[Sloper]

I think Sloper was arguing that our potential for innovation, discovering new types of resources, and thinking up new uses for current resources is 'infinite'. Rather than a single current, and soon (in the next 100 years) to be outdated resource, i.e. oil.

I've posted it here before but one rebuttal to Sloper's argument for us having infinite potential for innovation and getting out of tight squeezes is this: https://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/10/the-energy-trap/

Bingo, but calling people watermelons is just a lot more fun.

Ps call a tory troll will be online for the next hour while I cool & drink.

Free for people like us £99 per minute for proles.

[petejh]

Bingo, but calling people watermelons is just a lot more fun.

Green on the outside, red on the inside. Guess that makes you a blueberry. And me a kiwi (green and black)

[Oldmanmatt]

Blue berries are whiteish/translucent inside, shirly?

If there is one thing I'm sure of in this debate (me, myself, I,and wrong is always possible), strict adherence to political ideology will not provide an answer. As always the. Best way tends to lie somewhere in the middle, and probably meanders left or right as the terrain requires...

[miso soup]

Nobody has mentioned overpopulation of the planet yet.

Surely that is of greater threat to our environment and standard of living than a potential energy crisis?

I think it has been touched on, but this is of course the real problem.  There wouldn't be any energy crisis or climate change if there wasn't so many people.  Most of the problems talked about here could be solved in a couple of generations if people would just stop breeding.  But that seems about as likely as people not killing each other or not fucking each over for money and power.  I have no faith in market forces solving any of these problems but having said that the only thing that's ever reliably lowered the birth rate of a country is improving it's economy.  But then developed countries consume more energy per head of population than less developed ones.  Maybe that fact could be balanced out by increased efficiency and renewables, or maybe not and we're all fucked.  I don't know.

Here's some more pessimistic links:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/11/061102-seafood-threat.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/20/magazine/its-the-end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it-and-he-feels-fine.html?action=click&module=Search&region=searchResults&mabReward=relbias%3Aw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fquery.nytimes.com%2Fsearch%2Fsitesearch%2F%3Faction%3Dclick%26region%3DMasthead%26pgtype%3DSectionFront%26module%3DSearchSubmit%26contentCollection%3Dmagazine%26t%3Dqry205%23%2Fdark%2520mountain&_r=0

[i.munro]

There wouldn't be any energy crisis or climate change if there wasn't so many people.

This is just wrong though globally. Until very recently  nearly all the contribution to both issues came from the 'developed world' the  majority from  the 300 million in the US i.e. 5% of the worlds population.

[miso soup]

But if the global population was a fraction of what it is it wouldn't matter so much that 5% of it are caning so much energy.

But I suppose as the 5% figure grows, and the figure that it's 5% of grows, there's little chance of any advances in efficiency being enough to counteract it, so I guess we are just fucked.

[petejh]

Ahh the internet... 15 years ago no-one outside of some specialists and a relatively small number of determined geeks would have been able to navel gaze over scientific evidence and discuss how potentially bad things could get; sure you'd always get the occasional doom-monger claiming the world's going to the dogs but what did they know - they were just going off a hunch, or the bible! But now, now we can be accurately pessimistic, and quickly inform others of our pessimism, and best of all, with the back-up of sound scientific evidence available at the click of a mouse we can prove to everybody how well-informed and correct we are to hold such a pessimistic view. And all from the comfort of our own living rooms. Isn't it wonderful?! 

[Muesli]

    If informed pessimism is not the answer what is?
 
Should I try not to worry, sit back and wait for science / engineering / market forces to ride to humanities rescue.
Should I stock pile cans of cassoulet/ bottled water / weapons /size 8 blancos for life in some post apocalyptic future.
Should I liquidate all my assets and use the capital to buy a sustainable small holding somewhere far away from major population centres and well above current sea level.
Perhaps I should rush to breed/pass on my genes to another generation and let them sort it out.
 
None of the above really addresses the underlying problem but maybe it is too intractable for my greedy little monkey brain to do much about other than pessimistically watch it happen whilst tut -tutting all the way to oblivion.
 
Maybe there isn’t really a problem and I shouldn’t worry but I am as unconvinced by that as I am by the doom merchants.
 
A more equitable and sustainable human society would be great but I’m buggered if I know how to make it happen.
 
 

[i.munro]

What baffles me is the complete lack of response to these problems from our 'leaders'.
Yes switching to a non-oil (either nuclear or renewable)  economy will be economically painful for the reasons given (investment up-front) but I can think of several examples where democracies took on this sort of pain.

In response to the 'great stink' London constructed a (at the time ) staggeringly expensive sewer system.
The British in 39 turned their whole economy over to the state to prepare for war & took on a debt that has only recently been paid off . Russia a little later sacrificed much more both economically & in other terms.
Yet somehow the response to this crisis is to pretend it isn't happening.

[Oldmanmatt]

http://www.iflscience.com/technology/solar-roads-could-power-entire-country

What about roofs?

We are quite ingenious, as a species; when we're not being utter arseholes...

[Duma]

and on a less positive note...
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/05/140512-thwaites-glacier-melting-collapse-west-antarctica-ice-warming/

[Fultonius]

Sloper?

Who'd fight for the cause i.e. our no-win no fee whiplash claims?

Good to see household energy consumption decreasing. A drop in the (rising) ocean but a welcome one.

I read in the news the other day that there are new rules to deal with whiplash claims fraud. Does this mean Sloper won't be able to afford as much claret and foie gras?

[Sloper]

I look after the defendant side of the firm.

There are no doubt fraudulent claims, exaggerated claims and chancers. (and they make my piss boil,; how were your Ugg boots (which you never probably owned damaged in your rear end shunt, fuck off)

However the ABI trope of 7% of claims being fraudulent are bollocks Aviva's own figures put it at c <2%.

Let's face it, innovation driven by the market (yes often following 'pure' research in the university labs) delivers whereas the green / anticapitalist doom mongering, bedwetting drivel doesn't.

Ps I'm being deliberately provactive, I understand that the reiki healers and trickcyclists in Sharrow and Nether Edge need some muppets to fleece, (I must declare an interest I get a referral fee for each counseling session they attend)

[miso soup]

David Graeber on Thomas Picketty:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/30/savage-capitalism-back-radical-challenge

[Sloper]

The sort of one eyed wanton fuckwittery that makes the Guardian what it is, stumbling from non sequitor to incorrect assertion, the only thing it doesn't say is 'it's not fair, Johnnies dad always let's him stay up past 11'.

Let's nail a few things, commerce and capitalism lead to the development of laws which constrain capitalism, the social consequences of capitalism drive the development of laws which drive social change.

Capitalism now is more restrained, controlled and in effect neutered than ever before.

This is a matter of simple observation

[Moo]

Sloper stop talking in absoloutes mate, it just makes you sound like a child with a big stick shouting 'wah wah wah why won't anyone listen to me'.

[slackline]

The sort of one eyed wanton fuckwittery that makes the Guardian what it is,

The Mail? no I read the Guardian.

[Sloper]

Perhaps you could point to a time when capitalism was more constrained by law and regulation? When capitalism growth and change generally and industrial or commercial innovation particularly has not led to legal changes, or draw if not causative very strong casual relationships between the consequences of capitalism and social legislation i.e law on housing etc.

<<<I'm waiting>>>

[Sloper]

The sort of one eyed wanton fuckwittery that makes the Guardian what it is,

The Mail? no I read the Guardian.

It doesn't mean I agree with what they print, the main draw is the crossword.

[slackline]

Somewhat related to economics and growth...

Consumer Heterogeneity and Paid Search Effectiveness: A Large Scale Field Experiment

A large scale analysis of eBay data which suggests that "paid search ads" are ineffective.

[a dense loner]

I could have told you that

[slackline]

But you wouldn't have had the data to back it up. 

[slackline]

Mate just sent me a link to this PDF, seems to get some positive reviews.  Figured others might be interested....

David MacKay Sustainable Energy - without the hot air



http://www.withouthotair.com/

[slackline]

Solar power supply/cost out-stripping coal in Australia

[Sloper]

Solar absolutely has a place but I'm note sure whether it's as significant part of the answer as its proponents would suggest as there are problems with storage (electric mountain in reverse??) and base laod, these are however probably chalenges that the technology and market will overcome in places like Oz and other sunny places.