I find it amazing that so few researchers are aware of the fact that all economic growth is depending on increased energy use. And that 80% of the energy comes from fossil. The dream of phasing out fossil for "rebuildable" energy production is not possible at large scale. So we are struck with what is remaing of fossil energy until it becomes too expensive to extract.
This will happen gradually during the coming decades and we will have to revert back to more physical work again at a lower living standard. Eternal growth is about to disappear long before 2100, probably in a decade or two. This also means that the climate models based on that growth is faulty.
Even without all the recent politicization and polarization, research has been in a crisis for a while. Publish or perish, chasing grants that practically define the results, all the recent concern over the replication crisis confirms that money is driving the bus, not rational inquiry. We are in a fog of uncertainty, and I simply don't know what to believe anymore. Thanks for tagging one example.
Your closing remarks remind me of an encounter I had years ago with a senior UN Habitat official. I asked if in any of the scenarios used in their work, it was contemplated that current trends of urbanisation might go into reverse at some point in the 21st century. "Well," he said, "I suppose anything is possible, but..." And he looked at me as if I'd asked if they had a plan for what to do when the aliens land.
I find it amazing that so few researchers are aware of the fact that all economic growth is depending on increased energy use. And that 80% of the energy comes from fossil. The dream of phasing out fossil for "rebuildable" energy production is not possible at large scale. So we are struck with what is remaing of fossil energy until it becomes too expensive to extract.
This will happen gradually during the coming decades and we will have to revert back to more physical work again at a lower living standard. Eternal growth is about to disappear long before 2100, probably in a decade or two. This also means that the climate models based on that growth is faulty.
Even without all the recent politicization and polarization, research has been in a crisis for a while. Publish or perish, chasing grants that practically define the results, all the recent concern over the replication crisis confirms that money is driving the bus, not rational inquiry. We are in a fog of uncertainty, and I simply don't know what to believe anymore. Thanks for tagging one example.
Your closing remarks remind me of an encounter I had years ago with a senior UN Habitat official. I asked if in any of the scenarios used in their work, it was contemplated that current trends of urbanisation might go into reverse at some point in the 21st century. "Well," he said, "I suppose anything is possible, but..." And he looked at me as if I'd asked if they had a plan for what to do when the aliens land.
A lamentable omission by the IPCC to exclude ‘No growth’ or ‘Low growth’ in their 2100 scenarios.
Your critical thinking helps us challenge the blinkered narratives being concocted.
Thank you.