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

Iterate

(3,021 posts)

8. Ok. I can better see now where our ideas are diverging.

Reply to GliderGuider (Reply #7)

Sat May 18, 2013, 07:15 PM

May 2013

I guess I have to make a better case (and have more evidence) for a more culturally deterministic view. It's not that I don't agree that energy and energy flow matters to the system and its health, but I'm adding culture as an intermediate step that translates and synchronizes actions before it emerges at the system level.

'til later.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

8 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The robust carbon intensity of global primary energy [View all] GliderGuider May 2013 OP

What exactly pscot May 2013 #1

I think it's a polite way of describing someone who has an... GliderGuider May 2013 #2

I wonder what the minimum is to sustain life and limb. Iterate May 2013 #3

If we reduce energy consumption, civilization begins to decay, and people begin to die. GliderGuider May 2013 #4

I don't see any states in decay or collapse until you get below 1.5 or so Mtons per capita. Iterate May 2013 #5

You can't really look at individual states for this purpose GliderGuider May 2013 #7

Ok. I can better see now where our ideas are diverging. Iterate May 2013 #8

if you squint, it's been plateaued since 1915 phantom power May 2013 #6