|
TUESDAYS — YOUR INBOX — ASSUREDLY
______________________________________________________________________
CURATED ECOLOGICAL NEWS
Can billions of people change behavior to avoid collapse?
“Humans are consuming our renewing resources like clean water and soil to exhaustion. We are too big for our ecological niche on earth. We are consuming fossil and uranium energy to exhaustion. The solar and wind renewable energy sources won’t be able to replace them. And we are dispersing our non renewing supports like phosphorous and rare earths to the point of lost utility.
Baring some technological breakthrough, the earth, at the end of this century will support a lot less people. Our population, according to UN projections might rise to 9 or 10 billion persons by 2050, after which, according to my calculations, might descend to 600 million who live like 17th century serfs. This decline, without extreme restrictions on births, will result from starvation or conflict deaths.
“Few want to believe my scenario. Most want to believe technology will make ‘tomorrow better than today’. When previous civilizations overshot regional and technological limitations and collapsed, they rebuilt themselves better than before. People believe they and their children will slip through this century’s bottleneck and be the survivors in the next even better civilization.
“My computations suggest only radical changes in human behavior resulting from a change in social organization can reduce overshoot to zero, avoid the tragedy, and implement an ever improving civilization. However, these changes appear too difficult to implement.” [click the link for the full article]
Richard Heinberg — phasing out petroleum extraction
“This year is the 20th anniversary of the publication of The Oil Depletion Protocol: a Plan to Avert Wars, Terrorism and Economic Collapse, by Richard Heinberg. It was based on the protocol designed by geologist Colin Campbell and later improved by Kjell Aleklett.
“The protocol basically aimed to design a system to make oil producing nations reduce their oil extraction rates by the global depletion rate of oil, which was roughly 3% per year at that time.
“When any non-renewable resource’s extraction is in the decline phase, capitalism is of no use. There must be regulation and plans for this decline in order to avoid very serious problems. However, even in the decline phase of resource extraction, capitalism has ways of finding a profit for the few, even if that means the immiseration of the many.
“The best solution for the decline phase of fossil fuel era is rationing of what’s left. That way, we avoid fighting, unfairness, and life-threatening fuel shortages. The best energy rationing scheme I’ve seen is Tradable Energy Quotas (TEQs), which I discussed in the book.
“There is only one country, Portugal, which at the parliamentary level has passed the Protocol. A few municipalities in the U.S. and elsewhere passed resolutions endorsing it in principle. But the Protocol is intended for implementation at the national scale.
“For oil-producing nations, implementing the Protocol would ensure the continued reliable availability of oil resources, though at continually reducing rates. This would make long-range planning possible. Of course, oil is a depleting resource and its economic benefits are temporary.” [click the link for the full article]
Richard Heinberg — energy descent, to use less overall
“Deployment of so-called renewable energies largely depend on petroleum. So without putting the brakes on the growth of fossil fuel consumption, will renewables massive installation really help reduce our dependence on oil?
“The current sharp spike in diesel fuel prices is likely to be a significant drag on the construction and installation of renewables. People tend to forget that, despite all the solar panels and wind turbines, the heavy work of the global economy is still mostly being done by diesel fuel.
“Our current way of life cannot survive the end of fossil fuels, but our current way of life is a huge problem anyway. We need to envision other ways of living on the planet, ones that acknowledge limits and the vital importance of all other species.
“A real energy transition plan would address the question of scale. Regardless of the energy sources we choose, we will not be able to continue using as much energy as we do now for more than a few more years. A hypothetical solar or nuclear future, at current energy usage rates, would require more minerals or uranium than can realistically be extracted.
“In the end, the main solution to our energy and climate problems must be to find a way to use less, but to do so in a way that enables humanity to gradually adjust. That’s what the Oil Depletion Protocol would do.
“We do need to replace fossil fuels with renewable energy, but also to reduce energy usage. In the end, the renewable energy that we will rely on may not be high-tech; it may be low-tech, just because that’s what’s possible over the long run.” [click the link for the full article]
Richard Heinberg — when will oil constraints shock US economy?
“We at Post Carbon Institute have been pointing out that energy is the basis of the economy, that oil is our foremost energy source, and that a transition to alternative energy sources will necessarily be slow and incomplete. But society is due for a reckoning at some point.
“Now, as the United States’ war on Iran has set off a global energy crisis, humanity has arrived at a more immediate and critical Wile E. Coyote moment. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has issued a report suggesting that continued oil shortages could reduce global economic growth by 2% and raise inflation by 2.3%. Some analysts say the IMF warning is far too weak and that the crisis could trigger a global recession or worse.
“Oil is a key ingredient in most consumer products. It powers essential elements of industrial society, including the food system. And oil moves everything, since over 90% of transport energy is oil-based.
“However, for the moment, the stock market is hardly signaling imminent economic peril. The US seems somewhat spared from its consequences when compared to many other countries. The worst fallout so far is expensive gasoline. Why have Americans seen so few repercussions?
“Two reasons: the US is currently the world’s biggest oil producer; and the US has the world’s second-largest strategic petroleum reserve (after China). However, these two pillars of US energy resilience are shaky.
“First: Even though the United States produces over 13 million barrels of oil per day. America is the world’s second-largest oil importer, even though its politicians love to brag about ‘energy independence’. Second: Strategic petroleum reserves are only meant to last a relatively brief time. Currently, the US has about 400 million barrels of oil stored. That’s 20 days’ worth of total American consumption.
“The longer the crisis drags on, the harder real shortages will bite oil-importing economies worldwide. Every time Trump attacks Iran or threatens to do so, oil prices rise. However, it would be even worse politically for Trump if he were to accede to a long-term Iranian peace deal that looks like a defeat for America. So, the standoff persists, with the Strait of Hormuz blocked.” [click the link for the full article]
Data centers unite us — in opposition!
“The monthly meeting in Lyon Township, a small town in southeast Michigan, was packed on a recent Monday. Residents lined up at the mic to talk about a proposed large-scale data center.
“Lyon Township voted for Donald J. Trump in 2024, but party loyalties hardly seemed to matter. In an era when Americans are divided on everything — even the cars they drive and the TV shows they watch — data centers seem to have bridged the partisan divide.
“In Virginia, a recent poll found the public had turned sharply against data centers. The same is true in Wisconsin, said Charles Franklin, director of the Marquette University Law School Poll, which found that around 70 percent of people now say the costs outweigh the benefits. Even more interesting, he said, the state’s deep partisan divide seems to have vanished when it comes to data centers.
“In Michigan, where, according to one count, at least 50 towns have passed efforts to pause data centers, the issue has the potential to scramble politics. Because Democrats run the state, and Gov. Gretchen Whitmer pushed for a law that offered tax incentives for data centers, they could be the first to feel the backlash.
“Data centers are being built to power the A.I. boom, and the projects are vast, often multibillion-dollar endeavors. They are powerful new forces in local economies, and because they demand a lot of energy and water, and are massive structures, they also threaten to change the land itself.
“But it was the sheer scale of the proposals, the suddenness with which they’ve appeared, and the secrecy surrounding them that is punching emotion into the issue, turning out thousands of Democrats and Republicans for tense town hall meetings.” [click the link for the full article]
Drumph wants grandiose power plant/data center to boost his ego
“At the edge of Appalachia, on a site where crews have worked for decades on nuclear waste remediation, the Trump administration aims to build the largest power plant and data center in the country. U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said ‘We’re operating in Trump time’.
“SoftBank of Japan would work with the U.S. government to build a 9.2-gigawatt, $33 billion power plant to serve a proposed 10-gigawatt AI data center, with a potential investment over several decades of up to $1.5 trillion.
“Political leaders want to put it on a fast track to open while President Donald Trump is in office. But the next steps are likely to be slow as details could cause long delays.
“‘The whole thing doesn’t add up’, said Ric O’Connell, executive director of GridLab, a nonprofit that provides technical expertise on the electricity grid to policymakers. Due to inflation on key components, the project would cost $3,586 per kilowatt, two to three times the cost of a combined-cycle gas plant two years ago. ‘As soon as Trump’s out of power, the [power plant is] going to get scaled way down or killed’, O’Connell said.
“American Electric Power has submitted a pre-application for a 50-mile transmission line across southeastern Ohio. The docket already includes three public comments urging the Ohio Power Siting Board to reject the project. There are no filings yet for the plant itself or a gas line to serve the plant.” [click the link for the full article]
Permaculture forest gardens — learning from indigenous experience
“Forest gardening has been practised by indigenous people around the world for millennia. And while there is increasing interest in forest gardening, the available resources tend to be either too general, or specific to locations and climates that are not necessarily relevant to us here in Aotearoa (New Zealand).
“A forest garden is a garden designed and tended with the layers and complexity of a forest in mind. While not as productive as commercially grown crops that focus on single yields, a forest garden offers similar benefits across a greater diversity of harvests — food, fibre, fuel and medicine.
“When we think about a forest garden as a biodiverse, multi-layered orchard, it helps us to think about different types of forest gardens suited to different climates. In this sense, there are four broad types of forest gardens — tropical, subtropical, Mediterranean and deciduous.
“The deciduous climate has varying temperatures with four distinct seasons. Deciduous forests have open canopies with 3 – 4 layers. Example species could include emergent pear, plum, and persimmon canopy trees, blueberry and echinacea shrub layers, and chamomile and strawberry ground covers.” [click the link for the full article]
Indigenous guardians of Earth still being persecuted, and worse
“Indigenous people are being killed for protecting their territories, criminalized for practicing their culture, and seeing their lands stripped of resources without consent. Last week, Indigenous leaders called for countries to fully implement the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), and other international human rights standards.
“In 2007, the United Nations General Assembly adopted UNDRIP, a sweeping resolution that established international standards for Indigenous land, language, health, and more. Indigenous people around the world say nations are not living up to the framework.
“At the U.N., Kenneth Deer, a member of the Mohawk Nation of Kahnawà:ke, acknowledged the need for a monitoring body. ‘To implement the declaration, they need a watchdog’, he said. ‘They need somebody over them to make sure they’re carrying out their responsibilities’.
“For many Indigenous nations, health includes cultural and spiritual health. Moses Goods, who is Kanaka Maoli, explained how Indigenous languages serve as memory, identity, and medicine. ‘Language is a link to who we are as a people and our identity, which is linked to health. When you take those things away, the health of the people starts to decline’.
“‘We cannot speak of health while there is tear gas in our communities, while 60% of the water sources in the Amazon are contaminated, while 40% of our children live with chronic malnutrition, while around 10,000 people have been murdered in 2025’, said Ercilia Castañeda, Kichwa and the vice president of the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador.” [click the link for the full article]
Dragging out modernity’s demise is like pulling a bandage slooowly
“Dave Murphy, an energy transition scholar, and physicist Tom Murphy, both founders of the Planetary Limits Academic Network, explore a range of themes including the polycrisis, ecological overshoot, and the strengths and limits of modernity.
“Ben McCall: I don’t believe that Tom is advocating for a loss of the beneficial elements of modernity, but rather inferring from available data that planetary limits simply won’t allow modernity to continue. So Dave, how confident are you that we get to choose?
“Dave Murphy: At its core, our differences seem to be whether there is a choice. I do think we are still abusing what Schumacher called the Earth’s ‘tolerance margins’, which are indeed finite. Every additional environmental degradation in the name of economic growth will make the inevitable collapse and recovery harder.
“I think it is important to consider what we mean by ‘collapse’. Isn’t the most likely outcome some sort of long, muddling-through period by which economic growth reverberates between periods of growth and stagnation while the energy system is slowly transformed?
“It is my contention that most of the people in the world are, as you describe, ‘innocents’. The vast majority of people on Earth are not willfully driving Spaceship Earth as it careens out of control, but they are on the Spaceship nonetheless.
“If there is a possibility that insulin production and clean water and other features of modernity can be saved, and therefore more of our neighbors can survive, then we — those that have the capacity to ponder such things — are ethically obligated to do our best to achieve that future.
“Ben: We have forged an agreement that there will be some sort of correction, or collapse, or muddling – that is, that modernity cannot last indefinitely. Dave proposes that the most likely outcome is a ‘long, muddling-through period of growth and stagnation while the energy system is slowly transformed’. Tom, I sense you have a different view of the likely outcome; could you share your perspective?
“Tom Murphy: Predictions are hard. That said, the physicist in me looks for encompassing principles. In doing so, I tend to step back from a messy decades-scale view, thinking instead on timescales of centuries or millennia.
“It is easy to see that growth — which has been a bedrock companion of modernity — cannot continue for much longer. So why try? Fossil fuel use will necessarily decline. Human population — temporarily inflated by agriculture’s heavy dependence on fossil fuels — will likely follow suit. Ore’s low-hanging fruit is long gone — necessary for renewable energy technology.
“Not only is this moment we call modernity ludicrously atypical, but it is fundamentally unsustainable — meaning its failure is basically guaranteed (not a choice). Again, the failure of modernity is not the same as the failure of humanity. We have other options.
“But we can think about what long-term sustainability could look like, and start calmly sloughing off the deleterious trappings of modernity — rather than engaging in what is likely a futile attempt to continue some familiar, comfortable version of modernity by alternate means, only to make the ultimate transition costlier.” [click the link for the full article]
|
