The Dark Planets Conjecture

Why haven’t we detected any evidence of alien intelligences yet? The wallpaper on one of my computers is the composite picture NASA published in 2000 of the entire earth at night. The amount of light visible from space is at once beautiful and intriguing, and it makes me wonder how much energy we waste by unintentionally beaming it into space, whether it is light, infrared radiation (heat), or radio waves. Looking back through human history, it is clear that, as a species, we used comparatively little of our planet’s resources before the industrial revolution, and I suspect the view from space back then showed very little human-made light, if any. Then I contemplate the probability that, in the absence of any great new energy-producing technology (fusion?), we will run down our available fossil fuel sources over the coming decades, driving the price up to the point where fewer and fewer people and organizations can afford to use and waste energy as we do today. In another century or two we may be conserving energy to such an extent that we will have to stop our light, heat, and radio waves from dissipating into space, and the planet may return to the way it appeared before the industrial revolution. This brings up some interesting questions about our universe.

Future Cost Increases for Fossil Fuels Will Change Architecture

My new job puts me in a large windowless warehouse-like building, much of which has been turned into office space, cube farms with offices embedded in the walls nearby.  At any given time nobody inside knows if it is raining or if the sun is shining, if it’s day or night.  As in most commercial buildings, the lights and ventilation fans run almost all the time, which seems costly.  One nearby building has a small wind turbine on it that runs a lot of the time, however, and another I see near work has a solar panel on the roof.   All that has made me consider what the buildings of thirty years from now will be like.  Certainly they will be quite different, and I expect the inevitable rise in the cost of fossil fuels, and all energy sources “in sympathy”, to be an important influence on their architecture.  So what will commercial buildings be like in the future?

What Will Happen to Businesses When Energy Cost Eclipses Labor Cost?

Today the cost of labor is the biggest single cost element for many businesses, and drives most decisions. The rise of fossil fuel prices will not be smooth,  however, as we have seen in 2008, when oil prices doubled in a matter of months and then fell back to 30% of their peak in a few months more.  During these spikes, and in the longer term as fossil fuel sources become more difficult and costly to extract, energy costs will rise to a level that challenges or surpasses labor as the biggest component of cost for many or most businesses.  The law of supply and demand also kicks in as population continues to expand, and labor costs in many industries will fall as increasing numbers of people are seeking those jobs.  At the same time, rising energy costs will reduce or eliminate the advantage of manufacturing in “low cost countries” such as China.  How will businesses react?  Will the net effect be to cause people to generally live at a lower economic level and make less money for equivalent work compared with today?  Will manufacturing of progressively lower cost and higher margin goods return to the developed countries?

The Road to Sustainability: Individual Specialization is a Two-Edged Sword

Specialization and collaboration are the hallmarks of human success as a species. We may have started as generalists like members of most other species, but specialization has gotten us where we are today.  While all non-microscopic life forms are made up of specialized parts and symbiotic relationships, specialization in conjunction with cooperation between members of the same species has been raised to a high art by the human species.  Since long before recorded history humans have been collaborating as families and communities, and much success has been achieved, largely through increased efficiencies realized through individual specialization. For example, when a mother can care for the children the father can gather food, when a sentry is watching over the village everyone else can carry on their daily business without wasting energy on being vigilant, and when a farmer is raising large quantities of food, other community members such as the person making cloth for the farmer’s clothes are freed to optimize their efficiency and quality. The farmer is not only well fed, but also has better clothes. Like most things, however, specialization has a down side.

Southeastern U.S. Gas Shortages after Hurricane Ike Reveal How Far We Are from Sustainability

Aftereffects of hurricane Ike revealed a need for consciousness-raising in the American Southeast (and the U.S. in general). I went on-line and viewed TV reports and newspaper stories from the Carolinas Monday (Sept 29, 2008), which said that 4 of 15 gasoline refineries in the Houston area were still shut down since the hurricane 2 weeks earlier, and many others were still operating at reduced capacity, but the situation in the Carolinas should improve and be fine in a week. In the meantime they suggested people buy gas only when their tank was below one quarter full, and that some gas stations were limiting customers to ten gallons per visit. Police also asked that people stop calling 9-1-1 to ask where they could find gas, as it was impeding real emergency calls. Many stories were hopeful, but none sounded certain. Worse yet, none offered any suggestions for people to actually save gas, such as by carpooling, taking the bus, bicycling, walking, or planning out and combining trips, among other solutions that would actually reduce gas demand. I wasn’t surprised, then, that absolutely nobody mentioned any long term solutions, let alone that our overpopulation of the region and the planet is at the root of the problem. Does the word clueless come to mind?

Extended Non-Families, An Alternative for the Aging Childless

People in a variety of situations, and in both developed and underdeveloped countries, are concerned about elder care.  Unfortunately, this is a key force behind the prevalence of large families and the resulting population explosion in underdeveloped countries.  I keep thinking about the news interview I heard recently with a parent in Pakistan (I think it was) who said that the reason they had a large family was so they could be assured that at least a couple of their children would be around to aid them in their old age.  Their assumption was that conditions in Pakistan were not going to get better, and that, between the economic and political problems, they would likely lose at least some of their children to disease or violence before they became old enough to need daily assistance.  Having someone to support you in old age isn’t just an issue in third world countries, however.  Childless individuals and couples in the developed countries have the same concern, and another option is becoming apparent.

How Pundits Support Denial of Climate Change

Some media pundits create a system that promotes and supports denial of climate change. Most media pundits are opportunists by nature. Their pay is based on their ratings, and being controversial gets more attention than being rational. It is to their advantage not only to say startling things and draw attention to themselves, but to nurture constituencies that will bolster their ratings. That is one of the ways human nature interacts with our mass media. Unfortunately, our global challenges just happen to provide excellent opportunities for unscrupulous pundits.

Who Would Have Thought Richard Nixon a Visionary?

In 1960, Richard Nixon gave a speech on the country’s agricultural problems to a group in South Dakota (link) in which he noted that “population here and elsewhere is growing at a remarkable rate.”  He also noted that beef consumption per capita had increased by more than 40% in less than 20 years, from 56 to over 80 pounds per person per year, or about a quarter pound per day, a pattern very similar to what is seen in rapidly developing countries now (for meat, not necessarily beef).  This certainly sounds prophetic as, 48 years later, we watch improving standards of living in the developing countries combining with burgeoning overpopulation to produce a global consumption binge such as the planet has never seen before.

Not With a Bang, But With a Whimper

I fully believe that the world will find a new, sustainable situation within the next century or two, as we get over our big “high” on fossil fuels and things settle down again, possibly with a new energy source (fusion looks possible, eventually).  I have read so many predictions of cataclysms, the poisoning of the environment, worldwide epidemics, world wars, drought and famine … They all sound dire, and I can’t discount the possibility that some of them will occur to some extent, but, short of a major asteroid collision or similar cosmic-scale event, I have to believe change will generally come not with a bang, but a whimper.  Still, the challenges before us are many, and important.

Preventing Population-Related Disasters in the Developing World

Recent studies of population growth indicate that population in the developed world is relatively stable, declining in some places and being bolstered by immigration in others.  The developing world, however, is seeing a continuing population explosion (link).  I was astonished to hear in a radio news report last year that the city of Karachi, Pakistan, had a population of 17 million, and that Mexico City was cited as the largest city in the world at 35 million.  Whether those figures are accurate or not, the thought of such huge and densely populated cities in such poor countries is staggering.  It is obvious that the developed countries need to help the developing world with this problem, if for no other reason than that it will fuel illegal immigration, already an issue in much of the developed world.  How can this be done most effectively?

More on How “Growth” is Regarded in U.S. Culture

I wrote an entry before (link) about my feelings on the way the press in North America uses the term “growth”, and how the concepts of increased consumption, population, land use, and corporate profits are lumped together.  It is constantly implied that more people must consume more of everything for the economy to be healthy.  I believe this will have to change, however, to achieve sustainability, but how?