Marc, Dr. Nering made no claims or stipulations about population growth in his analogy. Rather, he used actual estimated increases in global energy consumption. The 5% growth per annum which he "assumed" is a global reality. Whether the percentage remains, increases or decreases from 5% was not his primary point.
(Mind you, if the percentage changes, it will be by human choices, no matter what direction it turns.) The increase in global consumption is not only due to population increase, but flat out consumption increase by other countries adopting western "uncivilization" consumption patterns. There is no reason to fault his example. It is accurate two fold - both in the analogy of exponential growth and the basic concept of finite resource consumption. Take note: He did not pull a Nostradamus and predict the year, day or hour of the last wheeze. He simply took some of the fossil fuel industry's best guesses, incorporated statistical growth rates and extrapolated what is as real of a possibility as anything anyone else can provide. Pray tell how is that wrong? It's actually quite an impressive way to teach a calculus problem, all the while addressing real world problems. I doubt if any of his students will ever forget it. Todd Appal Energy [EMAIL PROTECTED] > This article makes the Malthusian error of assuming that a quantity will > continue to grow along a simple exponential, when in fact real living > systems always level off through interaction with others. > > Using the same simplistic, pseudo-scientific arguments, one can easily > "prove" that Mankind is already extinct. > > Very silly - and discredits the idea of resource conservation when the > kids realize that the argument is bogus. Glad I didn't have this guy for > a teacher. > > Marc de Piolenc Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
