|
|
Veteran
Posts: 214
| Reading "Limits to Growth" back in 1972, reinforced by the pollution, oil and economic problems of the 1970s, suggested to me that we would run into problems by the second decade of the twentifirst century. I mostly ignored things through the 1980s and 90s and started to take a closer look in late 1999, initially focusing on climate change, as the internet was making much more current information and opinion widely accessible.
The three big things: climate change, resource limits, economic collapse; that I've thought about have turned out pretty close to my expectations. The good news: I've been, on balance, slightly premature and pessimistic in my predictions. The bad news: that's all the good news, things progress much as I perceived; ten years ago there was some chance we could think our way out of the problematic situation we were sinking deeper into, now we need miracles.
In 2001 I thought oil production limits were the most obvious imminent big problem we were approaching and that we'd probably reach that limit (the start of oil production decline) around 2010-12. Over the next seven years that played out much as expected but thereafter it was masked, delayed and moderated somewhat by the economic downturn, and ameliorated a little by some unanticipated production of new supply from shale oil - unfortunately this has given the US an illusory straw to cling to.
Then I turned my attention to the economic and financial system. The more I understood the more it looked like an unsustainable ponzi scheme. By 2003 the interplay between oil production limits and economic growth - and our response to those - looked to be the key shortish term issue. By late 2005 I expected a recession in most developed economies starting around end 2006 triggered by high oil prices and the economic cycle, it arrived a year later than that according to the US NBER which is responsible for declaring when their recessions start and end.
My faint hope, probably the last hope of getting through the next 20 years without extreme pain, was that oil and energy limits would be widely seen as a partial cause of the recession hence seriously tackled as part of the solution and that could help reduce carbon emissions, too. My view was that increased oil prices due to a shortfall of supply vs. demand would be a primary cause of recession and the first relatively mild stages of serious economic problems. They certainly contributed but the primary cause was the stupidity of the financial system.
Climate change always seemed, to me, a slow burner; something that would make life more challenging for those who survived the initial major collapses. I never expected our systems to take this seriously enough nor do anywhere near what was needed to solve the problem. But I thought the serious impacts were more than a decade or so away so oil and economic system issues would dominate in the shorter term. The serious hurricane season of 2005 has not been repeated since, the dramatic Arctic ice melt of 2007 has been challenged but not beaten - though it will be this year. Global temperatures have continued their implacable rise and extreme weather events have increased but generally not enough to scare folks unduly - though 2012 may begin to change that.
In 2008 our financial system came very close to breaking and oil reached prices unimaginable a few years before. Weather had significant adverse effects on grain crop production but the following 3 years' good harvests have rebuilt grain stocks. It now looks like 2008 was a pivotal year, we could have heeded the warnings and radically changed direction but our efforts have all been bent to restore business as usual. I think that was when we blew our very last realistic chance.
The consequent recession depressed oil consumption by about 3% in developed economies but that slack has been taken up by developing economies over the last 3 years. The higher oil price has facilitated investment in and production of more unconventional oil reserves, supply chain stockpiles increased over 2009 through 2011 but it looks like demand is currently outstripping supply and eating into those stockpiles.
The financial system has been kept alive by transfusions of $trillions in ways deemed unacceptable prior to 2008. Banking system insolvency has been transfered to states, consequently we will see states become insolvent, and ultimately the whole financial system. These transfusions are having diminishing effect, more is needed each successive time to keep it alive, when they cease to work sufficiently the result will be a more dramatic and precipitate financial collapse than otherwise would have been. I didn't expect it would be possible to keep interest rates so artificially low for so long, nor that so much money could be conjured to inject into the system, without those policies having a more rapid damaging effect than they have.
So, oil, energy and resource limitations have had less impact than I predicted. The economic system is apparently in superficially better health than seemed logical to me, too. But I am not optimistic these positives will continue for long.
Climate change has had more immediate effects than I anticipated. It could materially and persistantly affect food production henceforth, perhaps catastrophically. Underground aquifers have been over exploited, especially in India, Australia, US, this is damaging food production, too. We've no real idea what impact the rapid Arctic warming will have on weather patterns but initial indications suggest it could be surprisingly dramatic and deleterious.
Despite (paltry) global attempts to reduce carbon emissions they have been increasing at around 5% annually as we emerge from the first phase of recession. I can see no possibility of our present human society voluntarily making sufficient reductions in greenhouse gas emissions to avert the major adverse changes in climate which may even be inevitable already.
There is minimal probability that the global climate warming will be kept below 2 C even if there is a major collapse (economic and population) within a couple of years. The big climate question, for me, is what might trigger two very scary positive feedback loops: methane and CO2 release from northern hemisphere permafrost and methane release from sea floor clathrates, particularly around the Arctic. Should these kick in rapidly we could find ourselves in a world 6 C warmer, possibly within a few decades. We don't know where these tipping points may be but there are already signs that both are occuring on a considerable scale, there is a significant possibility we have passed the point where global climate could fairly rapidly change to a new, much warmer, equillibrium, or become chaotic. Sea level would then rise more than 200 feet, though it should take centuries - but that view may change once this year's Greenland melt is analysed.
On balance we've managed to muddle through better than I expected on the oil and economic issues but probably at the cost of more rapid and painful adjustment later, but worse on climate change. I don't think the next stage of that adjustment will be much more than a year away, and I think it could easily result in the collapse of the present economic system.
======================================
What next? There are two main trajectories: a relatively slow grind down or a series of significant collapses. It will likely be a combination of these but I expect sudden collapses to play a major part. Anything better would require solutions that are currently unknown, our present situation is not recoverable given existing science, technology, economics and politics.
It's unlikely that global oil production will ever exceed 92mbpd (currently it's just below 90mbpd) for a period of 6 months or more. Why? Conventional oil production has been on a plateau since 2005, sometime soon, and probably before 2015, that will turn down. Virtually all the growth in oil production since 2004 has been in unconventional oil: deep sea, tar sands, shale oil, corn ethanol. All of these are much more expensive to produce than conventional oil, often not economically viable at $80bbl, some perhaps barely viable below $100bbl. The global economy as a whole seems to be impacted by prices above $95bbl, reducing growth and oil consumption in developed countries, with $125 for more than a very few months thought to trigger US recession. Some current oil production is not economically viable at oil prices which permit economic growth in OECD countries.
Consequently I don't expect any of the major developed nations to achieve much in the way of economic growth henceforth. Even before collapse, global trade / globalisation could go into significant reverse due to either economic or political drivers, or both. The major rapidly developing 'BRIC' countries (Brasil, Russia, India, China) and others are very likely to encounter a significant slowdown before long due to: recession in the developed countries / internal economics / de-globalization / energy prices and limits.
However, developing countries can to continue to benefit from oil and other fossil energy even if it increases significantly in price. There is scope for it to cost effectively substitute further for human and animal labour, especially as their wealth and the cost of human labour increase. So, developing countries will mop up any surplus oil for a good while yet and developed countries will inevitably have to get by on less.
At some point major parts of the global monetary and financial system will fail. We've started to see the beginning of this with Euroland, x 6'Japan won't be far behind, then the US$ will follow taking most of the rest with it. It could trigger a general collapse or some new financial system might be devised and imposed to keep some kind of global economic system functioning, albeit probably short lived. I expect significant negative developments on this within 15 months, possibly before the end of 2012.
Climate change will continue accelerating, increasingly undermining the stability of present society and economic systems, wiping out many species and possibly our own in due course.
The geopolitical effects of these strains will be immense, the next five years may see more upheaval than all the last 60 years. Difficult to predict exactly what but some possibilities: India / Pakistan, Middle East, Euroland breakup, USA fracturing, China / Taiwan / Japan / Korea, Mexico / USA, Canada / USA, China / USA.
There is a fourth big thing: human population. That will keep increasing until it crashes, improbable it can continue its present uptrend for as long as a decade and no sign that we will voluntarily manage it or per capita consumption down sufficiently to avoid a crash. Exactly how, how far, how fast, that happens is an interesting question. My estimate remains the same as it was in 2001, by 2030 global human population will be less than 3 billion (it's currently around 7 billion), and it will not exceed 7.5 billion meanwhile. It may drop below 1 billion this century and to near zero within a millenia or so.
There will be draconian attempts to manage the initial collapse and probable ensuing chaos. At some point a population cull will occur, either to facilitate our species' survival or en route to its ultimate demise. It could be merely a result of economic collapse or deliberate actions by government(s) or others. I expect the latter and, if it is done pre-emptively, I expect it about 3 years from now once the medium term probabilities (energy, economic, climate, resources, water, food) become clearer. If you want to survive, this will be the main bullet you need to dodge.
Summarizing:
Oil production has managed to keep pace with demand but price and supply constraints will prevent 'normal' economic growth in developed nations for the foreseeable future. Unless demand is constrained by significant economic downturn or collapse there will be insufficient supply soon, probably within 2 years.
The economic and financial system is on life support which is becoming increasingly expensive to maintain. I expect it to fail significantly within 15 months, quite possibly beginning in earnest by end 2012.
Climate change looks like it is having more rapidly damaging effects than previously expected. This is impacting the weather, financial system (US drought this year is in top 4 natural disaster insurance costs ever, over $50 billion and rising), and food production.
We have taken no realistically adequate steps to tackle any of these problems, just kicked the can down the road. Bought time with which we have done nothing constructive, at the cost of more catastrophic collapse later.
Geopolitical instability will increase dramatically.
At some stage a significant reduction in human population will be the consequence or only viable solution. If done pre-emptively, which I think is a significant possibility, my guess is 2015.
As a species we have clearly been living beyond this planet's ability to sustain us for perhaps 30 to 50 years but have not recognised that. We ALL need to fully comprehend it and either live within our sustainable means or buy sufficient time to develop the science and technology to appropriate new and / or extraplanetary resources. Currently there is no sign that we are capable of either. Present assessment: FAILED, lacking in self discipline and objective perception.
I don't know if we'll get a chance to re-sit. I'm reminded of my 1st year university pure maths exams. I decided not to revise or do any of the differentials part of the course, which was about 25% of the syllabus; half the exam questions were on differentials and the rest seemed fiendishly hard, I failed. For the re-sit I decided to do only the differentials questions; I finished in half the alloted time, walked out and passed easily. Like I did, us humans need to change strategy, the current one manifestly doesn't work; if we can find the right strategy it might be surprisingly easy. Hey! I finished on a positive note, LOL.
| |
| |
|
2001-2015: a look back at my thinking, and forward