When Peak Oil and Peak Population Implode the Earth
seamy underbelly of politics.His understanding of politics comes from
his former insider status. Now he's telling it all. This site may push you
over the edge, so bring your patience; and an open mind.
Truth Always - from a European Yank's view.
of this text, to get a complete picture of the info presented here.
Mobs will rule the streets in the nation that is now the third largest in the world right behind China and India, and unable to support its population except by taking resources from other countries.
of industrial civilization is about 100 years.
(1979) all time peak of world energy production per capita
(1999) the end of cheap oil
(2000) eruption of violence in the Middle East
(2006) all-time peak in world oil production
(2008) OPEC crossover when more than 50% of oil comes from the OPEC nations
(2012) permanent blackouts spread worldwide
(2030) world energy production falls to 1930 level
Future dates may vary but it is easy to see how, with the knowledge we have of peak oil, the world could slip into a Medieval or even Stone Age scenario. Even a Dark Ages world would be difficult to sustain with no coal and little wood to burn.
We are so dependent on energy that, unless we find some alternatives to hydrocarbon energy generation pretty quickly, we will find ourselves without the time or energy to switch.
As oil ceases to be cheap and the world reserves are toward depletion, we will indeed suddenly be left with an enormous surplus population that the ecology of the earth will not support. No political program of birth control will avail.
The people are already here. The journey back to non-oil population homeostasis will not be pretty. We will discover the hard way that population hypergrowth was simply a side effect of the oil age. It was a condition, not a problem with a solution. That is what happened and we are stuck with it.
The earth’s long-term population carrying capacity is between 0.5 billion and 2.0 billion people This vital but media taboo subject is detailed as follows:
For those who long for the good old days of a sub-billion population, it is useful to note that the only path to that end is for many billion people now alive to become dead, even if not one baby were to be born in the next thirty years.”
- Dr. Ross McCluney, Principal Research Scientist at the Florida Solar Energy Center, put it bluntly, “My warning of today: We are systematically taking apart the life support system of Planet Earth. We’ve exceeded the sustainable carrying capacity of the planet by a factor of 3. For everyone to live like the average North American it would take three Earths.”
- Lindsey Grant, author of The Collapsing Bubble: Growth and Fossil Energy and the former U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Environment and Population Affairs, states, “The population of the less developed world has grown by two-thirds since 1950—and they were poor in 1950. The need for a fundamental shift in the ratio of resources to people in the poor countries may itself justify an optimum world population figure of one billion. Barring a catastrophe, it might take centuries to reach such figures, even with a determined worldwide effort.”
- Dale Allen Pfeiffer, author of Eating Fossil Fuels: Oil, Food and the Coming Crisis in Agriculture, writes, “Studies suggest that without fossil fuel based agriculture, the U.S. could only sustain about two thirds of its present population. For the planet as a whole, the sustainable number is estimated to be about two billion.”
- Paul Thompson, author of The Twilight of the Modern World: The Four Stages of the Post Oil Breakdown, describes the final stages of collapse, “Sooner or later, all the remains of our existing society will have gone, to become weed-clad ruins to rival those of the Aztecs and Mayans.
By now, everybody who is unable to convert to a sustainable, self-sufficient lifestyle would have died off, leaving only those living in independent communities to continue human history.
The world population may have fallen to as few as a thousand million, scattered in oases of agricultural land amongst deserts of buildings, rusting vehicles and forests.”
- Colin J. Campbell, gently but firmly sums it up: “We will have to change the way we live as oil production declines toward eventual exhaustion. I stress that it is the onset of terminal decline that is more relevant than the end of oil itself. It is not too soon to start thinking about what that may entail.”
*Peak of Oil Production the Road to Gorge Olduvai
*Gorge Olduvai
*The Olduvai theory states ...
Peak Oil Now, Oil Perhaps to $300
Peak Oil
The Richard Heinberg Interview Part 1
The Richard Heinberg Interview Part 2
Crude Impact: Proof of Peak Oil
Peak Oil, Peak Coal, and Beyond
Peak Oil and US-Geopolitics
Will peak oil cause a recession or depression?
Peak Oil - 45min. documentary
Again, I'm planning on using my comment on your site as the basis of a post on the RLCC site.
Hello EuroYank and All,
Greed is the problem and not that there are no human beings with the gift of ingenuity to bring forth truly clean, safe, alternative energy in greater supply than ever supplied by the oil industry. That said, many of the dire and urgent warnings in your post and cited-and-linked references are still valuable. I have written myself about the population explosion and peak oil.
While I don't hold with the view of many libertarian capitalists that the Club of Rome is any worse than are those libertarians (the Club of Rome being severely ridiculed by certain anti-NWO types (Austrian School types for one) for worrying about unbridled population growth), I do though hold that technology developed solely out of a pure spirit of unselfishness is not inherently evil (is not an iteration of Nimrod's Tower of Babel). It's not the end-all-be-all, but it's not sin. I do believe metaphysical provisioning is there for the truly worthy.
I say all of this, because certain of the libertarians simply claim that selfish, capitalist technology to come will take care. Well, that's the "clean-coal" (no such thing, so far) hope. Why bother even trying though when there are so many obviously better choices? The reason is those who are already heavily invested in the coal supply-and-use chain. Also, we've seen what the technology of Monsanto has been doing – causing diseases and backfiring by aiding in rapid mutation (yes Darwin and more importantly Gregor Johann Mendel) for resistant pests, etc. The promises of Monsanto are all backfiring, because they are greedy. The greedy spirit cannot bring forth good. It's impossible. A rotten tree with a rotten root does not produce good and delicious and healthy, wholesome fruit fit for human consumption – physical or spiritual.
If we were as one human race (which we are) to come together in the spirit of humble, loving service, there is no doubt in my mind that the answers would be supplied. The only blockage is selfishness that runs to hyper-greed. It is the private-profit motive that is the devouring spirit. It's the spirit of usury. It's the spirit of mammon and the medium of exchange versus just plain giving, as Jesus fed the five thousand from love absent all hypocrisy.
There is no real love in capitalism or any system of mundane money such as the U.S. dollar. Its mindset is short term. Most of the tycoons of the 1920's didn't give a damn about the people inheriting the Earth of 2009. They got theirs in the 1920's and on, are dead now, and not in Heaven, as a direct consequence of their spirits and deeds (including gross, intentional negligence).
I'm surprised you aren't inundated by anti-environmentalists. Are they just not commenting, or are you killing their comments because they are so stupid (you did write that you wouldn't allow dumb comments)? Of course, if you don't allow dumb comments, you don't get to refute them and thereby show your readers how to do that.
The problem with opening the floodgates is knowing how and when to control them and to shut them off when they refuse to be convicted by a working conscience and just want to swamp a discussion with no debating rules. Many of them so far have actually refused to the bitter end to develop a working conscience. It gets in the way of private profits at the direct, negative expense of everyone else, as your more recent post clearly demonstrates. The rich get richer (in unrighteous mammon; hardly richer in the eternal spirit of righteousness) while the poor get poorer.
This is a good post: Deserves credit on its level. I use the term "good" in the mundane here. Only one is good who is our Father (no sexism intended) in the real, New Heaven. I know this is not lost on you, EuroYank.
Blessings,
Tom Usher
The Christian Commons Project