Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Environment & Energy
In reply to the discussion: Tyndall Center Director Anderson: Rapid Emissions Reduction Hard: 4-6C Far, Far Worse [View all]AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)46. Well.
You don't. You have made a statement of personal faith.
Well, no offense meant, but you kinda did too. Only thing is, though, at least mine is far more realistic.
We are facing the possibility that the planet will lose its ability to produce food in significant quantities. The oil is pretty much gone. The minerals are mined out. The oceans are turning acidic. The weather is becoming progressively more inhospitable.
Yes, we are facing trouble. But let's not go too far here. Things may not get much better in many of our lifetimes, that is true, but this is really only on a human timescale. Civilization may need to fundamentally restructure but it isn't going to die out altogether, at least not thanks to AGW alone, even in the worst case scenario.
And, Paul, you did say that, if I may quote you directly: "What may look like collapse can also be seen as the sweeping away of what is here now in order to make room for the emergence of the new." At least that we can agree on.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
62 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Tyndall Center Director Anderson: Rapid Emissions Reduction Hard: 4-6C Far, Far Worse [View all]
hatrack
Nov 2012
OP
It doesn't really work like that. The 1% hoards and MORE energy gets used.
AverageJoe90
Nov 2012
#17
Maybe. I just don't have the faith that it'll necessarily be true, though.
AverageJoe90
Nov 2012
#50
Consuming less has been a substantial factor in emission reductions during the recession
NoOneMan
Nov 2012
#9
That assumes that humans will always exploit all available energy and negate surplus
NoOneMan
Nov 2012
#24
Wealth is a cultural construct and quite alien to many pre-agricultural societies
NoOneMan
Nov 2012
#23
You have so much faith in the ability of humans to rebuild after complete collapse
NoOneMan
Nov 2012
#45
Cheat Sheet Answers: Number one is an outright liar and Number Two isn't even short-sighted. =)
AverageJoe90
Nov 2012
#51
Increased efficiency means more available energy, meaning cheaper energy, resulting in more growth
NoOneMan
Nov 2012
#53