Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

livingontheland - Re: [Livingontheland] Efficiency

livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Healthy soil and sustainable growing

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Ryan Albinger" <ryalbinger@earthlink.net>
  • To: "Healthy soil and sustainable growing" <livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [Livingontheland] Efficiency
  • Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2007 09:53:44 -0600

** comments below


> [Original Message]
> From: <activism98201@verizon.net>
>
> Ryan, you can disagree all you want, but I'm afraid that this doesn't,
regardless of how you think or would like things to be, change the facts.
>
> Per point 1 - "Does it scale?" No. It doesn't scale because it's not
sustainable. The current paradigm, which IS about transportation, doesn't
scale without oil (cheap energy).

**** I agree with that to the extent we have cheap energy and that is
integral to the system. WHEN energy becomes more expensive, then the
movement of people and materials gets driven down to only the only
necessary of tasks. Food, shelter, and water being the core requirements
to sustain human life, food will take the center stage and it's procurement
for the masses is greatest priority, hence, energy will be directed to
that. And when that happens, fuel energy can only be dedicated to the most
effcient means necessary, whatsoever that is. Again, it comes down to the
fact achieving the most for the least is the name of the game when inputs
are limited.

>
> Per point 2 - "Is there anything in nature that is similar?" No. In
millions of years nature has created ZERO systems such as we currently have
developed.

**** Large scale functioning human populations have only been around for
the past 10,000 years, give or take. It has been humans that have created,
and unfornutately reshaped nature, the current system. To follow back to
nature and to the system she has created, humans must then be taken out of
the picture because the innate function of human is to create a better
place for themselves, travel to extend their resources, and use (exploit)
the resources availed to them. The bright side of that is we can collect
ourselves to live in a coexistant relationship with nature and in doing so
we must use less resources.

>
> And point 3 - Jevons Paradox holds true, proof is that all of our natural
resources are in serious decline owing to our ability to efficiently
exploit them.

*** Couldn't agree more. I just say most of that decline is from
recreational resource exploition, not a purposeful or necessary use. Thus
leading to resource decline without renewal. Flying around the globe is
too easy, everyone needs their own car, a McMansion is the smallest house I
can live in, a car with 80,000 miles is way too old to drive, etc.

>
> This group is about sustainability. The systems that we're currently
operating with, of which transportation IS an integral part of, are not
about sustainability (they're about exploitation). No matter how efficient
you make these systems they will NEVER be sustainable.

*** Please define sustainability. My connotative understanding of the word
effcientcy is intergral to being sustainable.

>
> As Paul pointed out, we're externalizing a bunch of the costs of our
"efficiencies." As global climate change starts to laugh at us I have to
wonder how smug we'll be about being so damned "efficient."
>
>
> Seasoned Eatings!
>
> -Mark Nagel
> Everett, WA

**** Externalizing costs must be in the equation of the objective to
achieve the best results and the best means so we may get to the best
possible outcome.
Ryan

>
>
> =====================






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page