I don't think the point Mr. Czech discusses is quite a trivial truism, since one can point to cases where technological advances can indeed limit the consumption of resources, or otherwise lower environmental impact. For instance, LED lighting uses less engergy than incandescent lighting. Given that such cases exist, it is reasonable to ask how much, across the whole spectrum of technology and the economy, can technologies reduce environmental impact. Additionally, there may be technologies that actually mitigate environmental damage already inflicted. Thus, mathematically at least, it might make sense to speculate that environmental impact can be greatly reduced, if not set back to zero (and if there is a technological breakthrough that can substantially reduce human population, hey, maybe even to zero).
I think, however, that Mr. Czech does not use his thousand words very efficiently to make his point, since the article is rather too chatty and short on substance. Additionally his example of wrenches to tighten nuts is not very helpful and is based on a faulty understanding of the history of wrenches. The first wrenches were military tools used to twist the bars out of the portcullises of castles. These wrenches were of necessity open-end wrenches since the attackers had access the bars from the side; they couldn't count on sliding the wrench over the end of the bars, as one must do with a box-end wrench. Box-end wrenches became popular with the rise of the machine age, because in many cases the nuts and bolts of machines can be accessed from the end. These wrenches justify the name "box end" because they had a simple square of iron at the end of the iron rod that served as the handle. When hex nuts became popular, that gave rise to the six and twelve-point wrenches (whose nut-fitting part no longer looks like a box) that we today call box-end wrenches. However, the monkey wrench, which Mr. Czech implies was used first on nuts, was a later development than the box-end wrench because it has a relatively complex screw-based adjustment system that was much harder for a blacksmith to make than a simple box on a rod. The monkey wrench is probably a good example of a technological development that lowered environmental impact, because its adjustable nature let a mechanic have just a few wrenches instead of one for every possible nut size. Interesting, huh? Martin M. Meiss 2012/1/17 Neil Cummins <[email protected]> > All he attempts to persuade one of is that the planet has a limited amount > of resources and that therefore economic growth cannot continue > indefinitely. > > > > This just seems to be a trivial truism (whatever view one has of > technology, and even if one has no view whatsoever concerning technology!). > > > > The nature of what constitutes ‘environmental protection’ (which is itself > a contested and multi-faceted concept) and how this relates to > 'technological progress' is not even touched upon. > > > > Neil > > > > *An Evolutionary Perspective on the Relationship Between Humans and Their > Surroundings: Geoengineering, the Purpose of Life & the Nature of the > Universe * > > > > http://www.cranmorepublications.co.uk/50 > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 5:28 AM, Rob Dietz <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > See this week's Daly News feature, "Technological Progress for Dummies, > > Part > > II." In this column, also called "More than One Kind of Nut," Brian Czech > > explains in plain language why the conflict between economic growth and > > environmental protection cannot be reconciled by technological progress. > > Hold onto your ratchet! > > > > http://steadystate.org/technological-progress-for-dummies-part-ii/ > > > > Thanks, > > Rob > > >
