I am 52 yo. After 40+ years of mainstream environmentalism, I woke up to reality a couple of years ago. I’m not sure what the precipitating event was. Maybe it was one too many hockey sticks of the decline of species over my lifetime. Before my awakening, I was holding on to ‘reduce, reuse, recycle,’ ‘live simply, and ‘Love Your Mother,’ boosted by our successes with elimination of ddt, cleaner water and air, the elimination of acid rain and catastrophic ozone depletion, and the preservation of some species, like humpback whales. I was on the ex-com of our very active local Sierra Club group, but after my awakening, I had to step away because no one in the group, and I mean no one, is facing reality head on. So, here I am, isolated from the community that has meant so much to me, trying to find solace in parasocial videos by people willing and able to see and say the devastating truth. What a shitty, shitty place it is to be.

@thurstonhowellthetwelf3220

5 ай бұрын

Bill Rees is numero uno IMHO.

@jackoflava

5 ай бұрын

What does it mean to you that people "face reality head on"?

@sannejohnson8438

5 ай бұрын

@@jackoflava See the actual climate impacts already happening around them, significantly, global death of coral reefs, sea level rise that is already causing increased coastal erosion and flooding, more frequent and more extreme weather events, and important changes in weather patterns that affect food and water supply. Acknowledge that these impacts are just going to get worse as average global temp keeps rising with ever more carbon emissions pumped into the atmosphere. Start putting serious thought and resources into essential adaptation measures.

@jackoflava

5 ай бұрын

@sannejohnson8438 I turned 50 last year and as such have lived in a period of profound financial, geopolitical and environmental crisis my entire life. Believe me, I'm well aware of all of the things you and Bill Rees mentioned and have been paying as close attention to what's going on. I don't relegate the bad stuff to some worse future, it's happening NOW. Aside from the fact that I will one day pass away I'm relatively comfortable with adaptation because I've been doing it my entire life. I mean, we all have. Constant adaptation is simply unavoidable for living things existing on a changing planet.

@TheRealSnakePlisken

4 ай бұрын

Welcome.

I dont know anybody here in Australia that doesnt have an outside clothes line and one under the verandah roof or an inside line. Its a no brainer. My mother said when she was a kid her family only had one bath per week. Unless you're working outside in the dirt and sun all day you dont really need a daily shower. We should all get used to the natural human smell again. And in a degrowth society, we wont need huge houses to put all our stuff in. My husband and 3 kids used to spend 6 weeks per year in a 4m long caravan. We always became so close emotionally during those times, then when we got home wed disperse and become isolated in the various rooms again. We dont do it anymore because we have to take care of an elderly parent but we probably wont in the future even if we could because weve made a commitment to use less energy and staying local. My 3 children dont have any desire to accumulate or have big houses so maybe the younger generation is changing already. Perhaps existing houses can be made into duplexes or extended family residences and sharehouses instead of building new ones. Just some of my thoughts on degrowth.

@firsttorecess1074

10 ай бұрын

I can take a decent shower in less than2 minutes or a bath with half a bucket (2 1/2 gallons) of water. Some things are about conservation, and others with doing without.

@charlessudick8519

9 ай бұрын

Solid waste , studies a phd. In th70s my studies gave me a perview of the many local landfill facilities that are to this day way ahead of there time ..Puente Hill Landfill ....etc.. No PHD. just observing what is in our presence

@JamesFitzgerald

4 ай бұрын

Those are crazy ideas that most people will not embrace. Degrowth is a downer.

@RandyTWester

3 ай бұрын

Yes, if you're using sunshine on rooftop solar panels to supply heat to a clothes dryer, you're probably doing it wrong. Same if your house is too dry in winter and you're using a machine to dry clothes.

@j85grim4

22 күн бұрын

Here in the U.S., I only see immigrants from other countries hang their clothes here, and it's extremely rare.

The collapse has already begun. I am remembering an old Jared Diamond lecture where he was discussing the collapse of the Maya I think it was, and then he said that he wasn't aware of any people ever possessing the wisdom or wherewithal to reverse a collapse once it had begun. Most had doubled down and thereby hastened their demise. At the time I thought it was an odd fact to mention. Now it seems crucial and central.

Optimism, really? I've been following this news going on 6 years now hard and I don't see any optimism in our future. It's important to remember that we were all born into this and as much as we want to blame people that's not going to get us too far.

It's always a pleasure to listen to Bill Rees, and a pleasure to discuss these matters with him, as we have at the University of Tasmania as he unflinchingly talked collapse. It seems that John Mulrow also seems to understand the matter which is encouraging. Very interesting indeed for we who coined the phrase "degrowth by disaster or design" that it has caught on so well and had such wide adoption - It must be the #Zeitgeist. In any case, as Bill describes, either way, planned or unplanned, the reality is #collapse.

And listening to how many hectares are needed vs available for humans, leaves me wondering... does whatever remaining wildlife there might be out there have its own land, or will they have to share our 2.6 hectares? And will we let them when we discover them eating our tomatoes?

The clothesline example was interesting. How many people have no chance of a home with a yard now? No yard, no wash line. But you will go broke at the laundromat. A lot of economic privilege is showing here. It takes income and a good credit rating/inherited wealth to get acreage and homes today. Many rural people, and city people who might like to be rural can not afford the activities/efficiencies of which Ashley speaks. Seen the price of rents recently, or used cars?

"If we just had a biillion people on earth you could drive nay god-damned kind of car you want." 01:09:10 🎯

The comment around 'alternative metrics' (10:10) was perfect. Ive been having these debates with F&F and Ive always struggled to explain clearly about system boundaries but this description 'drawing the system boundary around the electric vehicle' is perfect and its exactly what we do in so many areas. Great Video. Thanks Guys

Explain how you get the ten million people in a given large city to go out into the land and produce enough food to sustain themselves? That alone is impossible since they have no knowledge or ability, let alone having land upon which it’s possible.

I tend to be a prepper and I am afraid of the vikings taking away what ever preppers have prepped for themselves. Kudos to Simon Michaux for at least the latter term in this context.

Stop having too many children.

@davestagner

10 ай бұрын

In developed countries, the birth rate is at or below replacement, across the world. Only a handful of impoverished, war-torn countries (Afghanistan, the Sudan, Yemen, etc) still have really high birthrates. Once a nation starts to modernize, it takes about two generations for population growth to end (read “Factfulness”, by Dr Hans Rosling, for more details). Growth these days isn’t at the birth end, but the death end - people living much longer on average. That’s why Earth’s population is expected to level off by around 2070, then it will start to slowly decline. “Another doubling” is unlikely to happen. So blaming people having children is factually wrong. But here’s the problem within that… the top 10% of the world’s population generates 50% of the greenhouse gases and other waste. And before you think “the rich”, keep in mind that the world’s top 10% starts at about $40k/year - lower middle class, by American standards. The world’s poor - the only people still “having too many children” - aren’t the ones causing the mess. We have to find a way to drastically reduce the carbon footprint of the existing middle classes - people with cars, urban jobs, and non-subsistence diets. And the Puritan hairshirt of “degrowth” is a non-starter. However morally superior it makes its adherents feel, they’re not going to talk billions of people into “living with less”. Thankfully, we can and will get rid of most fossil fuel consumption over the next two to three decades, using existing proven technologies. Hopefully, that’s fast enough to avoid tipping points that break the food systems and wreck civilization.

@j85grim4

22 күн бұрын

We really need a 1 child per family policy globally. I like Paul Ehlrich's idea of people like me who don't want to have a child, sell their 1 child permit to a rich person for lots of money that wants more than 1 child. Works for me.

Awesome, insightful and inspiring! Thank you, all.

This lecture was mind blowing for me. But how do we convince all of us to use clothes lines and solar showers? I know Ashley said she grows most of her own food, but she has 9 acres. I don't know anyone that has that many acres. And I don't know the first thing about growing my own food. It gets really hot where I live and we have air conditioning. I am willing to live in a hotter house (used to live in the gulf coast without air conditioning), but my wife and kids won't have allow it. I just can't comprehend how to change the paradigm we live under in a way that most people would accept. I'm going to listen to this again and think as hard as I can to absorb a fraction of the ideas in this talk. Thank you all for sharing your wisdom.

@TheRealSnakePlisken

4 ай бұрын

Rerefence journey of Guy McPherson.

Bill Rees: There is no energy transition just energy addition. John Mulrow: Folks use energy (any type) to dig for more energy (any type).

@AlanDavidDoane

8 ай бұрын

Junkies gotta junkie.

@Mtnfarmer55

4 ай бұрын

@@AlanDavidDoaneExactly! Most of the population thinks and behaves the exact same way as an active addict. Most common desire, More.

Excellent analogy by Bill. A vehicle will go forward (if you press the gas) until it hits a wall or falls off a cliff.

When the US reduced the max speed on highways to 55 mph to save fuel, the unintended consequence was a drop in fatalities which left more people driving and gas consumption continued to rise because of it.

Great conversation, I've lived half my life with an income below the defined poverty level in my very rich country, and I'm happier than most of my very upper middle-class friends .

@Rnankn

7 ай бұрын

It is also a contradiction if you or others who voluntarily choose minimal consumption should experience insecurity as a result. Effectively, you’re doing humanity a service, and should be granted a guarantee of basic security as a result. Unfortunately, most people are punished for poverty with deprivation, and rewarded for overconsumption with more resources. It is such a morally simplistic way to look at the world, it is almost like economists have the emotional maturity of toddlers.

@chrisruss9861

5 ай бұрын

People to whom much is given often don't leave much space for poorer people to lead a good life. Much prime land that they have seized should belong to the public, e.g. beachfront. Parkland should have a proportion of fruit trees. On green belt opposite my road I planted a food tree and see migrant locals collecting the fruit.

Soloptimism. "I am doing good things, and thinking good thoughts, therefore..."

Does anyone know what book John is talking about when he mentioned the name Alan Graw and the title "Cultivating a Post Carbon Society"? I can't seem to find anything close to that. This is mentioned in the 44:00 minute.

Dr. Rees is correct! Humans are going away, along with all life. TEOTWAWKI!

@j85grim4

22 күн бұрын

I think our civilization is definitely going away but it's unlikely we will go extinct anytime soon. We will go back to a 1800's material level of living probably but we will still be around just in far lower numbers.

My understanding of peak oil: Humanity has extracted about half the fossil fuels that ever existed within the ground. Because the economy seeks maximum returns, it collects fuels first where they are abundant and cheap to extract, implies the remainder is difficult to extract and needs more diesel...

Using sustainable technology is great if you own land but in an apartment and low to middle income it's a lot more tricky.

Muito importante conversar sobre o que é urgente para todos nós, acho que não temos tempo para fazer uma transição através de conscientização, difícil tanta gente mudar, a maioria só pensa como capitalizar 😢

@EvolutionWendy

9 ай бұрын

Yes. Role models, people who live like our grandparents did, are reassuring. They show examples that life is wonderful when simple. Many people seem frightened of the simple life, wrongly thinking simple is non-stop terrible.

Great discussion! @54:00 about degrowth: for most people this a scary prospect, and most economists think it is impossible. But how about ‘progressive pricing’? I mean: if we start putting a real price on carbon and raw material use, start low but steadily increasing over time, wouldn’t that be a mechanism that could work? Two aspects: 1. Price is something we accept and understand and are used to. We live by money, so using the price is fitting into our way of living. It is also quantifiable; 2. A gradual increase will give people time to adapt, and gives people continuity and predictability, and gives a society time to develop solidarity.

@johnmulrow8692

10 ай бұрын

yes - price mechanisms will definitely be a part of degrowth. AND the total amount of real spending must go down. That's the part traditional pricing mechanisms don't account for.

@elizabethpears307

8 ай бұрын

As long as there is a huge wealth gap 90% of the people will feel the impact while the rest will happily pay whatever price to continue the high life because they can.

We just need 4 Earths. Fixed.

@zbigniewbohdanowicz8897

10 ай бұрын

For next 20-50 years, depending on the growth rate..

Excellent discussion. Thank you.

Excellent conversation. I now have a much better understanding of overshoot. We have a political economy (capitalism) that is a for profit (above all else) system in place. The elites (owners of this system) will not relinquish control of the economy on their own. This must be discussed when talking about de-growth or what is needed to make sufficient change to even consider the possibility of turning this ship around, which I don't think is possible, given our current predicament.

Verbal communication leads to more energy requirements like Gas fired electrical generating stations. We may be saving the paper buy we now need to burn more gas to keep the communication in a digital form. Because more people can communicate with each other now. Then when we had to send letters .

Thumbs up for William Rees.

@kirkha100

7 ай бұрын

William Rees is crystalline. No one is going to look at Overshoot. No one is going to dig deeper. It calls into question the central premise and motivations in human behavior and biological imperatives we act from, and the real possibility that we were doomed from our very beginning. We get to see Fermi’s Paradox occur, up close and personal. All else is a fantasy.

@springer-qb4dv

14 минут бұрын

Right. There is no fermi paradox. It's fermi indicator. Out of billions of civilizations in our galaxy none last more than a brief moment. Any civilization hoping for more than brief existence must be made up of far seeing, altruistic individuals. Humans don't meet that criterion.

First time viewer here. Great stuff. Thank you.

You can tell a group of people who've never gone hungry or worried about where they were going to live when they talk about just burning money to force the economy to shrink.

My friends in Massachusetts built their passive solar homes. 50 years ago. (I think their kids may have sold them off, as generations passed.) Solar fairs at the university, 1973. (Met Scott Nearing -- at 100 -- and Helen Nearing). No, the trajectory is clear. The collapse of agriculture will "thin" the population, but by then, methane release will have taken over any remaining tipping points. Meanwhile, live a good ethical life, as you seem to be doing, and don't worry about the outcome. There's no shame in wanting to survive, while helping others as you can.

Many thanks Ulrike Herrmann published a book a couple of years ago with the title similar to "Das Ende des Kapitalismus". It just details on this very topic. I do not know, whether this book has been translated to english though.

Agreed, Ashley, we need to be a grassroots movement as opposed to a top-down movement. You are right- I like your solar shower. "Collapse now --avoid the rush." We won't have electricity sometimes. I have a Berkey water filter in case I need to drink polluted creek water if the water system goes down like it almost did in Hurricane Florence for me where I live. Also, each of us can do what we feel is "right" to be congruent with our values and to have personal integrity (wholeness).

@alanj9978

8 ай бұрын

Everyone should have a Berkey in their emergency kit. You can live a long time without food, but you need safe water.

@dianewallace6064

8 ай бұрын

@@alanj9978 Agreed. Glad I have it.

Yep she is in the tail of the curve, nice way to say it. The force that would convince the main to make a change is disaster.

Humans Live On And Of Nature, Nature Live With And In Nature ! How many people that will be able to live in the future will be decided by how Much Nature that will Survive Climate Change.

Thank you

She has kids. She won't get it.

Domesticated poultry makes up around 70% of the biomass of all birds on the planet, when she says she has some chicken at her garden, she is somehow contributing to being part of the problem.

I saw two electric vehicle chargers at a motorway service/rest area in the UK. They were out of order because they could not be connected to the grid. There are often hundreds of cars parked at this and other service areas. If there were 100 cars each connected to 100 kW then they would need a power supply of 10 MW.

Try to turn around Jevons Paradox! Let's reduce energy efficiency (or rather, let's reduce it even further as it is very low anyway). Then, according to Jevons, our energy consumption should go down. Or what? Anyway, dear geniuses, good luck with your paradoxes!

Could we have a list of realistic bottom-up solutions? Would love to consider some for my life but not sure where to find a list of options that have been tested.

Watch the Michael Moore film: Planet of the Humans

We are headed toward a simplification which is an artifact of collapse

@justcollapse5343

8 ай бұрын

Yes - but we would argue "simplification" is an inadequate term to describe the horror of what is unfolding.

@chadreilly

Ай бұрын

@@justcollapse5343 True, it's Nate Hagans trying to cope, lol

A pitty, there is no Thanos.

47:52 No, metals are not burned (with the exception of uranium, when it is used as a fuel). Every gram of metal extracted from the crust makes us permanently richer.

How do you actually use less then? How do you get rid of containers that you need to bring your groceries home? How do you stop people from driving? You stop from heating your homes?

@andy-the-gardener

10 ай бұрын

emps exploded above 10 major cities would work. i've explained till i'm blue in the face to the organisers in charge of the industrial death engine that its in their childrens interest to terminate said engine if they want said children to survive much longer, but they never replied. bit rude if you ask me. i'm only trying to help

@madameblatvatsky

10 ай бұрын

How did humans make it to 1900?

@chadreilly

Ай бұрын

@@andy-the-gardener Best answer I've heard!

@andy-the-gardener

Ай бұрын

@@chadreilly ty. best reply ive ever had! tbh, replies to me are usually pretty angry, if i get any. sigh. people just dont like being told the kids they should not have had are gonna dei soon.

@chadreilly

Ай бұрын

@@andy-the-gardener Lol, well put again. In theory we could raise these children to be saboteurs and raiders for their own future. Instead of marching for subsidies for the wind and solar industries.

2022 Uruguay exported 280 thousand tons meat. Uruguay's main beef clients are China, US, Canada, the European Union and Israel.There's a huge water depletion issue on hand in for small people, because only a small proportion of Uruguay’s water is used for human consumption. In 2019, rice, wood pulp, soy beans and meat used more than 50 times as much as went to drinking supplies to people. People are forced to drink salty water and without meat- and pulpindustry they would do fine even in these these severe drought conditions. So Uruguay is not as happy ecological wonderland like is applied here.

Dr. Rees feels the need to say "we are completely capable of creating the kind of human society to meet the reality of the planetary conditions" .....I'm paraphrasing. I think this is a purely utopian concept, though I don't blame him for throwing it out there as conceivable. But I think that despite our complex brains, we are just as driven as lemmings, on this path to destruction, though I admit this is a simplistic explanation of true lemming behavior. I'm just trying to make a point. We will soon know our fate, at the rate we are going. De-growth is our only hope, but hope won't get us there.

Economic depletion is a better way of thinking rather than peak oil. When the cost of supply of commodities is more than the ability to pay. The inability to transition to low emissions energy due to lack of materials means fossil fuels will be used to economic depletion wirhih a few decades. Global warming will exceed 4 C and sea level rise 2-3 m before 2100 and continue next century.

So the solution is all 8 billion people on earth buy 9 acres of land in Uruguay?

Funny how opinions on material availability or better the lack thereof as uttered by Mark Mills or Simon Michaux, both to the best of my knowledge deep into mining and its economy, are not taken up by the ones in power.

Alan Savory has been use cattle to regenerate the soil in Africa. This is important

@karlwheatley1244

Ай бұрын

Alan Savory's claims have been widely and repeatedly debunked. Globally, raising livestock has been the #1 cause of loss of wilderness habitat on land and the #1 cause of loss of biodiversity. Research shows that land generally heals faster if you get the cattle OFF of it. It's very simple: More cattle=less wilderness & less biodiversity.

Hi, this is a great theme, The False Promise show the first I watched Doomer Optimism. I really feel opening exploration to the optimism discussion is excellent. May I speak with a show producer? I have detailed focus with historical context and there is holistic discussion around the optimistic way forward which anchors back at least as far as M King Hubbard (though he is not known for it).

so your saying Extreme energy efficiency (and a smaller amount of people) is the only solution??? and we will still destroy every ecosystem on the planet with "clean" energy??

Great Guests. Both 'in the zone'. Thank you. 54:36 I wish general population understood this, as well as the damage cycle to air, water and soil around. I care for my Family's small pasture cattle farm using regenerative techniques and we CAN rebuild in about 3 years. There is a fantasy that veganism is an answer. I believed the vegan ideas till I was faced with reality on the ground. But every year we add more chemical stimulants to just get through is another year and further destruction away from rebuilding a generally trashed landscape, that only looks functional and domestically beautiful from an uneducated eye. I think we will poison ourselves before anything else, as I think these two Men are suggesting. I still have an imagination, of a day when all the genius minds and skilled individual and many capable people of the planet actually focus on building a more natural vital and healthy planet full of clear lovely water, crisp clean air, fertile rich soils, obsessively beautiful landscapes of grasslands, forrests, deserts with life and seas teaming with fish. This consumerist society has gotten so boring. Ps Ashley, washing machines...magical. my Grandmother, born 1906 told her eldest Daughter born 1930 she was not allowed to get married till a machine to wash clothes was invented. The rest was history of course, but clothes washing by hand for a family is a lot of work

I was thinking about sustainable aviation fuel. Let's suppose that we find a way to replace the nearly 300 million tonnes of fuel used each year in planes with little or no carbon emissions. Even if we could achieve this very ambitious goal we would not have democratized flying. Only about 11% of the worlds population fly each year. The potential for growth is still enormous.

She lives on a 9 acres of land. Sorry lady but that's not low consumption.

@aliendroneservices6621

8 ай бұрын

33:30 33:41

This little chunk has never had a tough day in her GA GA. Life ...

You mean wider roads don't reduce traffic???

John, degrowth will happen but no degrowth advocate seems to understand what a sustainable level of economy actually is. It will be impossible to manage economies down to a sustainable level.

@karlwheatley1244

8 ай бұрын

"John, degrowth will happen but no degrowth advocate seems to understand what a sustainable level of economy actually is. " Right, wealthy nations must reduce their footprints down to the level of Malawi or possibly Vietnam (the latter one IF we go to more plant rich diets).

@mikeroberts4260

8 ай бұрын

That would be closer to a sustainable level but I doubt that would be sustainable either.

@karlwheatley1244

8 ай бұрын

@@mikeroberts4260 Actually, that's what the math shows would be a sustainable level.

@mikeroberts4260

8 ай бұрын

@@karlwheatley1244 What math? Any society that consumes any resource above its renewal rate or damages its environment beyond its capacity to assimilate that damage, cannot be sustainable. I'm fairly sure that Malawi and Vietnam don't quality as sustainable, if nothing else because they partake in world trade.

@karlwheatley1244

8 ай бұрын

@@mikeroberts4260 Conceptually, you and I are on the same page (and I almost never meet anyone online who understands what you just wrote about sustainability. Mathematically, sustainability can be determined by the per capita ecological footprint of a nation compared to Earth's remaining biocapacity. Look up ecological footprints of nations, and you'll see Malawi is just sustainable while Vietnam is just slightly in overshoot. Most people in both countries are poor farmers, but if they "develop" more or participate more in world trade, their footprints will grow into greater and greater overshoot. My frustration is that climate scientists and activists forget/don't realize the climate crisis is just part of the broader ecological crisis of overshoot and can't be solved by switching to renewable energy than continuing on with our industrialized capitalist economy. I agree that some of the de-growthers may not realize just how much we must de-industrialize and simplify our lives to be sustainable, but the whole model is about getting our impacts down to what the Earth can bear. Take care.

Academia is a huge waste of energy. How many thousands of PhDs do we really need? Maybe we need some education efficiency.

How many people can the planet support the interviewer fortunate existence. 200 million 🙄don’t look up🤬

Easter Island …

Economic degrowth is impossible as long as the population rises and it is at these high levels. Who will convince human beings to be poor and have a miserable life? It is much more plausible that we'll grow and consume until extinction. Overall, Ashley and John are sooo American-centered in their views, without being conscious that 90% of the globe population has other cultures, values and interests. Basically, you are activists because you're bored and have too much energy, as a result of your good life. Go in Bangladesh and live with 50 cents a day if you are so keen to change something about yourself!

@PimpinNinja2U

11 ай бұрын

Fully agree with the first half of your comment. The judgement is counterproductive and not healthy. I hope you're able to grow past it eventually.

@AudioPervert1

11 ай бұрын

Americans, generally speaking do not have the capacity to imagine, even less learn and know about peoples (and their cultures) outside America. It's a sense of privilege inside a vicious self-serving society. Which also includes the Doomers as well as Boomers. The example you cite of Bangladesh is right and lot to learn from - I know that personally because I am bengali. Adios!

@cg000gc

11 ай бұрын

@@PimpinNinja2U When I see dirt, I call it dirt; this is not a judgement, but a qualification. And let me give you another qualification: this is not a doomer podcast.

@ashleycolby6676

11 ай бұрын

I live in Uruguay on a very very low energy homestead. The message is directed at the developed world because they are the highest consumers!

@christinearmington

11 ай бұрын

@@AudioPervert1. vicious 😑

You guys are so out of touch. What a privilege to live on a 9 acre farm and setup a solar shower. Most people need to contend with reality, and reality dictates that they work or they starve. Nobody is going to change willingly. Nobody is being shown a different way… rent’s still due at the end of the month. Humanity has mortgaged the future. Ecologically and economically, the debts racking up and one day it’ll need to be paid. I think we all agree that the sooner the better for the biosphere, but who wants to live in a post colapse world? Blade runner at best, The Road most likely.

We do not have a technology issue in solving climate change or even an economic issue…the underlying reason climate change will continue without a solution is due humans ego. We deep down do not think there is anything that can end our existence…we see the pending doom of climate change as something the someone will eventually solve and live will continue…the idea that something so beneficial as the use of fossil fuel could have such a fatal downside just don’t make sense to us…people the study the issue keep saying we need to stop burning fossil fuel NOW…will sorry to inform you but NOW has already come and gone….it’s later than you think

"Bargaining stage of grief" - don't Bulverise us optimistic Ecomodernists! You've got to prove THAT someone is wrong before you psychoanalyse WHY they are wrong. Also, you might find local farming attractive but many are not gifted that way. Some of us are weaker physically for that lifestyle - others wired to play with computers or accounting or neurosurgery. And that's fine! But I object to Degrowthers telling us all to go 'back to the land' when that subsistence lifestyle is the very one that requires population growth because someone has got to run the farm when you are too old!

@kfrans1k111

9 ай бұрын

You gotta burn a lot of carbon and use a lot of resources to make enough money in the economy to buy a 10 acre farm and provision it with the tools to run it in the first place...

First of all, what's the SF6 footprint of each and every solar panel, wind turbine or electric car? Second, the 2% of the planet occupied by the cities are responsible for more than 70% of all greenhouse gas emissions. Third, the urban, GDP climate-change population will reach 5 billion consumers by 2030.

Listened to the whole thing and it all seems moot. Regardless of the merits of the doomer argument We will go down the techno-optimist road and it will either thread the needle or fail. I would rather a podcast that identified the crucial factors that will produce failure, when we will fail, and what to do after.

@karlwheatley1244

8 ай бұрын

"Regardless of the merits of the doomer argument We will go down the techno-optimist road and it will either thread the needle or fail. I would rather a podcast that identified the crucial factors that will produce failure" It's impossible for the techno-optimist approach to thread the needle and meet the needs of 8 billion people because it ignores Earth's limits, the basic needs of life, and the laws of nature. Our future lives, economies, and societies are totally dependent on the health of Earth's ecosystems (and the millions of species that make them up), but industrialized capitalist economies and consumerist lifestyles steadily destroy those species and ecosystems, and the more people there are and more man-made stuff there is, the faster we destroy them. Why? Humanity's collective ecological footprint is currently overshooting Earth's sustainable carrying capacity by ~70% per year, and as long as we are consuming faster than the Earth can regenerate and polluting faster than Earth can de-toxify--and warming the planet, worsening ecological and thus societal breakdown (which is already underway) is inevitable. To prevent worsening ecological and societal breakdown, we must shrink the footprint of the global economy by ~50%, but because our the size of our footprint is virtually identical to the size of GDP, that means we must shrink global GDP by about 50% and never let it rise again. But because the richest 20% of people and nations cause ~70-80% of the harm/footprint, this means that individuals in wealthy nations and wealthy individuals elsewhere must shrink their footprints by ~60-99+%. Because that means getting our footprint down to the size of a country like Malawi, the only way to do that is much simpler lifestyles, less industrialized and more localized economies, and just less man-made stuff. To achieve one-planet lifestyles so that billions of people don't die prematurely, we not only must stop burning fossil fuels, we must stop producing "forever chemicals" and a long list of of other chemicals and products. Diets low in meat (especially beef and mutton) are not just beneficial, they are non-negotiable for preventing ecological and societal breakdown. We must go back to making things out of materials that are either biodegradable or can be recycled successfully (wood, glass, steel, aluminum) and stop inventing chemicals and products that are toxic to the web of life. What to do after (for those who survive) is clean up the mess we made and adopt the simpler, less industrialized, and simpler lifestyles that are the only thing that is sustainable. Does that explanation help? Questions? (I've been researching and then drafting a book about this for more than a decade).

@chadreilly

Ай бұрын

You would probably like David Fleming's Lean Logic.

I’m a concert pianist and I love elephants. But I gotta admit the feel of real ivory is way better. 🤷‍♀️🤦‍♀️🌀

Breeding draft horses... lmao

I LOVE DOOMERS SO MUCH AHAHHAHAHA :DDDD

The earths mass is 6000 Trillion times that amount , puts 700 Million Tons into perspective, and who is to say a large proportion of that will not be recycled. Regarding the world population, who knows what the Golden number is, and like many echo systems ultimately it will be self balancing based on availability of food/resources, and unless you plan to start mass sterilising what do you plan to do! Billy here is just yet another Doom and Gloom merchant making money out of academic pontification rather than his back.

"You just assume all that can happen." But it can, while RESTORING the ecosphere! When you define Overshoot into its various parts, the solutions become obvious. When you waffle around about it being this whole big thing called "Overshoot" - you can have a pedestal to lecture us on Degrowth. But when you ask specific questions like "Can we get enough energy without burning fossil fuels?" We can. "Can we feed a world of 10 billion and have a functional biosphere?" We can. "Can we find enough metals for the energy transition?" We can. "Can we save ecosystems while going through the energy transition?" We can. "Can we give 10 billion of us all the energy and food and fibre we need to live modern, convenient, beautiful lives while saving the environment?" We can. "What would giving 10 billion people everything they need do?" It decreases population growth and ends the growth curve. Done

@svarog63

9 ай бұрын

Unfortunately, the answer to all your questions is: No we can't". Please educate yourself.

@eclipsenow5431

9 ай бұрын

@@svarog63 I have - especially on the minerals for the energy transition which is an extremely ignorant - almost Trump like - myth being pushed by some smart people. I don't know why Simon Michaux is so popular these days, but doomers just lap it up without investigating his arguments or sources. The reality instead? WIND AND SOLAR do not need rare earths! They can use them (for a performance boost in niche sectors) but do not have to. The majority of renewable energy and battery brands are moving away from rare-earths due to cost. 95% of Solar panel mainly use silicon (which is 27% of the Earth’s crust) and aluminium (8%). Wind is made from iron (5%), aluminium and now recyclable fibreglass. There are new wind generators that do not use ANY rare earths in the magnets, and we are now recycling up to 95% of the technologies above. GRID STORAGE: engineers plan to Overbuild the grid to reduce storage for each city down to 2 days. PUMPED HYDRO: Professor Andrew Blakers has a satellite atlas of the earth’s many pumped hydro sites we could use. There is 100 TIMES the potential storage we need in those! These are like coal plant turbines but instead of millions of tons of coal going in and CO2 coming out - they just pump water uphill and let it rip downhill. They’re batteries of water and gravity. re100.eng.anu.edu.au/global/ SODIUM (Yes, seasalt!): stack-able, cargo container sized salt batteries are now being deployed in Australia that use NO lithium, cobalt, graphite, or copper. They're less flammable, less toxic, and 30% less expensive than Lithium. They’re even good enough for some cheaper shorter-range EV’s. www.pv-magazine.com/2023/04/03/australian-manufacturer-reveals-1-mwh-sodium-chloride-battery-design/ IRON BATTERIES rust and “derust”iron - which is 5% of the earth’s crust. No rare earth’s required! www.utilitydive.com/news/minnesota-puc-xcel-form-energy-battery-sherco-solar/685460/ ELECTRIC VEHICLE BATTERIES are moving to Lithium Iron Phosphate which do not use ANY rare earths. The USGS reserves from 2022 show we have 89 million tons of lithium which at 6 kg of lithium per EV would build 14 BILLION EV's - we only need a 1.4 billion. TRUCKS: Tesla have their 40 ton Semi, Australia have 100 ton Janus trucks that do a quick battery swap every 400 km or so, and mining giants are now experimenting with fast-charge battery packs. Why? Remote mines can now run on renewable electricity generated on site rather than expensive diesel trucked in from interstate. There are remarkable new technologies in recycling all these things. Basically, Big Battery is replacing Big Oil. Clean energy has a 4 year doubling curve. We are moving from finite and polluting energy that was starting to run low into renewable energy made from super-abundant materials that can be recycled forever. So that's energy covered. Next Degrowth myth I need to debunk?

“Precision Fermentation” is the most important sustainability technology - up there with renewable energy. Think of it as 'electric food' because it bypasses inefficient old photosynthesis. Let me explain. Plants use photosynthesis to split water, getting hydrogen and oxygen from water. They 'eat' the hydrogen combining it with CO2 in the air to grow, and release oxygen that we then breathe. But plants only use 6% of the sunlight. Then it gets worse. It has to grow leaves and stems and roots and other things - we can only eat a tiny part of the plant. Most of that is carbohydrates when what we want is lots of proteins and fats. In the end, we're eating way less than 1% of that incoming sunlight! But what if instead of plants, we used solar panels at 20% efficiency at using the sunlight. It powers electrolysis which splits water, so that's about 80% efficient so now we're at 16% of the sunlight. Then instead of growing plants which mainly grow carbohydrates, we give the hydrogen to specially selected hydrogen-eating bacteria. These grow carefully selected proteins and fats directly. All the bacteria needs is hydrogen and a tiny sprinkling of mineral fertilisers. Then consider that we can get all the power we want from solar panels and rooftops - and something like an extra 10 TIMES the electricity we use today if we float solar panels on our fresh water reservoirs. We can power these vat-grown-food factories without using any essential farmland. NASA came up with it way back in the 1960's to feed deep space astronauts - but then deep space missions were postponed for decades. But now as we approach a world of 10 billion people all needing to be fed, this could just help us feed the world and save nature. Rewild it. Reseed whole ecosystems! Because it's going to bankrupt grazing. No more livestock like beef or goats or lambs or pigs or even chickens. No more over-fishing the oceans - because we can grow omega 3 rich proteins as well. No more palm oil - because they are already starting to produce that. It's expensive at the moment - but like solar and wind - costs should come down with learning curves and economies of scale. What does all this mean? Over the last 300 years we've chopped down 2 billion hectares of forest to raise livestock - enough space for 3 TRILLION trees. Let's regrow that. That many trees would soak up ALL historical CO2 emissions. We could reseed ecosystems and save nature. And we could feed the world from a tiny area. Our fats and proteins would be immune from floods and drought and even pandemics from 'wet-markets'. It would save nature, giving forest homes to countless animals. With Cross-Laminated Timber we now know how to build skyscraper buildings from wood - so some of those 3 TRILLION trees can become all the recyclable building material we need - locking up carbon for 100 years or whatever. And it would solve climate change. Win win win. Please watch George Monbiot explain more here - just 6 minutes. It's the best technology since renewable energy: Read his article - and google it. It’s amazing! www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/nov/24/green-technology-precision-fermentation-farming

SUPER-POWER - when Jevons is a GOOD thing. Let me explain: Wind and solar are now 1/4 the cost of nuclear on an LCOE basis. (Lazard.) That means they are so cheap we can Overbuild capacity to get through winter and reduce electricity storage down to a few days. (This is easy with off-river pumped hydro or sodium batteries.) Wind and solar are now so cheap that even with the final costs of extra HVDC powerlines and extra storage, they’re only 30% of the cost. They’re like paying a 30% admission price to get access to a warehouse of super-cheap power systems - the 70% of the cost in wind and solar. We are going to Electrify Everything, including transport and industrial heating and smelting processes. This is more efficient. EG: An electric car uses about 80% of the energy generated from the original renewables, but an oil car WASTES 80% of the oil energy due to thermal inefficiencies. Each super-cheap renewable dollar achieves more in the real world. It means replacing oil with infinitely recyclable minerals and metals. It means we install an off-grid EV charging station (running on renewables and sodium-grid batteries locally) rather than drive oil tankers down the highway every week just to refuel a petrol station. Janus Australia run truck conversions for giant Aussie Road-Trains. Rather than drive the one battery the whole way, the diesel tanks are ripped out and a swappable battery unit are installed. A guy on a forklift does it in a minute. Every 400 km, just swap the batteries over! www.januselectric.com.au/ There are mining companies trialling fast-chargers on their giant mining trucks. And of course, once the world has gone renewable and there are no oil, gas, or coal ships, that’s 40% of international shipping down - which is about 22,000 cargo ships that no longer need to be built. It’s all going to be so cheap we WILL use more power (Jevon’s paradox) but in this case it is a good thing! During the non-winter months of the year we’ll have all this super-cheap excess power to do other things, like desalinate water or generate hydrogen for synfuel for jet airlines, etc. Anything that can be switched off for a few months as we get through winter, and then scaled up again. We can use SUPER-POWER to process ALL municipal solid waste through a variety of Gasification technologies that can recycle everything - even old pizza boxes, teenagers joggers, and soiled nappies / diapers! eclipsenow.wordpress.com/gasification/ Gasification basically means we can household waste into half the materials we need to build the next house! It means an end to all landfill. The only missing ingredient? Super-cheap super-power to make it economical. Who knows what future super-cheap super abundant power will do? It will of course need to be guided by strong legislation, such as protecting the biosphere and national parks etc. And again, once everyone has everything they need, the world will go through a Demographic Transition which means the population will start to shrink - true sustainability achieved at last!

You're part of the problem. Seek (and then tell us) about your valid solutions.

How to Decouple: 1. Massively INCREASE the amount of mining (because that's what renewables require) which will eventually use 0.3% of the non-ice land on earth. 2. This gives us all the energy we need. 3. With all this energy, we can grow all the proteins and fats we need for 10 billion people via Precision Fermentation in an area the size of Greater London. 4. This would let us return 30% of the land being grazed by our livestock back to nature, regrowing roughly 3 trillion trees, solving climate change, creating massive ecosystems and habitats, and giving us all the building materials we could need. 5. Meeting all human needs ushers in the Demographic transition which will gradually shrink the human population the way most first world countries have shrinking populations.

Proven fossil fuel reserves are at a minimum 5X what can be burned to keep within the carbon budget. Peak oil no longer means much. Brought to you from Calgary, a global petro city. Proven reserves is a common term in this 'town'. Good answer dude on peak oil.

@JohnnyBelgium

10 ай бұрын

There was a peak in liquid oil production in November 2018 and since then we have been converting natural gas to gasoline to make up the difference.

Hey Doomer Club ... What is your combined emissions? Count? Speak? Even reduce perhaps?