Ecological and economic limits and overshoot
thanks for helping Ben, in cc, with this important question: < first question: Is it possible, or do you know of resources and data I can look at, to maintain the exponential growth the economic structures require? Id appreciate any other reflections or ideas you have about how this relatively short-term scenario could possibly play out. > part of my own answer is below with recommended resources Ben, see http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/p2p-practices-as-condition-for-the-next-long-w... In this paper, I draw on Kondratieff wave theory and Carlota Perez to describe the near and longer future scenario, basically: Sudden system shock makes previous system inoperable 15 years of crisis, deleveraging of debt, etc .... New wave based on new principles, which could/should include substantive p2p practices However, the underlying biospheric and civilisational crisis may very well complicate things substantially, this may very well be the last wave of capitalism Sam, I remember you place the congruence of ecological crisis in 2030, do you have any sources on that? Michel ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> Date: Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 4:57 PM Subject: Re: Student Paper To: ben zand <[email protected]> Dear Ben thanks for that email and I pretty much agree with your summary of the world situation, not sure though where I can find these data, but here is a summary by Ted Trainer: http://p2pfoundation.net/Radical_Implications_of_a_Zero_Growth_Economy (see also below, I"m adding stuff as I think of it) and this is probably quite important: http://p2pfoundation.net/Planetary_Boundaries "The following points drive home the magnitude of the overshoot:* * 1. *If the 9 billion people we will have on earth within about 50 yearswere to use resources at the per capita rate of the rich countries, annual resource production would have to be about 8 times as great as it is now. * 2. * If 9 billion people were to have a North American diet we would need about 4.5 billion ha of cropland, but there are only 1.4 billion ha of cropland on the planet. * 3. * Water resources are scarce and dwindling. What will the situation be if 9 billion people try to use water as we in rich countries do, while the greenhouse problem reduces water resources. * 4. * The world’s fisheries are in serious trouble now, most of them overfished and in decline. What happens if 9 billion people try to eat fish at the rate Australian’s do now? * 5. * Several mineral and other resources are likely to be very scarce soon, including gallium, indium, helium, and there are worries about copper, zinc, silver and phosphorous. * 6. * Oil and gas are likely to be in decline soon, and largely unavailable in the second half of the century. If 9 billion were to consume oil at the Australian per capita rate, world demand would be about 5 times as great as it is now. The seriousness of this is extreme, given the heavy dependence of our society on liquid fuels. * 7. * Recent 'Footprint' analysis indicates that it takes 8 ha of productive land to provide water, energy, settlement area and food for one person living in Australia. (World Wildlife Fund, 2009.) So if 9 billion people were to live as we do about 72 billion ha of productive land would be needed. But that is about 10 times all the available productive land on the planet. * 8. * The most disturbing argument is to do with the greenhouse problem. It is very likely that in order to stop the carbon content of the atmosphere rising to dangerous levels CO2 emissions will have to be totally eliminated by 2050 (Hansen says 2030). (Hansen, 2009, Meinschausen et al., 2009.) Geo-sequestration can’t enable this, if only because it can only capture about 85% of the 50% of emissions that come from stationary sources like power stations."* some sources to check: http://p2pfoundation.net/Energy_Scenarios http://p2pfoundation.net/Powerdown_Scenarios http://p2pfoundation.net/Sustainable_Shrinkage I recommend you take a look at 'overall policy frameworks', see Introduction: - On the Necessity of Mediation for Economic and Social Transitions<http://p2pfoundation.net/On_the_Necessity_of_Mediation_for_Economic_and_Social_Transitions>. Christian Arnsperger. - Christian Arnsperger <http://p2pfoundation.net/Christian_Arnsperger>: The Concept of Transition<http://p2pfoundation.net/Concept_of_Transition>. [38]<http://eco-transitions.blogspot.com/2011/04/why-transition-first-look-at-concepts.html> Ways to organize P2P-Commons oriented proposals in a coherent whole: 1. The Five Capitals Model <http://p2pfoundation.net/Five_Capitals_Model> 2. Seven Acupuncture Points for Shifting to Capitalism 3.0<http://www.ottoscharmer.com/docs/articles/2009_SevenAcupuncturePoints5.pdf>. Otto Scharmer. 3. David Korten: Seven Global Sources of Dysfunction and their Corresponding Corrective Actions<http://p2pfoundation.net/Seven_Global_Sources_of_Dysfunction_and_their_Corresponding_Corrective_Actions> 4. Christian Arnsperger: Six Framework Conditions for Global Systemic Change<http://p2pfoundation.net/Six_Framework_Conditions_for_Global_Systemic_Change> 5. The New Economy Working Group<http://p2pfoundation.net/New_Economy_Working_Group>, with David Korten<http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Policy?title=David_Korten&action=edit&redlink=1>, Nine Action Clusters<http://neweconomyworkinggroup.org/about-us/ten-action-clusters>and Three Defining System Conditions<http://neweconomyworkinggroup.org/about-us/our-working-premise> 6. 11 Structural Problems of the Current World System<http://p2pfoundation.net/11_Structural_Problems_of_the_Current_World_System> That's it for today! On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 12:36 AM, ben zand <[email protected]> wrote:
Great. Again I deeply appreciate your time and efforts for humanity. And I do not expect any complete answers as I think that is beyond the scope of any one mind to comprehend with he interweaving complexities of today. I am beginning my paper by looking at the economic realities which drive the world and determine possibilities. Which in itself, I feel, is one of the root problems of humanity. Developed countries have become infatuated with growth and economic measures as the goals for society. This obviously isn't going to create a benevolent world as each country competes for exponential growth in a limited planet. Now it seems the United States, the engine and absorber, of economic growth has reached its limits of consumption as the population cannot service much new added debt, which allowed it to maintain this position. The globalist appear to look toward China and the developing world as the next engine after the next black swan induced market crash depresses the economy and destabilizes the U.S.'s position. In any plan to create new structures for the future of humanity, we must first roughly understand the environment in which they will be created and the palpability of these new possible changes.
So first question: Is it possible, or do you know of resources and data I can look at, to maintain the exponential growth the economic structures require? Id appreciate any other reflections or ideas you have about how this relatively short-term scenario could possibly play out.
Ben
Michel, yes I thought 2030 was plausible. (stop reading this now if you are easily depressed). Now, I think we could see problems in even *less* time than that. We could see the West Antarctic Ice Sheet suddenly slide into the ocean, which would raise sea levels very quickly. Or, we could see as little as a decade long release of giga-tons of methane gas from the ocean floor. 55 million years ago, just such an event happened, according to paleoclimatologists, and it caused a temperature spike of 8 degrees celsius, killing 2/3 of ocean species. Ice ages also show evidence of rapid climate shift (even as little as 3 years). On top of that, we can see that we are now down to about 10% of world fisheries http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/05/0515_030515_fishdecline.html , 10% of rainforests. (next year we are projected to cross the threshold of 10% of rainforests and 50% of species that some believe rainforest ecologies can bounce back from on their own http://www.rainforests.net/variables.htm ) And, we are using 1 and one half of the total capacity of the earth to replenish itself! We have *already* exceeded the limits of growth. http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/world_footprint/ Plus, I think it is clear that on a worldwide bio-psyhco-social level, we are already seeing many areas slide into control paradigms (most remarkably right here in the West), while we're also seeing people coordinate to topple old control regimes, or broken bureaucracies. What this all means to me is that we are already in serious, serious trouble. Yet, as we discussed in work in Future Forward Institute, and as we've explored here in P2P Foundation for a number of years, there is also plenty that is emerging as adaptation to these changes On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 6:03 AM, Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> wrote:
thanks for helping Ben, in cc, with this important question:
< first question: Is it possible, or do you know of resources and data I can look at, to maintain the exponential growth the economic structures require? Id appreciate any other reflections or ideas you have about how this relatively short-term scenario could possibly play out. >
part of my own answer is below with recommended resources
Ben, see http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/p2p-practices-as-condition-for-the-next-long-w...
In this paper, I draw on Kondratieff wave theory and Carlota Perez to describe the near and longer future scenario,
basically:
Sudden system shock makes previous system inoperable
15 years of crisis, deleveraging of debt, etc ....
New wave based on new principles, which could/should include substantive p2p practices
However, the underlying biospheric and civilisational crisis may very well complicate things substantially, this may very well be the last wave of capitalism
Sam, I remember you place the congruence of ecological crisis in 2030, do you have any sources on that?
Michel
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> Date: Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 4:57 PM Subject: Re: Student Paper To: ben zand <[email protected]>
Dear Ben
thanks for that email and I pretty much agree with your summary of the world situation,
not sure though where I can find these data,
but here is a summary by Ted Trainer: http://p2pfoundation.net/Radical_Implications_of_a_Zero_Growth_Economy
(see also below, I"m adding stuff as I think of it)
and this is probably quite important: http://p2pfoundation.net/Planetary_Boundaries
"The following points drive home the magnitude of the overshoot:
If the 9 billion people we will have on earth within about 50 years were to use resources at the per capita rate of the rich countries, annual resource production would have to be about 8 times as great as it is now. If 9 billion people were to have a North American diet we would need about 4.5 billion ha of cropland, but there are only 1.4 billion ha of cropland on the planet. Water resources are scarce and dwindling. What will the situation be if 9 billion people try to use water as we in rich countries do, while the greenhouse problem reduces water resources. The world’s fisheries are in serious trouble now, most of them overfished and in decline. What happens if 9 billion people try to eat fish at the rate Australian’s do now? Several mineral and other resources are likely to be very scarce soon, including gallium, indium, helium, and there are worries about copper, zinc, silver and phosphorous. Oil and gas are likely to be in decline soon, and largely unavailable in the second half of the century. If 9 billion were to consume oil at the Australian per capita rate, world demand would be about 5 times as great as it is now. The seriousness of this is extreme, given the heavy dependence of our society on liquid fuels. Recent 'Footprint' analysis indicates that it takes 8 ha of productive land to provide water, energy, settlement area and food for one person living in Australia. (World Wildlife Fund, 2009.) So if 9 billion people were to live as we do about 72 billion ha of productive land would be needed. But that is about 10 times all the available productive land on the planet. The most disturbing argument is to do with the greenhouse problem. It is very likely that in order to stop the carbon content of the atmosphere rising to dangerous levels CO2 emissions will have to be totally eliminated by 2050 (Hansen says 2030). (Hansen, 2009, Meinschausen et al., 2009.) Geo-sequestration can’t enable this, if only because it can only capture about 85% of the 50% of emissions that come from stationary sources like power stations."
some sources to check:
http://p2pfoundation.net/Energy_Scenarios
http://p2pfoundation.net/Powerdown_Scenarios
http://p2pfoundation.net/Sustainable_Shrinkage
I recommend you take a look at 'overall policy frameworks', see
Introduction:
On the Necessity of Mediation for Economic and Social Transitions. Christian Arnsperger. Christian Arnsperger: The Concept of Transition. [38]
Ways to organize P2P-Commons oriented proposals in a coherent whole:
The Five Capitals Model Seven Acupuncture Points for Shifting to Capitalism 3.0. Otto Scharmer. David Korten: Seven Global Sources of Dysfunction and their Corresponding Corrective Actions Christian Arnsperger: Six Framework Conditions for Global Systemic Change The New Economy Working Group, with David Korten, Nine Action Clusters and Three Defining System Conditions 11 Structural Problems of the Current World System
That's it for today!
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 12:36 AM, ben zand <[email protected]> wrote:
Great. Again I deeply appreciate your time and efforts for humanity. And I do not expect any complete answers as I think that is beyond the scope of any one mind to comprehend with he interweaving complexities of today. I am beginning my paper by looking at the economic realities which drive the world and determine possibilities. Which in itself, I feel, is one of the root problems of humanity. Developed countries have become infatuated with growth and economic measures as the goals for society. This obviously isn't going to create a benevolent world as each country competes for exponential growth in a limited planet. Now it seems the United States, the engine and absorber, of economic growth has reached its limits of consumption as the population cannot service much new added debt, which allowed it to maintain this position. The globalist appear to look toward China and the developing world as the next engine after the next black swan induced market crash depresses the economy and destabilizes the U.S.'s position. In any plan to create new structures for the future of humanity, we must first roughly understand the environment in which they will be created and the palpability of these new possible changes. So first question: Is it possible, or do you know of resources and data I can look at, to maintain the exponential growth the economic structures require? Id appreciate any other reflections or ideas you have about how this relatively short-term scenario could possibly play out. Ben
-- -- Sam Rose Hollymead Capital Partners, LLC Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451 email: [email protected] http://hollymeadcapital.com http://p2pfoundation.net http://futureforwardinstitute.com http://socialmediaclassroom.com "The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human ambition." - Carl Sagan
thanks Sam, if you ever see timelines on this, thanks for letting me and ben know, On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 9:07 PM, Samuel Rose <[email protected]> wrote:
Michel, yes I thought 2030 was plausible. (stop reading this now if you are easily depressed). Now, I think we could see problems in even *less* time than that. We could see the West Antarctic Ice Sheet suddenly slide into the ocean, which would raise sea levels very quickly. Or, we could see as little as a decade long release of giga-tons of methane gas from the ocean floor. 55 million years ago, just such an event happened, according to paleoclimatologists, and it caused a temperature spike of 8 degrees celsius, killing 2/3 of ocean species. Ice ages also show evidence of rapid climate shift (even as little as 3 years).
On top of that, we can see that we are now down to about 10% of world fisheries http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/05/0515_030515_fishdecline.html ,
10% of rainforests. (next year we are projected to cross the threshold of 10% of rainforests and 50% of species that some believe rainforest ecologies can bounce back from on their own http://www.rainforests.net/variables.htm )
And, we are using 1 and one half of the total capacity of the earth to replenish itself! We have *already* exceeded the limits of growth. http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/world_footprint/
Plus, I think it is clear that on a worldwide bio-psyhco-social level, we are already seeing many areas slide into control paradigms (most remarkably right here in the West), while we're also seeing people coordinate to topple old control regimes, or broken bureaucracies.
What this all means to me is that we are already in serious, serious trouble. Yet, as we discussed in work in Future Forward Institute, and as we've explored here in P2P Foundation for a number of years, there is also plenty that is emerging as adaptation to these changes
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 6:03 AM, Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> wrote:
thanks for helping Ben, in cc, with this important question:
< first question: Is it possible, or do you know of resources and data I can look at, to maintain the exponential growth the economic structures require? Id appreciate any other reflections or ideas you have about how this relatively short-term scenario could possibly play out. >
part of my own answer is below with recommended resources
Ben, see
http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/p2p-practices-as-condition-for-the-next-long-w...
In this paper, I draw on Kondratieff wave theory and Carlota Perez to describe the near and longer future scenario,
basically:
Sudden system shock makes previous system inoperable
15 years of crisis, deleveraging of debt, etc ....
New wave based on new principles, which could/should include substantive
p2p
practices
However, the underlying biospheric and civilisational crisis may very well complicate things substantially, this may very well be the last wave of capitalism
Sam, I remember you place the congruence of ecological crisis in 2030, do you have any sources on that?
Michel
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> Date: Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 4:57 PM Subject: Re: Student Paper To: ben zand <[email protected]>
Dear Ben
thanks for that email and I pretty much agree with your summary of the world situation,
not sure though where I can find these data,
but here is a summary by Ted Trainer: http://p2pfoundation.net/Radical_Implications_of_a_Zero_Growth_Economy
(see also below, I"m adding stuff as I think of it)
and this is probably quite important: http://p2pfoundation.net/Planetary_Boundaries
"The following points drive home the magnitude of the overshoot:
If the 9 billion people we will have on earth within about 50 years were to use resources at the per capita rate of the rich countries, annual resource production would have to be about 8 times as great as it is now. If 9 billion people were to have a North American diet we would need about 4.5 billion ha of cropland, but there are only 1.4 billion ha of cropland on the planet. Water resources are scarce and dwindling. What will the situation be if 9 billion people try to use water as we in rich countries do, while the greenhouse problem reduces water resources. The world’s fisheries are in serious trouble now, most of them overfished and in decline. What happens if 9 billion people try to eat fish at the rate Australian’s do now? Several mineral and other resources are likely to be very scarce soon, including gallium, indium, helium, and there are worries about copper, zinc, silver and phosphorous. Oil and gas are likely to be in decline soon, and largely unavailable in the second half of the century. If 9 billion were to consume oil at the Australian per capita rate, world demand would be about 5 times as great as it is now. The seriousness of this is extreme, given the heavy dependence of our society on liquid fuels. Recent 'Footprint' analysis indicates that it takes 8 ha of productive land to provide water, energy, settlement area and food for one person living in Australia. (World Wildlife Fund, 2009.) So if 9 billion people were to live as we do about 72 billion ha of productive land would be needed. But that is about 10 times all the available productive land on the planet. The most disturbing argument is to do with the greenhouse problem. It is very likely that in order to stop the carbon content of the atmosphere rising to dangerous levels CO2 emissions will have to be totally eliminated by 2050 (Hansen says 2030). (Hansen, 2009, Meinschausen et al., 2009.) Geo-sequestration can’t enable this, if only because it can only capture about 85% of the 50% of emissions that come from stationary sources like power stations."
some sources to check:
http://p2pfoundation.net/Energy_Scenarios
http://p2pfoundation.net/Powerdown_Scenarios
http://p2pfoundation.net/Sustainable_Shrinkage
I recommend you take a look at 'overall policy frameworks', see
Introduction:
On the Necessity of Mediation for Economic and Social Transitions. Christian Arnsperger. Christian Arnsperger: The Concept of Transition. [38]
Ways to organize P2P-Commons oriented proposals in a coherent whole:
The Five Capitals Model Seven Acupuncture Points for Shifting to Capitalism 3.0. Otto Scharmer. David Korten: Seven Global Sources of Dysfunction and their Corresponding Corrective Actions Christian Arnsperger: Six Framework Conditions for Global Systemic Change The New Economy Working Group, with David Korten, Nine Action Clusters and Three Defining System Conditions 11 Structural Problems of the Current World System
That's it for today!
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 12:36 AM, ben zand <[email protected]> wrote:
Great. Again I deeply appreciate your time and efforts for humanity. And
I
do not expect any complete answers as I think that is beyond the scope of any one mind to comprehend with he interweaving complexities of today. I am beginning my paper by looking at the economic realities which drive the world and determine possibilities. Which in itself, I feel, is one of the root problems of humanity. Developed countries have become infatuated with growth and economic measures as the goals for society. This obviously isn't going to create a benevolent world as each country competes for exponential growth in a limited planet. Now it seems the United States, the engine and absorber, of economic growth has reached its limits of consumption as the population cannot service much new added debt, which allowed it to maintain this position. The globalist appear to look toward China and the developing world as the next engine after the next black swan induced market crash depresses the economy and destabilizes the U.S.'s position. In any plan to create new structures for the future of humanity, we must first roughly understand the environment in which they will be created and the palpability of these new possible changes. So first question: Is it possible, or do you know of resources and data I can look at, to maintain the exponential growth the economic structures require? Id appreciate any other reflections or ideas you have about how this relatively short-term scenario could possibly play out. Ben
-- -- Sam Rose Hollymead Capital Partners, LLC Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451 email: [email protected] http://hollymeadcapital.com http://p2pfoundation.net http://futureforwardinstitute.com http://socialmediaclassroom.com
"The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human ambition." - Carl Sagan
-- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> wrote:
thanks Sam,
if you ever see timelines on this, thanks for letting me and ben know,
Sure, I've never seen one comprehensive timeline, but if you give me maybe about a 3 month lead time, I could build a synthesis timeline with http://www.simile-widgets.org/timeline/ that we can just keep adding to. Probably could read some specific data point from media wiki pages. If there is even a tiny amount of research funding for that, I'd be glad to have it too, of course.
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 9:07 PM, Samuel Rose <[email protected]> wrote:
Michel, yes I thought 2030 was plausible. (stop reading this now if you are easily depressed). Now, I think we could see problems in even *less* time than that. We could see the West Antarctic Ice Sheet suddenly slide into the ocean, which would raise sea levels very quickly. Or, we could see as little as a decade long release of giga-tons of methane gas from the ocean floor. 55 million years ago, just such an event happened, according to paleoclimatologists, and it caused a temperature spike of 8 degrees celsius, killing 2/3 of ocean species. Ice ages also show evidence of rapid climate shift (even as little as 3 years).
On top of that, we can see that we are now down to about 10% of world fisheries http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/05/0515_030515_fishdecline.html ,
10% of rainforests. (next year we are projected to cross the threshold of 10% of rainforests and 50% of species that some believe rainforest ecologies can bounce back from on their own http://www.rainforests.net/variables.htm )
And, we are using 1 and one half of the total capacity of the earth to replenish itself! We have *already* exceeded the limits of growth. http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/world_footprint/
Plus, I think it is clear that on a worldwide bio-psyhco-social level, we are already seeing many areas slide into control paradigms (most remarkably right here in the West), while we're also seeing people coordinate to topple old control regimes, or broken bureaucracies.
What this all means to me is that we are already in serious, serious trouble. Yet, as we discussed in work in Future Forward Institute, and as we've explored here in P2P Foundation for a number of years, there is also plenty that is emerging as adaptation to these changes
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 6:03 AM, Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> wrote:
thanks for helping Ben, in cc, with this important question:
< first question: Is it possible, or do you know of resources and data I can look at, to maintain the exponential growth the economic structures require? Id appreciate any other reflections or ideas you have about how this relatively short-term scenario could possibly play out. >
part of my own answer is below with recommended resources
Ben, see
http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/p2p-practices-as-condition-for-the-next-long-w...
In this paper, I draw on Kondratieff wave theory and Carlota Perez to describe the near and longer future scenario,
basically:
Sudden system shock makes previous system inoperable
15 years of crisis, deleveraging of debt, etc ....
New wave based on new principles, which could/should include substantive p2p practices
However, the underlying biospheric and civilisational crisis may very well complicate things substantially, this may very well be the last wave of capitalism
Sam, I remember you place the congruence of ecological crisis in 2030, do you have any sources on that?
Michel
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> Date: Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 4:57 PM Subject: Re: Student Paper To: ben zand <[email protected]>
Dear Ben
thanks for that email and I pretty much agree with your summary of the world situation,
not sure though where I can find these data,
but here is a summary by Ted Trainer: http://p2pfoundation.net/Radical_Implications_of_a_Zero_Growth_Economy
(see also below, I"m adding stuff as I think of it)
and this is probably quite important: http://p2pfoundation.net/Planetary_Boundaries
"The following points drive home the magnitude of the overshoot:
If the 9 billion people we will have on earth within about 50 years were to use resources at the per capita rate of the rich countries, annual resource production would have to be about 8 times as great as it is now. If 9 billion people were to have a North American diet we would need about 4.5 billion ha of cropland, but there are only 1.4 billion ha of cropland on the planet. Water resources are scarce and dwindling. What will the situation be if 9 billion people try to use water as we in rich countries do, while the greenhouse problem reduces water resources. The world’s fisheries are in serious trouble now, most of them overfished and in decline. What happens if 9 billion people try to eat fish at the rate Australian’s do now? Several mineral and other resources are likely to be very scarce soon, including gallium, indium, helium, and there are worries about copper, zinc, silver and phosphorous. Oil and gas are likely to be in decline soon, and largely unavailable in the second half of the century. If 9 billion were to consume oil at the Australian per capita rate, world demand would be about 5 times as great as it is now. The seriousness of this is extreme, given the heavy dependence of our society on liquid fuels. Recent 'Footprint' analysis indicates that it takes 8 ha of productive land to provide water, energy, settlement area and food for one person living in Australia. (World Wildlife Fund, 2009.) So if 9 billion people were to live as we do about 72 billion ha of productive land would be needed. But that is about 10 times all the available productive land on the planet. The most disturbing argument is to do with the greenhouse problem. It is very likely that in order to stop the carbon content of the atmosphere rising to dangerous levels CO2 emissions will have to be totally eliminated by 2050 (Hansen says 2030). (Hansen, 2009, Meinschausen et al., 2009.) Geo-sequestration can’t enable this, if only because it can only capture about 85% of the 50% of emissions that come from stationary sources like power stations."
some sources to check:
http://p2pfoundation.net/Energy_Scenarios
http://p2pfoundation.net/Powerdown_Scenarios
http://p2pfoundation.net/Sustainable_Shrinkage
I recommend you take a look at 'overall policy frameworks', see
Introduction:
On the Necessity of Mediation for Economic and Social Transitions. Christian Arnsperger. Christian Arnsperger: The Concept of Transition. [38]
Ways to organize P2P-Commons oriented proposals in a coherent whole:
The Five Capitals Model Seven Acupuncture Points for Shifting to Capitalism 3.0. Otto Scharmer. David Korten: Seven Global Sources of Dysfunction and their Corresponding Corrective Actions Christian Arnsperger: Six Framework Conditions for Global Systemic Change The New Economy Working Group, with David Korten, Nine Action Clusters and Three Defining System Conditions 11 Structural Problems of the Current World System
That's it for today!
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 12:36 AM, ben zand <[email protected]> wrote:
Great. Again I deeply appreciate your time and efforts for humanity. And I do not expect any complete answers as I think that is beyond the scope of any one mind to comprehend with he interweaving complexities of today. I am beginning my paper by looking at the economic realities which drive the world and determine possibilities. Which in itself, I feel, is one of the root problems of humanity. Developed countries have become infatuated with growth and economic measures as the goals for society. This obviously isn't going to create a benevolent world as each country competes for exponential growth in a limited planet. Now it seems the United States, the engine and absorber, of economic growth has reached its limits of consumption as the population cannot service much new added debt, which allowed it to maintain this position. The globalist appear to look toward China and the developing world as the next engine after the next black swan induced market crash depresses the economy and destabilizes the U.S.'s position. In any plan to create new structures for the future of humanity, we must first roughly understand the environment in which they will be created and the palpability of these new possible changes. So first question: Is it possible, or do you know of resources and data I can look at, to maintain the exponential growth the economic structures require? Id appreciate any other reflections or ideas you have about how this relatively short-term scenario could possibly play out. Ben
-- -- Sam Rose Hollymead Capital Partners, LLC Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451 email: [email protected] http://hollymeadcapital.com http://p2pfoundation.net http://futureforwardinstitute.com http://socialmediaclassroom.com
"The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human ambition." - Carl Sagan
-- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
-- -- Sam Rose Hollymead Capital Partners, LLC Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451 email: [email protected] http://hollymeadcapital.com http://p2pfoundation.net http://futureforwardinstitute.com http://socialmediaclassroom.com "The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human ambition." - Carl Sagan
no funding for that part Sam ... would be good to find though, Michel On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:13 PM, Samuel Rose <[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> wrote:
thanks Sam,
if you ever see timelines on this, thanks for letting me and ben know,
Sure, I've never seen one comprehensive timeline, but if you give me maybe about a 3 month lead time, I could build a synthesis timeline with http://www.simile-widgets.org/timeline/ that we can just keep adding to. Probably could read some specific data point from media wiki pages. If there is even a tiny amount of research funding for that, I'd be glad to have it too, of course.
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 9:07 PM, Samuel Rose <[email protected]> wrote:
Michel, yes I thought 2030 was plausible. (stop reading this now if you are easily depressed). Now, I think we could see problems in even *less* time than that. We could see the West Antarctic Ice Sheet suddenly slide into the ocean, which would raise sea levels very quickly. Or, we could see as little as a decade long release of giga-tons of methane gas from the ocean floor. 55 million years ago, just such an event happened, according to paleoclimatologists, and it caused a temperature spike of 8 degrees celsius, killing 2/3 of ocean species. Ice ages also show evidence of rapid climate shift (even as little as 3 years).
On top of that, we can see that we are now down to about 10% of world fisheries
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/05/0515_030515_fishdecline.html
,
10% of rainforests. (next year we are projected to cross the threshold of 10% of rainforests and 50% of species that some believe rainforest ecologies can bounce back from on their own http://www.rainforests.net/variables.htm )
And, we are using 1 and one half of the total capacity of the earth to replenish itself! We have *already* exceeded the limits of growth. http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/world_footprint/
Plus, I think it is clear that on a worldwide bio-psyhco-social level, we are already seeing many areas slide into control paradigms (most remarkably right here in the West), while we're also seeing people coordinate to topple old control regimes, or broken bureaucracies.
What this all means to me is that we are already in serious, serious trouble. Yet, as we discussed in work in Future Forward Institute, and as we've explored here in P2P Foundation for a number of years, there is also plenty that is emerging as adaptation to these changes
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 6:03 AM, Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> wrote:
thanks for helping Ben, in cc, with this important question:
< first question: Is it possible, or do you know of resources and data I can look at, to maintain the exponential growth the economic structures require? Id appreciate any other reflections or ideas you have about how this relatively short-term scenario could possibly play out. >
part of my own answer is below with recommended resources
Ben, see
http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/p2p-practices-as-condition-for-the-next-long-w...
In this paper, I draw on Kondratieff wave theory and Carlota Perez to describe the near and longer future scenario,
basically:
Sudden system shock makes previous system inoperable
15 years of crisis, deleveraging of debt, etc ....
New wave based on new principles, which could/should include
substantive
p2p practices
However, the underlying biospheric and civilisational crisis may very well complicate things substantially, this may very well be the last wave of capitalism
Sam, I remember you place the congruence of ecological crisis in 2030, do you have any sources on that?
Michel
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> Date: Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 4:57 PM Subject: Re: Student Paper To: ben zand <[email protected]>
Dear Ben
thanks for that email and I pretty much agree with your summary of the world situation,
not sure though where I can find these data,
but here is a summary by Ted Trainer:
http://p2pfoundation.net/Radical_Implications_of_a_Zero_Growth_Economy
(see also below, I"m adding stuff as I think of it)
and this is probably quite important: http://p2pfoundation.net/Planetary_Boundaries
"The following points drive home the magnitude of the overshoot:
If the 9 billion people we will have on earth within about 50 years
were
to use resources at the per capita rate of the rich countries, annual resource production would have to be about 8 times as great as it is now. If 9 billion people were to have a North American diet we would need about 4.5 billion ha of cropland, but there are only 1.4 billion ha of cropland on the planet. Water resources are scarce and dwindling. What will the situation be if 9 billion people try to use water as we in rich countries do, while the greenhouse problem reduces water resources. The world’s fisheries are in serious trouble now, most of them overfished and in decline. What happens if 9 billion people try to eat fish at the rate Australian’s do now? Several mineral and other resources are likely to be very scarce soon, including gallium, indium, helium, and there are worries about copper, zinc, silver and phosphorous. Oil and gas are likely to be in decline soon, and largely unavailable in the second half of the century. If 9 billion were to consume oil at the Australian per capita rate, world demand would be about 5 times as great as it is now. The seriousness of this is extreme, given the heavy dependence of our society on liquid fuels. Recent 'Footprint' analysis indicates that it takes 8 ha of productive land to provide water, energy, settlement area and food for one person living in Australia. (World Wildlife Fund, 2009.) So if 9 billion people were to live as we do about 72 billion ha of productive land would be needed. But that is about 10 times all the available productive land on the planet. The most disturbing argument is to do with the greenhouse problem. It is very likely that in order to stop the carbon content of the atmosphere rising to dangerous levels CO2 emissions will have to be totally eliminated by 2050 (Hansen says 2030). (Hansen, 2009, Meinschausen et al., 2009.) Geo-sequestration can’t enable this, if only because it can only capture about 85% of the 50% of emissions that come from stationary sources like power stations."
some sources to check:
http://p2pfoundation.net/Energy_Scenarios
http://p2pfoundation.net/Powerdown_Scenarios
http://p2pfoundation.net/Sustainable_Shrinkage
I recommend you take a look at 'overall policy frameworks', see
Introduction:
On the Necessity of Mediation for Economic and Social Transitions. Christian Arnsperger. Christian Arnsperger: The Concept of Transition. [38]
Ways to organize P2P-Commons oriented proposals in a coherent whole:
The Five Capitals Model Seven Acupuncture Points for Shifting to Capitalism 3.0. Otto Scharmer. David Korten: Seven Global Sources of Dysfunction and their Corresponding Corrective Actions Christian Arnsperger: Six Framework Conditions for Global Systemic Change The New Economy Working Group, with David Korten, Nine Action Clusters and Three Defining System Conditions 11 Structural Problems of the Current World System
That's it for today!
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 12:36 AM, ben zand <[email protected]> wrote:
Great. Again I deeply appreciate your time and efforts for humanity. And I do not expect any complete answers as I think that is beyond the
scope
of any one mind to comprehend with he interweaving complexities of today. I am beginning my paper by looking at the economic realities which drive the world and determine possibilities. Which in itself, I feel, is one of the root problems of humanity. Developed countries have become infatuated with growth and economic measures as the goals for society. This obviously isn't going to create a benevolent world as each country competes for exponential growth in a limited planet. Now it seems the United States, the engine and absorber, of economic growth has reached its limits of consumption as the population cannot service much new added debt, which allowed it to maintain this position. The globalist appear to look toward China and the developing world as the next engine after the next black swan induced market crash depresses the economy and destabilizes the U.S.'s position. In any plan to create new structures for the future of humanity, we must first roughly understand the environment in which they will be created and the palpability of these new possible changes. So first question: Is it possible, or do you know of resources and data I can look at, to maintain the exponential growth the economic structures require? Id appreciate any other reflections or ideas you have about how this relatively short-term scenario could possibly play out. Ben
-- -- Sam Rose Hollymead Capital Partners, LLC Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451 email: [email protected] http://hollymeadcapital.com http://p2pfoundation.net http://futureforwardinstitute.com http://socialmediaclassroom.com
"The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human ambition." - Carl Sagan
-- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
-- -- Sam Rose Hollymead Capital Partners, LLC Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451 email: [email protected] http://hollymeadcapital.com http://p2pfoundation.net http://futureforwardinstitute.com http://socialmediaclassroom.com
"The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human ambition." - Carl Sagan
-- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
participants (2)
-
Michel Bauwens -
Samuel Rose