Energy Transition & the Luxury Economy

That’s great! It starts with an earthquake
Birds and snakes, airplanes
and Lenny Bruce is not afraid.”

REM, It’s The End Of The World As We Know It

I spent a good part of my day yesterday listening to and reading Simon Michaux, who I now consider one of the most important thinkers in our world. I really cannot overstate its importance. It should be a family name. Before yesterday, I was the only person who was familiar with the man and his thoughts. But now I feel like I have crossed a bridge and see the world in a new light. The new light is about as close to reliable as I can get about anything. One is almost never 100% certain of anything. It’s good to have an open mind. But sometimes, some things are very close to others. That is the light in which I am now looking at the popular news and power change. The story is clear lies. It’s not just a little lie, but it is in a dramatic way lies. That is, not only that capitalist industrial civilization – as we know it – will not continue in the same way as it is now, using renewable energy sources, but it cannot go to ‘ face at all. It’s basically beyond. The dust is running. His days are numbered, and those days are few. It’s much smaller than most people think. It’s much less than we’ve prepared for, or prepare for.

I’m on this very well, and have been on that for a year, but Richard Heinberg came along recently and said that the energy costs of the energy transition are such that there must be “pulse” of fossil energy consumption, as well as greenhouse gas emissions, combined with high productivity from “renewable” resources and devices. If I understand what Heinberg is saying here correctly, he is saying that for many years, as the world builds up this ‘renewable’ energy infrastructure, the result will certainly be . increase, rather than reducing, greenhouse gas emissions — making the ‘energy transition’ completely contrary to its stated main purpose. After all, as people like Kevin Anderson have been saying for years, crop cuts will begin nownot ten years from now or more.

What Richard Heinberg did not mention in the article is that it is a legal system common sense and renewable energy resources can be mined for, smelted for, manufactured, transported and installed without increasing greenhouse gas emissions. if People need to reduce energy consumption as much as possible again sector of economy. But are we really the kind of people who will abandon automobiles, mass tourism and a luxury economy based on the sole purpose of replacing fossil fuels with renewable energy resources? That is, should we put a large renewable energy infrastructure into our own above Needs like culture and civilization-to the extent of making great sacrifices in other areas of energy?

Also Read :  Toy Fusion in Sacramento hit by thieves ahead of Small Business Saturday sale

But there is still another question related to it. And this is what Simon Michaux answered. The question is… It is even possible to replace the world’s wind energy enough to fuel the technological wealth of capitalists and corporations like the one that shuts down most of the world? In a nut shell, Michaux said no. It’s not possible – certainly not in the necessary time. He says we don’t have enough of the metals and minerals needed to do this. And he makes a strong case for this, and a comprehensive book.

We can manufacture some of equipment and some of those devices (e.g., electric cars, power panels, air conditioners….)? Yes, but they won’t be in a big which will allow technological civilization as we know it to continue. Time. Full stop.

So what does this mean?

Speaking for myself, it means it is the beginning of the end of the world as we know it – in almost every direction. There cannot be an easy and smooth change of our energy system. Which means it is the beginning of the end of the economy as we know it.

This popular version of “energy transition” has become a story of maintaining the economic, technological and political system with only small changes, rather than radical changes. The report is not based on research. Therefore, the concept of “climate events” in climate politics that is prevalent in today’s activist groups is not. All of this requires not a small change, but a radical change (and change) at its core.

Two key, and closely related, facts emerge in the light of both the Heinberg Pulse and the Michaux Monkeywrench1. These are:

  1. Energy consumption (and therefore economic contraction, measured in GDP/GWP) is inevitable in the near term.
  2. We live in the last days of what I call “economic luxury”.

If you click on the keyword “power boost” above, you’ll be taken to the Wikipedia article on that topic. There the power ring is defined as “the process by which a society either voluntarily or involuntarily reduces its total power.” My contention is that we are nowInevitably, enter the downward force on the basis of both of them Voluntary and involuntary measures -, although global net consumption continues to increase temporarily. That is, the increase in global net consumption has reached a peak, and we are now realizing that this is the case. Continued use of the net around the world will begin to decline rapidly very much in the near future, whether we like it or not. (But we are part to choose to initiate this process voluntarily… even if the process is forced by a disinterested process regardless our choice. So there’s a bit of a paradox here, as we feel like we haven’t started by force and started voluntarily. or unknowingly. Imagine that he found a large bomb in the bag of the ship we were in. The ship had not yet begun to sink. But the gouge is there, nonetheless. Heinberg’s ‘pulse’ and Michaux’s mrench monkey serve as a light that the situation we are in on the ship called Normal will not be above. It’s coming down. Soon, the “(popular) story” will also change, and we will not make it any different. But we are now at the end of this understanding like civilization. The story needs to change, because it is lies.

What is “economic luxury”?

I define a luxury economy as the economic condition of opportunity to live which depends on luxury goods and services to avoid economic and social collapse.

Also Read :  Barack Obama says Biden has 'repaired the economy and kept unemployment low' amid 8.2% spike in prices

I can think of no better way to express this concept of luxury economy than to start with this diagram.

In 1840, about 70 percent of Americans worked in agriculture. In 2020, only 1.3% of Americans work in agriculture. Agriculture, as a way of life, is example economic activity based on need (economic sector). People must eat. But technological ‘advances’ in agriculture (mainly in the form of agricultural machinery) led to significant changes in the labor force of agriculture, and this diagram tells the story of the replacement of manual and human labor by machinery. – but it’s awesome. increase in “units of productivity” per man-hour. As human labor becomes less important for food production, and as ‘technological development’ affects many areas of other economic needs, the type of economic activity based on luxury helps to accommodate displaced workers. them by giving things. work in the production and distribution of goods and services that would be considered luxury in 1840 – or 1900, or 1940. Historically, the US economy has become increasingly dependent on non-essential resources and Increased work in a downward slope that is similar to the same system. done in agriculture, making the USA one of the leaders that relies on the “luxury economy” just to provide the opportunity to live among its citizens.

The modern luxury economy is machine-oriented, and depends largely on exosomatic energy. A need-based economy is smaller and uses more appropriate endosomatic energy. Endosomatic energy is the energy you use to swing a hammer or ride a bicycle. Exosomatic energy is the energy used by your car engine or farm tractor. Future economies will use endosomatic energy more effectively.

Also Read :  How agents can leverage TikTok to build business

In fact, people differ significantly in what they consider “necessities” and what they consider “luxuries”. In my opinion, if I had to give such energy and luxury equipment intensively, I would have put more cars at the top of my list, although some people’s lives would be very difficult and if they are forced to live without a car. Another prime example of luxury goods and services would be jet travel. These two factors are also among the biggest contributors to fuel and air emissions. Living without a car can be challenging, but it won’t cause hunger or misery in most cases. But, most importantly, we can adjust things to make living without a car even easier.

The future of our economy, everywhere in the “developed world” (ie, the northern world, the rich world) must and does depend on the supply of luxury goods and services—and especially luxury goods and services that energy, whether they use direct fuel or not.

The transition to a smaller, slower and less energy-intensive economy will be made more smoothly and happily if we make this transition carefully, wisely and voluntarily. If we feel compelled to do so by unavoidable circumstances—but unavoidable—it will be an unimaginable disaster.

Unfortunately, the government will not be able to lead the way by implementing policies that generate and activate voluntary (and economic) power. In fact, it seems unlikely that they will accept such laws – for now. Perhaps, we will start to act as a community, outside of the government, to design and present this change to the government. This will require a radical change in politics – a shift from state politics to the politics of the community acting outside of the government. Only then, I think the government will start to consider going on this journey with us. But we shouldn’t rely on it, I think. As I often say, a tiger will not change its spots.

Let us lead as free people, though. To be free, one must first think of freedom.

1 No Heinberg Pulse is the energy cost of the ‘energy transition’ – which acknowledges that greenhouse gases must exist increase soon to build renewable energy infrastructure in the near future -, if the popular picture of the ‘energy transition’ is accepted.

No Michaux Monkeywrench is the monkey slope thrown into the thought process of “energy transition” when we believe that the world cannot provide enough scarcity and less.ash metals and minerals to advance the popular vision of the “energy revolution”.

Teaser Photo Credit: By Usien – Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=25951615

Source

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Related Articles

Back to top button