Friends, I recommend taking a look at this article on the social aspect of climate adaptation. http://grist.org/climate-energy/understanding-the-social-limits-of-adaptation
Though Friedman believes we won't drive ourselves extinct, as usual it will be the poor who die first. Gay On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Karl S North <[email protected]>wrote: > Jon and others, > > Alice Freidman <http://energyskeptic.com/>, a frequent writer on the > subject of energy descent, makes a case against extinction (reprinted > below). Guy makes an apparently strong argument ( I have read a lot of his > writing and heard him speak several times). But because of the complexity > of the planetary socio-ecological system, I don't think we as a species > know enough to say whether Alice's scenario or Guy's is more likely. > > We forget how little we know about how social systems behave in such > extraordinary circumstances. Despite many important lessons from the > historical record (all previous major civilizations have collapsed or been > consolidated), industrial civilization has happened only once, so there is > no historical example to learn from. It might decline quite differently > from the others. > > We also forget how little grasp we really have of the planetary > geophysical and climate systems. As an example, the repeated failure of the > combined scientific clout of the IPCC was not enough to grasp the full > dynamic complexity of climate change, so they had to published repeated > revisions of their predictions. > > My study of systems science tells me that we can obtain a better > understanding of the rough outlines of change in complex systems like ours > (the "what" - energy descent leading to economic decline, etc. in the > present case ) than we can of the "how" or especially the "when". From > that perspective, I think it is important to identify various probable > scenarios to help direct education and action, but keep a somewhat open > mind as to which is "right or wrong". > > I hope this helps, > > -- > Karl North - http://karlnorth.com/ > "Pueblo que canta no morira" - Cuban saying > "They only call it class warfare when we fight back" - Anon. > "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son > will ride a camel." > —Saudi saying > > ********* > > *The case against extinction* > > I think the end of fossil fuels and all that they enable us to do, > including microchips and global supply chains, has a 95-98% chance of > saving us from extinction because: > > 1. Carbon dioxide and methane will start to go down due to peak oil and > coal (Hart, Heinberg, Höök, Nel, Patzek), and natural gas *Shale Oil and > Gas Will Not Save > Us.*<http://energyskeptic.com/2012/shale-oil-and-gas-will-not-save-us/> > > 2. Our ability to do any kind of harm to any resource will diminish > drastically once oil and oil equivalent fuels diminish because so many > large vehicles and any other equipment with combustion engines won't > operate any more: > > - farm tractors will no longer compress and erode topsoil (or grow > enough food to feed 7+ billion people) > - earth moving machines will no longer harvest coal and other minerals > and metals > - our roads, bridges, airports, and docks will last less than 100 > years > > <http://energyskeptic.com/2013/enough-energy-left-to-rebuild-concrete-infrastructure/>because > we didn't build anything with cement to last over a century (unlike Roman > cement, which is still going strong). We won't have the energy to rebuild > or maintain most of our infrastructure > - It will be much harder to chop down (rain)forests with roads > crumbling and large trucks gone > - There won't be ships that can go to the ends of the earth to harvest > the last schools of fish. Marine reserves have often restored fish > populations faster than anyone expected. > - due to lack of fuel, future world wars or world war on the scale of > WWI & II will not be possible. Wars will be far more local, more like > pre-WWI. > - Although biodiversity loss will probably increase initially as > anyone with a gun goes out hunting, that's likely to change because the > people who live where hunters can get to on foot or bicycle will defend > their territory. The same goes for fishing and foraging. > > 3. The book "The Earth Without Us" gives me great hope that the earth will > recover rather rapidly. > > 4. In 2075 when sea levels start to rise, so many people will have already > died off from the decline in fossil fuels that there will be plenty of room > for coastal dwellers to move to > > 5. The loss of our ability to make > microchips<http://energyskeptic.com/preservation-of-knowledge/>and breakdown > in supply chains will be nearly as important as the loss of > oil in rapidly changing civilization back to wood-based energy, and also > increase the rate and numbers of people dying. > > I don't want to diminish the suffering and tragedy of between 3 and 7 > billion people dying, of climate change wreaking harm for thousands of > years, and the loss of much of the amazing scientific understanding we have > of the world since so much of it is being preserved digitally instead of on > a more permanent physical substance (i.e. imprinted on thin metal sheets, > etc). > > Even though even a small nuclear > war<http://energyskeptic.com/2011/nuclear-winter/>would kill over 1 billion > people, and a nuclear > EMP <http://energyskeptic.com/2011/em/>even more, the ozone would recover > after 5 years, many people around the equator will be fine, others will > have stockpiled enough food to get by. > > All of the 9 planetary > boundaries<http://energyskeptic.com/2011/9-planetery-boundaries/>will > diminish as human population declines from lack of fossil fuels. Peak > phosphorous will come even sooner without fossil-fuel driven vehicles and > equipment to harvest and transport it. > > This is too big a topic to list every factor and how it might turn out as > you can see from the menu items in Decline and Collapse at > energyskeptic.com. Yes, extinction is a possibility if too many of these > happen at once over just a few centuries. > But since both human population and energy resources are likely to decline > exponentially rather quickly, we won't be able to do the harm we are now, > to the planet or ourselves, and that has a good chance of saving us from > extinction. > > Alice Friedemann > > References > > Hart, Phil. 15 Nov 2010. Oil Demand to Decline in the West, according to > International Energy Agency. http://anz.theoildrum.com/node/7114 > > Heinberg, R., Fridley, D. The end of cheap coal. New forecasts suggest > that coal reserves will run out faster than many believe. Nature 468, > 367-369 (18 November 2010) doi:10.1038/468367a > > Höök, M., Sivertsson, A. & Aleklett, K. "Validity of the fossil fuel > production outlooks in the IPCC Emission Scenarios" Natural Resources > Research, 2010, Vol. 19, Issue 2: 63-81 > > Nel and Cooper (2009) Implications of fossil fuel constraints on economic > growth and global warming, Energy Policy 37: 166-180. > > Patzek, T, Croft, G. A global coal production forecast with multi-Hubbert > cycle analysis. Energy 35 (2010) 3109e3122 > > > > > > > > > -- ---------------------------------------------------- Gay Nicholson, Ph.D. President Sustainable Tompkins 109 S. Albany St. Ithaca, NY 14850 www.sustainabletompkins.org 607-533-7312 (home office) 607-220-8991 (cell) 607-216-1552 (ST office) 607-216-1553 (ST fax) [email protected] For more information about sustainability in the Tompkins County area, please visit: http://www.sustainabletompkins.org/ If you have questions about this list please contact the list manager, Tom Shelley, at [email protected].
