the next decade or so. They could be overwhelmingly
positive changes if the world got cracking in the right direction. I doubt it.
Democracy is too short sighted. I've briefed politicians on the scientific credibility of peak oil —*it's now pretty much mainstream science in Australia and about
50% of Aussie geologists believe we are already at peak oil right now... and will see the permanent decline soon. But the politicians are simply terrified of the idea of even mentioning the 2 words 'peak oil'. Our ABC has run a number of specials on peak oil, I've spoken with politicians about this, I know that every politician in Australia has had the data explained to them by experts... but they do nothing.
Catalyst: Real Oil Crisis - ABC TV Science
Four Corners Broadband Edition: Peak Oil
Crude - the incredible journey of oil - Broadband edition - ABC Science
So, back to the question I forgot to include in my post above (but edited in afterwards).
Quote:
|
How are we going to structure our finances in a 'steady state' economy?
|
