Modernization cannot continue

Discussion in 'Science & Society' started by darksidZz, Jun 13, 2011.

  1. scheherazade Northern Horse Whisperer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,798
    Two good posts, Me-Ki-Gal.

    You make abundantly clear that there is actually a danger in protecting the land from it's natural cycles. Very few people comprehend that every ecosystem has it's own unique lifespan. When the old growth forests become over mature, they are at risk for attack by insect pests like bark beetles and the intensity of forest fire that will delay regeneration.

    I live within the urban interface and there has been a restriction of firewood cutting and a policy of fighting all wildfires within the perimeter, so the buildup of over-mature trees and windfall is of huge concern where you have a lot of spruce and lodge-pole, pine, and an arid climate.

    Forest fire is our greatest potential for disaster in most of the Yukon.

    We need to rethink our relationship with the planet because I do not perceive current practices to be sustainable.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Stoniphi obscurely fossiliferous Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,256
    I also respect you, Mi - Ki.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    You make many good points and I enjoy your sense of humor.

    Animal power, wood burning power, coal burning power, oil burning power, hydroelectric power, wind and tides - these are ALL solar energy in one form or another. Figuring out how to move to direct use of the suns output is the challenge, but it is very doable if we are motivated enough. A very good first step IMHO would be merely to increase our efficiency. Add some insulation in the eaves and your heat bill goes down. Add ridge and soffet vents and you won't get ice damming any more so you don't need to replace/repair your roof.

    At noon in the middle of the Sahara desert, there is 100 Watts of sunlight falling on every square foot of sand...for free. If you could harvest, store and ship that energy you could help solve the energy problem. We are very close to being able to do this now.

    The entire second floor exterior wall of my Southern exposure is covered with type 3 (sorry I mistyped that earlier) passive solar collector. It contributes significantly to my winter heating needs as it vents into my second floor studio and office, I work at home so I am the main heat user in the winter. On a sunny day the furnace does not need to run at all and the temps in here are in the 70's F.

    Chimpies' link shows how simple solar can be too. I didn't read through the whole thing, but it appears to be a type 1 passive system that I have encountered before. Type 2 is more efficient and type 3 is most efficient of the passive wall - mounted solar systems I have seen. The weak point on all of them is the backdraft damper. I have been using off-the-shelf dampers, but am in the process of inventing one that is much more efficient for locking down the system. The prototype seems to function properly at this time, though I am still tweaking the switching module. I do not want it to use any power for any part of its function other than the solar input, it is completely passive and manually operated.

    As part of the current rebuild using now - available materials that had not been invented 32 years ago I will be adding remote sensor thermometers so I can record the temps at the intake and output dampers across the whole 30 foot wall as the days progress. That should give me a better handle on its actual heat production. Replacing the exterior wood with aluminum and pvc and the galvanized screws/washers with stainless steel should make it more serviceable over the decades.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Stoniphi obscurely fossiliferous Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,256
    On another note: I want to see some of those 'high rise greenhouses' in our urban centers. That would address several problems at once. I would throw in catfish and crayfish farms as well, for similar reason and purpose.

    Human population density will have to be addressed proactively or "nature" will likely do so for us.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    The only inexhaustible energy source is the sun. Effectively inexhaustible, to be precise, since the earth's maximum population is limited by our waste heat and wouldn't make a dent in the sun's output.

    We need to build giant solar collectors in high orbit and beam the energy to earth safely in microwaves. Unfortunately that project will require international cooperation on a scale and timetable that mankind has never achieved.

    So in the meantime we'll build more nuclear plants. There's no alternative. Terrestrial "renewable" energy sources aren't enough.
    As noted, solar energy can replace oil; the problem is in building the infrastructure. The technology of orbiting collectors was worked out more than forty years ago and requires no advances beyond our current level.

    Meanwhile nuclear will replace oil as the various governments argue over who's going to pay for the solar collectors. It's safe enough--Fukushima demonstrated that even last-generation nuclear technology can withstand two off-the-scale natural disasters without killing anybody. The long-term death rate from nuclear power will be somewhere in the percentile band with lightning and bee stings: risks nobody worries about.

    The real problem with nuclear power is waste disposal. If we can actually build those solar collectors within the next couple of centuries the total volume of nuclear waste generated while we're waiting for them will be small enough to be managed with acceptably low risk. But if we fail to plan, and wind up using nuclear power forever, then of course we'll have a problem. Nuclear waste lasts many times longer than the total duration of civilization, which has arguably been on the brink of collapse a couple of times. It's foolish to believe that we can protect people fifty thousand years from now who may not be able to read our signs, understand our warnings, or even understand how any technology beyond a stone axe works.
    That would have been true 100 years ago. The Industrial Revolution is behind us and the Industrial Era is drawing to a close. The Electronic Revolution is in full swing and we are already in the Information Age. Computer technology is making obsolete the old paradigm of "bigger is better." Huge concentrations of capital are no longer necessary for most infrastructural projects, e.g., no forest of telephone poles for cellphone networks, no twelve-lane freeways for people who "go to work" on the computer in their living room, no proliferation of fast-food joints for people who are home for meals and have time to cook, no smoke-belching factories for the one-off "manufacturing" runs of instantly configurable CAD/CAM systems.

    You see this all around you already. American corporations are changing from producers to scavengers, buying up each other's rotting carcasses in a desperate attempt to stay in business for a few more quarters until they, too, go belly-up. Meanwhile the son of a friend of mine and his wife emigrated to Estonia and started up a successful software house--with nothing more than their life savings.

    A few giant corporations like Microsoft, AT&T and FedEx comprise the infrastructure of the post-industrial economy and they will continue to prosper, but corporations as a voting bloc of "artificial persons" will no longer dominate politics, as the "aristocracy" of the democratic era.
    I don't think renewables will be able to power civilization. But we'll wait and see. The post-industrial economy will require much less energy than its predecessor and (as I will point out a few lines down) the population will soon begin to shrink.
    You're about thirty years behind the information curve. The second derivative of population went negative around 1980 and the first derivative is universally predicted to do the same sometime before (or only slightly after) the end of this century. Population will peak just barely into eleven digits, and then start falling for the first time in tens of thousands of years.

    The problem we will have to face is one that no one is even thinking about. Every economic system since Adam Smith has relied on a steady increase in the number of producers and consumers as the engine that drives prosperity. When population starts to decrease, everything we know about business, economics and government will be obsolete. Couple this with the fact that the average age will be much higher than it has been, and that we older folks have different needs, desires and attitudes, and we're looking at a wrenching change in the makeup of civilization.

    On the plus side, this will surely mean an end to war. Older people are, in general, less hot-headed and have more experience learning how to resolve disagreements or simply letting them go. Moreover, when we do start wars we send you youngsters to do the fighting, but when young people are rare and precious we'll be reluctant to "waste" them as cannon fodder.

    I'll let your imaginations run rampant thinking up what goes on the minus side. But you need to start worrying about actual forthcoming problems, rather than assuming that the world will always be like it is today, and finding clever ways to solve the problems of the Industrial Era.
     
  8. scheherazade Northern Horse Whisperer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,798
    Originally posted by Fraggle Rocker
    An economic system that fairly addresses the needs of all the planet's residents rather than the privileged 5% or so who presently use the greater percentage of the resources to proliferate their continued advantage.

    Now that would be a change worthy of our assumed stature as a civilized species, IMO.
     
  9. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    Unfortunately, your techno-grandiose schemes will fail to the economic collapse driven by peak oil. Nuclear is now out due to safety issues and it's huge cost vs. cost of cleanup when they fail. No one will want to insure them. Solar energy is basically electrical, and we don't have the grid to support widespread use, it isn't even on the drawing board much less the budget. Agriculture, construction, mining and manufacturing depends on diesel power, again no viable alternative in the near future.

    The clear solution is managed contraction, re-emphasis on agriculture using sustainable tools, probably manpower for the most part, possibly the reintroduction of working animals, and contraction of our towns around rail and water transit hubs. Wars over resources will increase, the federal system of government will become increasingly irrelevant. We will not be as prosperous as we were, but we will survive.
     
  10. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    Solar energy is expensive, at least in the beginning. The end of cheap energy will also mean the end of all the infrastructure that brings your those solar panels relatively cheaply. This also means that the increasing numbers of those left behind will be unable to access this resource. No doubt their resentment at the loss of their "non-negotiable" way of life will bring you right into their cross hairs (oh yeah, they can afford that).
     
  11. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    33,264
    While many countries are charging their citizens anywhere from 4.00 to 18.00 US per gallon for gasoline there are some countries that do not such as Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and a few others that produce much of their own oil. I'd think that before the cost of gas becomes overbearing upon a society that the government will step in and take control over those gas industries that are only trying to gouge the citizens and are only wanting more profits for greed not upkeep or cost of living expenses for its workers. I believe that unless a government doesn't step in and prevent the downfall of its society it to will become so corrupt that it won't care at all about what the needs of its citizens are but only will lookout for the rich and powerful to override the freedoms of the citizens to control them completely. I also think America is heading this direction and soon will be under the total control of businesses and their needs not its private citizens and what they need.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  12. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    Give people a choice between the risk of nuclear power and reversion to the pre-industrial era when 99.99% of the population was doomed to careers in the production and distribution of food??? They'll vote for the risk every time!

    As I already pointed out, more people are killed by lightning and bees than by nuclear powerplant accidents. If you multiply the number of nuclear powerplants by 100 then you'll probably elevate the risk to the level of household falls--which are a major cause of death that absolutely nobody worries about.

    If you're an American you're talking to people who accept ten thousand deaths a year from drunk driving, because not one of them wants to give up his own right to drive drunk by having a breathalyzer interlock installed in every new car for about $200.

    Nuclear power plants? Build them suckers! Right now!
     
  13. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    Production of food can be a rewarding occupation, at least it's honest.
     
  14. Me-Ki-Gal Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,634
    Spidey death and doom my buddy . I am afraid you are right . The economic ponzi scheme is coming to a close in our life time I believe . Thinks have been speeding up tremendously. You know as I make my rise to the top parallel events are mirroring my action , or I am mirroring the events . I can't tell Spidey for it seems like sometimes I come first and other times the events come first . Maybe when I come first it is because of the tip off . Like in basket Ball . Something or someone tips it off to Me . Maybe more of a sensory perception like animals and the electrical potential plane.
    Horses and ploughs probably , over Man power yes ! Pickers will be humans . You can tell by the general rhetoric this is true .

    So lets address population decline. A flaw in Fraggkle rock . The Plague . When did it start 1350 is that about right ? About the same time as the Minni Ice Age. So the world was in decline from the massive deaths . I imagine it happened pretty fast . Will the next catastrophic decline happen fast like that ? I don't know for sure ? I know the baby boomer 2nd. wave bubble happened in 1976 . That is what I understand to be the peak of boomer children mini bubble . So the thought is it is all down hill from there . I know it will continue to swell and that number is not quite set in stone for the variables have not been fully comprehended. I believe it will happen sooner than Fraggle thinks . If the world emerges faster out of third world statues that would have a dramatic influence on the equation . The information age is awakening many many peoples world wide . That has to have an impact too . Most of the people are waking up to the idea of over population so you can see the implications of the new paradigm whole wide world thinking unfolding . The brakes are being put on heavy duty. Mother nature is also doing her part also by lower fertility in human populations ( appears to be harder for the average woman to get pregnant ) Things are speeding up from my vantage point . We know this is true with existing information silos falling. Fuck it is a brand new Day , Can you feel it . The Crackle in the air . Shit it is exciting as hell to be on the cusp of change
     
  15. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    Absolutely - no doubt about it. HOWEVER, you've not thought this through to any real depth. Although I truly favor family farms over the corporate monsters, there's a *lot* to be said for economy of scale.

    Another is the ability to make it through a series of successive bad years. A big company has deep pockets and operates in several different locations at the same time. A family farm, however, has limited resources, is tied to a SINGLE location, and two bad crop years in a row is about enough to totally ruin them. Out of business, bankrupt and starving.

    In another of your posts you talk about the possibility of returning to working animals on farms. I honestly think you have no idea of the problems that would introduce into the production of food. For just one thing, it would require a HUGE increase in human labor. Very few people today could even guess just how much time and effort it requires of a farmer to employ horses/mules in working a farm. (Small hint: ever heard of people working from before daylight till after dark? And that's just one of many things involved.)
     
  16. Me-Ki-Gal Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,634
    Spidey You are fucking on top of it bro . The Farmer is going to be the new rock star if people want to eat . Man you are seeing the future dude . Hells Bells you making the future
     
  17. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    This isn't just something I think is a good idea, it will be the only option left open to us.
     
  18. Me-Ki-Gal Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,634
    Ah yeah , Did it , doing it , going to do it again . Dairy farmers 24/7 is the same thing and that is with automation involved .
    Family farms . Now that is a thought . This is the existing scenario right now. Right now ! Right Now . OLd Man dies leaves farm to the kids . Kids don't like Farming . Kids want urban life style sold as bill of goods by smart growth ideology . Plus one or 2 kids that have the gumption can't cover the cost of the other kids buy out . besides Inheritance tax and property taxes .
    Farm Fire Sale .
    A. Developer who turns it to housing tracts or mini ranches to support the old American dream . ( THis is dead by way of existing economies in progress, People in Denial hold out thinking this will change back to glory days any time )
    B. Sell to corporate farm entities.


    Corporation and Administration will rule with there Iron fist,
    Are we smart enough to stay free
    Corporation will control world resourses
    Are we smart enough to stay free

    O.K. progressives so far you have not really touched Big corporation with the attack on the beast. The winners by default of government protection has been insulated from the mayhem . The scape goat is small business. Listen very close to what I am saying . I was already banned for talking about this . I know I am not clear a lot of the time ( do I have to say it Dyslexia bad dyslexia ) You are punishing small businesses that have worked there fucking lives away for what appears to be nothing . They are being systematically stripped of there retirement wealth. The whole reason they busted there asses 24/7 ( for that is what it takes to run a successful product driven small business that employees 100 or less employees ) I picked that number by other peoples analysis , so don't hold me to that number . It could be 50 employees or even 20. The point is people like this do it because they believe in there product and they feel a responsibility to there localized community. They are the ones being punished by agendas all hands down . Businesses like this will continue to close .
     
  19. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,646
    Yep. And after the beginning, they are free for decades.

    Agreed. We will need to rely on other sources of energy, like . . . solar. There is already a solar panel plant powered by solar that does not need any net energy input. Will energy be more expensive? Yep. No way around that.

    I have a feeling that the people providing the power to let others live their lives at a fairly opulent level (compared to the rest of the world) will be relatively respected. Compare them to the people who are charging them $30 a gallon for gas while also killing off fisheries through oil spills - who do you think will be more "in the crosshairs?"
     
  20. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,646
    We don't have a widespread power grid? I'd check out the window. Here in San Diego we're putting in new distribution to get solar power from Imperial Valley to San Diego. Many other utilities are doing similar things.

    Biogas, coal gas and biodiesel are all proven options.

    I agree with a gradual return to more local production of food; this is starting to happen already. We get most of our food from a CSA. We will also see a return to more organic methods of farming. However, animal power just doesn't make sense; you need acres of forage to maintain an acre of land, and it just makes more sense to use power to do things like irrigate, till and harvest. The only time it really does make sense is when you have no alternatives.

    Governmental power always increases during wartime. "Support the troops!" "We need secrecy to WIN THE WAR on terror." "Why not sacrifice a little of your XYZ? So many soldiers are sacrificing everything for you."
     
  21. Me-Ki-Gal Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,634
    15 to maybe 20 years on photo voltaic cells . Expensive is right ! California has been working on this for some time . I saw a plan 35 years ago were P.G. &E was in the process of implementing then and Rancho Saco the nuclear plant was shut down do to public fear and solar panels were placed on the site that powered about 400 houses . The plan was to finance solar operations and have the public pay it off over the next several 100 years and in that way they would control market share for a long time. I don't know what exactly happened with the plan , but I am thinking that the brake down of solar equipment was not anticipated at that time for the thought then was a one time fee and then free power was indefinite. I get the feeling the equipment had not stood the test of time yet , for it was the early days in the technology. I am sure the early versions broke down even faster than the 15 to 20 year life expectancy now given in warranties by producers. You know it takes butt loads of energy to separate pure silicone out from Iron elements . I don't know ? Maybe it has become easier by now , or other methods have developed , or other raw materials have replaced the some of the older methods . I know it is still a developing industry and am sure it is heavily subsidized. That will go by by as government debt weighs heavy on government bureaucracies. Like Spidey has predicted a few posts back
     
  22. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    If this paradigm worked, we would have invested in mass transit already so we would not be dependent on fossil fuels. But we all know preparing in advance for environmental and energy emergencies is not something we do well in America.
    I don't believe there is a solar panel plant that runs only on solar. Do you forget the R&D that led up to building that factory? Or the trucks that delivered the materials to the site and distribute the end product, or the affluent society that supports an education system that produced the solar panel designers? There are many functions that solar power cannot reproduce.



    That's my point, the mere production of solar electricity will not lead to an opulent level of existence. Every source of energy other than light sweet crude requires a contraction in the scale of our society.
     
  23. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    Our grid is barely able to keep up with present loads. If you are suggesting that electricity replace everything we do now with fossil fuel, our grid is inadequate.



    All smaller scale than what we do now, or saddled with their own environmental issues.




    We won't have viable alternatives. Ever see a solar powered farm tractor? Neither have I.


    Who says it will be our government against another government? War is increasingly between non-governmental agencies. Read "The Transformation of War" by Clausewitz. What if the war is a civil war?
     

Share This Page