The End of growth-Richard Heinberg

[andy765gtr]

good talk. its obvious really if your not infected with the growth delusion

[ShumpJr82]

@tgreg990 You've got it wrong unfortunately. By the best estimates of shale gas (natural gas in the US), and with keeping economics in mind, the range of years for Natural Gas availability is closer to 25 years,not 200. Its trading at 2.00 USD per 1,000 cubic feet at the moment and is not even profitable to drill and extract to trade until the price is closer to 10.00 USD per 1,000 cubic feet. Natural Gas can not, and will not be our saving grace. There is no capital for its infrastructure ether

[lordmetroid]

The dollar has a definition, it is a measurment of weight

[At0m5k]

@lordmetroid That's a historical definition. The dollar as it is now has no definition.

[TheMuskokaman]

Similar to Jacque Fresco's Venus Project.Sustainability is imperative and there will be many people in the wealthy class that will fight this tooth and nail.Bloody shame people can't envision a society without a monetary system and try to realize it.The only reason this ideology would fail is from the greed and ignorance of those who would sooner enslave their fellow man instead of helping him. Or from fear of change Wakeup Time Humankind party's over and The Corporatists stuck us with the Tab

[tgreg990]

The thesis is assumed and not supported. Just a question about what do we do without carbon fuels. There is no basis for the predictions. He ignores other energy sources such as technologies and change, e.g., nuclear, solar, etc which will replace hydrocarbons IF we run short of very cheap oil.. Looks like there is a 200 year supply of natural gas. What about considering that? Not done. Debt will lead to asset devaluations. Not a big deal for those with few assets.

[MrMick73]

@tgreg990 Hello, You need cheap oil to produce cheap products. Price goes up economy fluctuates. Look into EROI that may help you learn a little more about whats required to obtain Oil and Gas and the return on the Energy investment.

Good Luck :-)

[4aSteadyStateEconomy]

@tgreg990, natural gas (U.S. fracking) may be grossly overhyped - as industry likes to boost stock prices and many wells have dried up prematurely already.

Unless nuclear fusion is finally realized, nuclear fission is based on finite uranium which could peak itself this century if heavily exploited. Even the Sun hits a finite surface area at any given time. Fossil fuels are really just time-compressed solar energy. You just can't get around the fact that a finite planet has finite resources.

[H3lue]

new money = mutual credit

[zyanhh]

But YES, I think thic crisis will not end soon, especialy here in Europe, where it is just beginning in fact. I also think many of ideas in video are true- like worse criminality, homelesness, worse education etc.

[ammachi3]

I wish more people knew about, and understood this man and those who associate/ working with him.

[simmyjaye]

Type Sparxism into YouTube and enjoy (it's related to Peak Oil).

[zyanhh]

Actually he misses the point of human beings - they improve, we are able to make new ideas. Also with growing number of peoples, there is greatly growing number of new ideas, improvements in time.

Maybe there is "peak" in OIL, but we will be able to use another source, same like it was with coal (peak coal is idea repeated since 19 century, still does not happen). I almost feel sorry for those lunatics, looking forward to "destruction and suffering".. Not gonna happen.

[andy765gtr]

@zyanhh actually, real innovation is slowing to a crawl. think of all the discoveries in the 19th century compared to today, where things like electricity and evolution were effectively discovered by some bloke and his dog in a garden shed. today we need multi squillion dollar town sized complexes peopled by hundreds of highly qualified staff to discover some irrelevant partical. the rate of innovation per head of population is virtually zero today, unless you count trivial embellishments.

[jimbobubbadj]

@andy765gtr They would rather put their heads in the sand, how unfortunate.

[CandianBear]

@zyanhh it would behoove you to listen without your mind already made up...

[jimbobubbadj]

@zyanhh Peak coal is already here. The volume of coal is up somewhat but the energy content of the coal(lower quality) is what is being mined more and more. The total energy of the coal produced is on the decline.

[jimbobubbadj]

@zyanhh The increase in ideas is not keeping up with numbers of people. There is a diminishing return on technology, google it. The Planet is finite, only has a set number of square feet.

[zyanhh]

@jimbobubbadj

For increasing innovation i would suggest watching lecture "matt ridley when ideas have sex" on TED

Planet is finite, sure. But still, there is vaste quantity of space unpopulated and almost unused.

I am not telling resources are infinite, but there is still lot of them, probably more than mankind ever mined and used. Price for drilling will be bigger, but with increasing efficiency of cars (i live in EU, new cars here have 4l/100km).

[longfinnedeeler]

@zyanhh What is that new resource? Who said it's about 'destruction and suffering'...much good will rise out of this issue i.e. eating locally grown produce...growing your own....riding bikes (when petrol prices become prohibitive)...the replacement of fossil fuels by Sciene is something science is not holding their breath about in terms of a scientifically engineered replacement....that would be a ludicrous hypothesis for anyone to make.

[zyanhh]

@longfinnedeeler

"Suffering and destruction" - you just named it:

- Riding bike instead car might be suffering for many (not for me, since i use public transport).

- Growing your food - I live in town, what is benefit in growing my own food, when i dont know much about that?

You are actually telling, that living like in middle ages is something great - local food, no "bad" fossil fuels, hunger, poverty, no transportation, no electricity, no medical care etc.

[FocusWLN]

@zyanhh that's completely wrong, the focus is sustainability whether it's going to lead to growth or constriction of our consumption (probably the latter)

[RICHLES01]

You need to look up on youtube ZEITGEIST the movie, goes into depth how all thats going on is by default, then go look at the Alexjones channel and how the new world order is taking over society, the rabbit hole runs very deep people, you need to have an open mind. The world is run by sick maniacs 2whom control the banking cartels and governments. Go look and investigate yourselves. Which pill do you want to take.

[RICHLES01]

Just up the road from me, Totnes is a good place for open thinking and for old hippies. Nice town, shame this stuff does not go in the mainstream

[carbonrocket]

Looks like the BP Chairman has been on this vid and given it a thumbs down?

[andy765gtr]

i live in the uk, and the elephant in the room is never mentioned.

growth is only mentioned in the positive, despite only being a short term bubble. the main reason for that growth is never mentioned, ie oil. or the damage of growth. or the  teetering overshoot

politics and media systems are full of frikin retards. aka economists.

heads should roll for the promotion of these ideas

[chizb79]

I read the book, the more I think of this, the more I know Mexico City will be fucked up in the Oil decline.

[moonsugar1]

I only live a few miles away from Totnes, I could actually cry over missing this!!

[simonsrd100]

Missing from this is there is only enough nuclear material left for the next twenty years then nuclear power station will be defunct .

[hyhhy]

@simonsrd100 That is a myth.

[tmaxyb]

Perhaps we can agree (abiotic oil aside) that oil gas and coal are all finite. Oil is better used for making plastics, tar macadam, insecticides, fungicides, pharmaceuticals and gas for making fertilizer . We can't deny that we need these things for life and the less burn in our cars the better. We like to drive now and again but much of our current car use is excessive and unnecessary. Hopefully we have a long way to go and even if we don't want to, we should care about the future.

[dylanknorth]

those two guys down below that are blabbering on about *who gives a FUCK about* should shut up, and learn something. seriously. shut up. learn. you're both idiots. now take a step towards un-idiotism. seriously.

[dylanknorth]

this is so exactly, fantastically well put. i thank you very much for introducing it to my world today.

[NovusChaoMundi]

Machines can still run on wood gas. Even if we wind up in a world with little to no oil wood gas will enable us to still get some tasks done with machines. Wood gas technology is the fuel after oil and its 100 percent renewable.

[jiroubu]

@NovusChaoMundi That's not a viable alternative at current population levels. We're already depleting forests faster than they can be regrown just for lumber. If we also depended solely upon forests to provide fuel for engines, we would experience crises similar to what happened to Easter Island and what's happening to Haiti now. Look it up.

[NovusChaoMundi]

@jiroubu No doubt there is going to be a population crash. Any species being animal or insect that reproduces faster than its physical environment can sustain will have a die back. On the other hand I plan on being around after this because I have prepared and when every one else is eating there lawn clippings I'll be feasting on my food stores and garden veges while running my wood gas generator. Cheers

[jiroubu]

@NovusChaoMundi I just wish our governments would take a lesson from China and control population growth so the population crash won't be so painful. All Abrahamic religions endorse reckless breeding despite this idea being centuries out of context. The population explosion that occurred during the industrial revolution behooved reproductive discretion, but a lot of cultures in America have rejected the notion that anything at or below replacement rate is beneficial in the long term.

[amandine512]

It's called the comments section, not the discussion section. Come on people.

[paulos184]

Well observed krunchy



[KrunchyJD]

One of the things that imeadiately strikes me, when people use the analogy of pushing a car, is just how inefficient cars actually are. The average person can push a bicycle 5-6 miles (if they were not lazy), but few could push a car this distance because of its weight. Most of the energy from the cars engine pushes the car and not its occupant(s).

Bicycles and human powered vehicles should be a major player, because they are so efficient.

[ladicius]

@KrunchyJD yeah, but i can get from michigan to california in 33 hours in a car. and haul things i own...in that car. and listen to music, control my personal climate, sleep in the car (because i didn't drive 33 hours non-stop)...i guess i miss your point. cars are grossly efficient compared to a bicycle. granted, i'm not a fan of emissions, but your argument doesn't seem to make sense.

[vert107]

@ladicius the point is that if you could not use gas but only your mussels, you would then prefer going to california by bike (that may take many days) than pushing your car many years long, right?

[ladicius]

@vert107 yeah, obviously, but that isn't realistic in any sense. it shouldn't even be a presented hypothetical situation, or analogy, or whatever - it's ten steps behind the questions we should, and are, asking about energy consumption and energy uses. i would rather not walk/bike anywhere. i would rather not emit carbon. i would rather not pay for the reactant that results in the carbon emissions. i would prefer to maintain the quality of life i currently enjoy. now create a question.

[KrunchyJD]

@ladicius Sorry but it is realistic, Oil, will be far more expensive in the future, and the assuption that because you want to drive a car you will be able to is unrealistic.

[KrunchyJD]

@KrunchyJD ladicius, unfortunately, I believe somewhere a long the line you have been conned by the car industry. If we go back to roman times the average commute was 30 minutes (via walking). Sure you can go further in a car but trip times have stayed the same or increased, and at great cost. The car first creates distance and then offers itself as the solution to the problem that it created. We create distance so that we must use cars, instead of creating people orientated cities

[KrunchyJD]

@KrunchyJD (cont).. on a people scale we create sprawl, which necessitates car travel and makes rail inefficient. With people orientated cities you can walk or ride a bike, anywhere you want to go, because it is not to far away. Furthermore, if you would like to go along way you simply catch a very available train. This comes with the bonus of less pollution, noise, fumes, danger, and a people friendly culture.

[ladicius]

@KrunchyJD @KrunchyJD it's unrealistic that you think we'll be running vehicles from oil in the future...it's actually amusing. i am a mechanical engineer/materials science major in the UC Davis program.  we create sprawl because (people like myself) can't stand living in the mess of humans that is any large city. i enjoy the land. i enjoy the mountains, specifically. i go back to your concept of oil being the only fuel we humans have...it will die, yes, but we will replace it.

[KrunchyJD]

@ladicius When did I say that we will be running vehicles from oil, in the future. What I said or was trying to say is that the car as a concept creates more problems then it solves. Sure, cars are fine in a rural context, but most cars are used in cities. Even if you can or it is even possible to create a car that runs on water, then the other problems of cars do not go away, ie congestion, poor land use, sprawl, and the unhealthy danger imposed by having heavy high speed vehicles in cities.

[ladicius]

@KrunchyJD dude, you're living in 1942. good luck with that. i can't even debate with you. sorry.

[KrunchyJD]

@ladicius Ok, so having a city where everyone has to drive many miles to get anywhere in gridlocked traffic, a polluted place full of noise, roads so wide that you cant see over them because of the curviture of the earth, a place in which people die by the thousands every year, and valueless strip mall development amongst a tarmac dessert is progress is it? A place where we send our you people off to die in oil wars so that we can drive miles in gridlock valueless space is progress is it?

[ladicius]

@KrunchyJD oh. my. christ. you're right. the car is the root of all evil because it consumes oil. you need to wake the fuck up and realize that you sound like an idiot. people die by the thousands every day due to heart disease - why don't you go fight for higher health standards? the reason people don't live in close quarters (as you would have it) is so we don't have to live next to people like you. think about the uses of oil beyond the vehicle. manufacturing? medicinal?? contd-

[ladicius]

@ladicius if you have a beef with oil, google the documentary 'HOME' - it's on youtube in its entirety. you're trying to piss on a fire miles away from the forest - the car is not the problem. where the hell do you live where you are so assaulted by 'valueless stripmalls and tarmac'??? you know what? MOVE YOUR ASS SOMEWHERE ELSE. you need to quit trying to fight the immovable giant and learn how to adapt. you need to start promoting ideas of positive change, not 'we all need to (contd)

[ladicius]

@ladicius live in huts within biking distance of one another). IT'S NOT A REALISTIC OPTION. it's people like you that piss me off because you're actually allowed to vote when obviously your education has reached a minimal level, and your ideas are without intellectual background. this is it. enjoy your life, ride your bike, do what you do.  you have no clue what life is about. i don't care how old you are - in fact, i like you less because of your age. old people think 'experience' (contd)

[KrunchyJD]

@ladicius "live in huts" what a load of fucking shit mate. How does driving less equate to living in Huts. I wouldnt be telling people they know nothing after that statement.

[ladicius]

@KrunchyJD really? your idea that centralizing humans to within walking distance of everything they need can easily be equated to the lifestyle of those who live in small villages...in huts. you are way way way too old to be carrying on this conversation. you have no grasp on the current state of progression this planet is in. your experiences have minimal weight, and your educational background is insufficient. all you have are thoughts and theories with no relavant background. goodbye.

[KrunchyJD]

@ladicius Your an idiot

[ladicius]

@KrunchyJD no, you stupid fuck, YOU'RE the idiot. you spell like a fucking child. you embarrass me. university degree??  what, did you find it in the bottom of a cracker jack box? YOU'RE a joke.

[KrunchyJD]

@ladicius You have faulty logic, and cant read who said what, Vert107 said Mussels not me. At least though they use logic. You are also a typical arrogant American, who is up themselves. I was also talking about cars in cities if you bothered to read my comments, not in the country. You cannot say why urban sprawl and car dependency is a good thing, you are simply carrying on like a child. Go watch the end of suburbia nitwit!

There is no point talking to you you are an idiot!

[KrunchyJD]

@ladicius You cant read. You also have no logic, Creating cities in which people must travel many miles to go anywhere makes little sense. How is creating walkable cities a bad idea, look at many of the cities in Europe dumbo!

If you think Urban sprawl and car dependency with people fighting oil wars so they can drive around in cities for miles in purpose built trucks is a good idea, you are insane. The SUV is an American invention.

[ladicius]

means shit - it doesn't. your experiences don't. mean. shit. my generation learns everything you've learned in your life by the end of high school. you have no say in what's going to happen with the rest of my life, and that's what frustrates me the most. you think you're helping, when you're actually just in the fucking way.

[ladicius]

@ladicius here.  youtube com/ watch?v = 8gXUDVrwfcQ&feature = feedu

[ladicius]

@ladicius ^take out spaces, add the periods.

[KrunchyJD]

@ladicius No mate, you are the one living in another reality, I am no idiot, I believe you are. Look at places in Europe where many people catch public transport, ride a bike or walk. They do so because they live within a reasonable proximity to where they want to go. Positive change involves driving less, it involves creating livable walkable communities. I am not the only crazy person as you put it saying this. Ever watch the end of Suburbia? (cont)

[KrunchyJD]

@KrunchyJD I have already seen Home, numerous times. Look in the average university level Enviro scince book, and you will see that Urban Sprawl and car dependency are a massive problem. It is you who is getting in the way, because you want to drive around in your car and pretend that you are not contributing to the problem. Is it also not a problem that people dont do enough exercise and just maybe that contributes to heart disease. Dont call me an idiot mate, simply because I dont worship cars

[KrunchyJD]

@KrunchyJD Furthermore, I never said cars were the only things that use oil, but transport is by far the biggest user. Nothing I have said is factually incorrect. You simply are pissed off because you have some fear of being without a car. Many people who ride a bicycle to work are quite happy. You need to do a bit more reading yourself before criticising what I have said.

[KrunchyJD]

@ladicius You learn "everything you've learned in life by the end of highschool", that statement in itself says you are a fool.

[ladicius]

@KrunchyJD you're retarded and unable to read - i said i learned everything you had learned by the time i graduated high school. example - when you spelled 'muscles' mussels. don't get me started on your 8th grade grammar skills...

[KrunchyJD]

@ladicius I may make typo's but you have the logic of a 1 year old. You have not been able to refute anything I have said with logic. I am not an American and I would not cast aspertions on my voting habits since I was not the one who ellected G W Bush!

[KrunchyJD]

@ladicius Obviously you cant read because I never said "mussels", that was someone else.

[KrunchyJD]

@ladicius So you believe you have learned everything by the end of high school, you clearly have not learned much.

[ladicius]

@KrunchyJD clearly you have not learned much, as you are unable to comment properly on a simple website. welcome to being an old man whom technology has passed by...

[KrunchyJD]

@ladicius Logic has passed you by!

[KrunchyJD]

@ladicius I would like to live somewhere pleasent and I dont regard long distance strip malls, commuting in congested streets, air pollution etc to be helpful. I also believe I have the right to ride my bicycle, from A to B without the fear of some Cager running me over. Distance created by cars IS the problem because it creates a dependency on car travel, which then creates more need for low density sprawl with wider roads and bigger distances.

[KrunchyJD]

@ladicius You need to wake up, this video was about oil, and transport is the biggest user of oil.

[KrunchyJD]

@ladicius I was exagerating to make a point. Cars create distance congestion, and a lazy attitude. Grow a brain!

[ladicius]

@KrunchyJD no, lazy people create a lazy attitude. my brain overwhelms the capacity for yours - please. tell me how many degrees you have, and what they are in. tell me the glorious colleges you have attended. i am eager to hear the insane mental capacity you hold.

[KrunchyJD]

@ladicius I have a university degree, idiot. Besides your problem is a lack of logic, since you think everyone driving everywhere and suburban sprawl equates to progress. obviously you dont read, or comprehend well since few people disagree that sprawl is a problem, and yet you are unable to mount a logical argument as to why I am wrong, other then to say that I want people to live in Huts, which if you have bothered to read you will comprehend that that is not what I said.

[ladicius]

@KrunchyJD what university, what degree. restate exactly how i say sprawl is correlated with progress. why did you capitalize 'huts'. show me your research data from a cited source on how the current societal 'sprawl' benefits or negatively affects america.

[KrunchyJD]

@ladicius You are looking at efficiency in different terms. Yes, granted you can go further in a car, and probably faster. However cars are extremely inefficient in terms of the power required to push their occupant. The avarage car is only around 20% efficient meaning that only about 20% of the energy it uses pushes the car forward, most is wasted. Furthermore, most of that energy goes into moving the car rather then its occupant.

[KrunchyJD]

@KrunchyJD Furthermore the only reason a car works is because of cheap abundant oil, and because oil is so energy dense.

[ladicius]

@KrunchyJD i see what you mean in terms of input to output efficiency. i don't think that ratio will change much, but i do think the cost of the input could be reduced/eliminated with advancements in technology, and the output would be left unchanged...which is ideal, i would suppose. and speaking of output, regarding emissions, i would hope to see them reduced to nil values also.

[KrunchyJD]

@ladicius The car creates distance and then offer itself as the solution to the problem it created. Why is it that one of the most livable cities in the World is Copenhagen, and despite the fact that it is freezing in winter as many trips around the city are taken by bike as by car. They also have good public transport, unkile the USA. Even if cars had no emmisions, they still present an unhealthy danger, cause congestion and encourage inactivity and obesity, and CREATE sprawl.

[ladicius]

@KrunchyJD woah woah woah, you say sprawled communities create inactivity and obesity??? are you high? why is austin texas one of the fattest cities in america? if such a large population in a small area reduces inactivity and obesity, explain that. inactivity and obesity are directly correlated with laziness and consuming more calories than the body expends. whether the intake of foods are healthful or not, it's simple math - not where you live. wake up.

[KrunchyJD]

@ladicius Austin Texas might have a big population, but it is sprawled out, and most trips are undertaken by car, so people are inactive. The fact that people are encouraged by infrastructure and their environment to drive everywhere is the problem, and yes, because they are lazy. No city in the USA is walkable or compact, so dont use American cities as an example. People may ride a bike 5 miles but few will ride a bike 10 miles, Does Austin Texas have a 5 mile radius? Urban sprawl = car use.

[KrunchyJD]

@ladicius How many times does the average person need to go from Michigan to California?

[ladicius]

@KrunchyJD ive been from michigan to colorado, to michigan. from michigan to california. from california to colorado to california. so i don't really base anything off of averages - unless you want to talk about commute times from the contingent cities around san francicso - a relatively close city to where i currently reside...then lots.

[KrunchyJD]

@ladicius I never said the car cannot be used to go on ocasional long distance trips but having the private car as the predominant mode of inner city transport is madness.

[ecraftsmen]

Compelling viewing with well reasoned arguments. The trouble is that Richard is preaching to the converted.

How do we get this message deployed on a country-wide, if not world-wide scale, especially when governments and big businesses have an interest in it not happening?

[Mrdresden]

@ecraftsmen Using Youtube, Facebook and other social networks you can spread the message incredibly fast to enormous amount of people. When the majority of the common people know about and actively work toward a common goal then neither big business nor governments are able to have their way if their interests clash with the goal and/or interests of the people.

[Mrdresden]

@ecraftsmen The problem really isn't deploying the message to the masses but to make them care enough about it. Most people, around the world, don't care enough about the rain forests to try to decrease their usage of paper, nor care enough about the environment to decrease the usage of plastics. Its much more easier for these people to donate small amounts of currency to organizations dedicated to solving these problems.

[Mrdresden]

@ecraftsmen The problem is that with the continuing rise in the human population the only way to solve or even halt these problems is to educating the population and making them think about these things. Not just donating to charities and organizations.

[SciTechExplained]

So many views !!! OUAUUUUU !!!

The world is listening !

[Postcarbonman]

Always love to listen to Richard. I appreciate his message and his style.

[falldownhard]

Richard Heinberg always makes outstanding presentations - he is truly an educator.