The upshot is we've always argued bigger is better, growth is progress, and think that a steady state is somehow bad, economically. Well - we're going to have to get used to it, globally anyway - but that doesn't mean there isn't a wonderful flux of energy/economic forces that will keep things circulating and providing opportunities for millenia to come...read on.
timmmaaayyy
Exponential Economist Meets Finite Physicist | Do the Math:
Total U.S. Energy consumption in all forms since 1650. The vertical scale is logarithmic, so that an exponential curve resulting from a constant growth rate appears as a straight line. The red line corresponds to an annual growth rate of 2.9%. Source: EIA.
"Physicist: At that 2.3% growth rate, we would be using energy at a rate corresponding to the total solar input striking Earth in a little over 400 years. We would consume something comparable to the entire sun in 1400 years from now. By 2500 years, we would use energy at the rate of the entire Milky Way galaxy—100 billion stars! I think you can see the absurdity of continued energy growth. 2500 years is not that long, from a historical perspective. We know what we were doing 2500 years ago. I think I know what we’re not going to be doing 2500 years hence."
'via Blog this'
What Tom Murphy doesn't show you. (U.S. energy growth has NOT been increasing exponentially for the last 400 years.)
ReplyDeletehttp://markbahner.typepad.com/random_thoughts/2012/08/what-tom-murphy-doesnt-show-you.html