Is the world about to change – big time?

As long as the oil campanies reign supreme, i expect not a big change, just enough that the public thinnks that there is progress.

The answer is yes and no. Studies have been done and academics have done work. Politicians have rejected the findings. Give us another answer! It was predicted in the 70s that overpopulation would run up burning things. Burning things and stuff was predicted to raise the temperature. Conservation was recommended. Some are ready, and some don't even have a chance to get close to ready. Jared Diamond wrote Collapse. I recommend it as a read on the subject.

P.S. Ocean destruction is a bad thing all round and nobody is really ready to face that.

Change is like holding back the sea, you can only stop it for so long.

Good Lord Dude, every day I look at CR4 and see you whining about the big oil companies controlling the world. Give it up and find a new conspiracy to whine about. How about Flat earth for a while...

You have no right to voice your opinion of anyone if you are hiding behind your guest status.

Crap or get off the pot!

Change will be driven by financial incentives. Just my opinion.

Change will continue. I do not expect anything catastrophic - change has been fairly fast for years, as far as technology. Perhaps there will be another little 'jump' but overall, just a steady continuation of what has been.

The only force that matters is that of the economics of supply an demand. The net cost of the energy we need to provide for the lifestyle we can afford is what we consumers react to and the market strives to provide. As we have proceeded through the energy cost/price ups and downs for the last 40 years, the efforts to adopt alternative energy have not taken hold because the oil alternative has remained the lowest cost alternative. When it runs out or becomes too expensive to extract and process, it will then be replaced with whatever is/are the next lowest cost source(s)

We do not trust theories and studies, because too often the data has been collected or presented with a (political) bias and is later refuted by another study. We also do not trust Governments to be organized or smart enough to tell the markets what they should be doing. If businesses follow the political whims of governments, they eventually go out of business. If governments supply a market, they do it poorly at best (no competition or innovation). In either case they have nothing to loose when they fail, they just make their citizens pay for it.

Note that as the recent gas/oil prices fell, we started using more and started buying more SUVs again. Cost suppressed the demand, but it still existed until it could be economically filled. Until and if we consumers can universally agree on a sound source (say nuclear) or another plentiful source (say hydrogen) can be made economically available, there will not be a real change - only the feeble appearance of change.

Here Here Bob C. Login

Hi,

Jared Diamond was good with Collapse but much better with: The rise and the fall of the third Chimpanzee.

Collapse is (for my feeling) too limited to small size civilisations. So the real collapse that happened to many civilisations did occur too, but very likely in a totally different manner.

What happened to:

A.: most civilisations: war and economic crisis because too high military spending,

B.: some civilisations: new illnesses unknown at that site, coming from the "outside",

C.: one or two only: big volcanic eruptions,

D.: many civilisations but not clear if fatal or survivable: violent and rapid climate changes.

E. some civilisations: exhausted by nonproductive priests or state-representatives and collapsing at first major problem,

F.: only one or ?, fragmenting into nonexistence after a long period of decline (West Roman Empire).

Maybe none of the problems above will cause our civilisation to collapse. Globalisation makes everything different. But local collapse may occur in many regions - as usual today.

Open question: will mankind be ready to live with changing energy supply and organise its distribution and conversion into needed other forms. And in future consequence quit the burning of fossil fuels: oil, gas, coal too expensive then. Bio too expensive today, causing starving others is not a recommended way.

Open question: will there be any natural habitat in 30, 100, 500 years? Will human population stabilise or not? Will steadily growing population trigger catastrophic failure as in experiments with mouse families with unlimited food supply?

I agree that Jared Diamond (any of his books, look also to Mrs.Diamond's book!) is very good reading!

RHABE

Open question: will there be any natural habitat in 30, 100, 500 years? Will human population stabilise or not? Will steadily growing population trigger catastrophic failure as in experiments with mouse families with unlimited food supply?

I believe for at least the next 100 years, natural habitat will remain. Perhaps wise people will re-naturalize some areas.

I also believe the population is already starting to drop in Europe. Other areas are growing, but there will be plagues yet to come. While Europe and North America may survive an outbreak of bird flu, some areas of the earth will be devastated for a long time.

Humans and rabbits multiply on a J curve. This is not in dispute. In the 70s I had a job recording an entire series of Ecology Lectures at UNCG. Wasn't registered for the class, but my job was to listen to every word. (I disagree with you as far as Mr. Diamonds books, feeling Guns Germs and Steel, and Collapse, are more important. I am in particular agreement that political science and history are the same thing.) Anyway- I am not looking forward to an asteroid strike, though I'd like to die by being smashed by a meteor. Nor am I looking forward to some disease like the pandemic flu. Mr. Diamond did correctly point out that as a species, big time species, we are in a bottleneck. In another Thread yesterday there was a lament that Engineers are not getting recruits. The Engineer Who Saved The World as a Hollywood or Bollywood Movie was my suggestion for improving the status and desirability of the profession. We do have the technology to get us through the bottleneck Mr. Diamond so wonderfully and artlessly describes. Employing it is another matter. Fate is what happens to you, and destiny is what you accept. We do have a duty to do the best we can, and I have very strong respect for engineers, but recognize they like pilots don't want to be bothered with politics. P.S. I was not aware of Mrs. Diamonds book, but will look it up. Thanks cc Bob C who influenced this post.

There's a very logical "countdown" of "10 ways the world might end", on the TED.com site (TED=Technology, Entertainment, Design -- a Silicon Valley ongoing Conference. What I found most interesting was the 1st one mentioned, "people just give up" in facing the crisis. In many ways that seems to be happening, in that "people" are not saying, "what can I do to created economic activity", "how can I establish something that will generate "jobs"", but rather leaving this all up to government policies and politicians. Personally, I think we should each start with a "Stimulus (organic) Aquaponic Garden" and see who can come up with a very practical design for Supermarket rooftops or backyards. These are quite popular in Australia where its necessary to save water, yet still grow food. hn

The "I Give Up Factor"; yes it is a dangerous factor flowing from information overload, and too many 2 dimensional well dressed heroes that don't actually exist.