Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Limits to Growth (1972) [pdf]

donellameadows.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 59 posts

Re: The Limits to Growth (1972) [pdf]

#11

Post by johnsea »

wjnc wrote: post #4
spodek wrote: post #3

I remember the first time reading this book, or rather the 30 year update -- https://www.amazon.com/Limits-Growth-Donella-H-Meadows/dp/19... -- thinking, " this is the approach to take to understand how the economy, ecology, pollution, and so on interact." Everything else was just looking at elements. Technology is important, for example, but exists within a system. They looked at the system. They had to simplify and…

With all respect to the authors, the thinking at that point in time and the impact it made on the world and you: Much of their predictions haven't stood the test of time. -No exhaustible has been depleted yet and the price mechanism combined with technological progress seems pretty able to set incentives straight. Look at what the oil price bubble of the '00s did for electric cars and batteries in the now. -The world…

> although local situations obviously have tragic effects (Syria, Venezuela)

Considering people who came to Europe in the last time you can at least add Afghanistan, Pakistan, Palaestina, some African countries to this list. And I'd say (apart from often atrocious politics) it's b/c there are too many young men and no work.

> Material goods production (plastics) is at an all time high

with worldwide measurable effects on the sea. (Immission probably due to only 6 large rivers, but still)

(many more signs)

I fear the Club of Rome will work out very well in time

Re: The Limits to Growth (1972) [pdf]

#12

Post by wjnc »

tom_mellior wrote: post #7
wjnc wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With all respect to the authors, the thinking at that point in time and the impact it made on the world and you: Much of their predictions haven't stood the test of time. -No exhaustible has been depleted yet and the price mechanism combined with technological progress seems pretty able to set incentives straight. Look at what the oil price bubble of the '00s did for electric cars and batteries in the now. -The world…

> No exhaustible has been depleted yet What did they predict would be depleted by December 2017, and where did they predict it? Be specific please. > The world has seen massively more population growth than they modelled Has it? What does their model predict for December 2017? Be specific. ( http://sustainable.unimelb.edu.au/sites/default/files/docs/M... shows an almost perfect fit of population growth predictions an…

Are you not asking of me a much higher degree of rigour than the Club of Rome demonstrated?

The simplest: No exhaustible has been depleted yet. See table 4. Add the years in columns 3 or 4 or 5 to 1972. Gold, mercury, silver were predicted to be exhausted by 2017. None are.

Re: The Limits to Growth (1972) [pdf]

#13

Post by DennisP »

spodek wrote: post #3

I remember the first time reading this book, or rather the 30 year update -- https://www.amazon.com/Limits-Growth-Donella-H-Meadows/dp/19... -- thinking, " this is the approach to take to understand how the economy, ecology, pollution, and so on interact." Everything else was just looking at elements. Technology is important, for example, but exists within a system. They looked at the system. They had to simplify and…

I agree, and for climate economics especially it makes a lot more sense than equilibrium models.

Something I found especially interesting in the LtG model is that the costs of dealing with environmental damage and extracting more scarce resources build up gradually over time, but the way it works out is that economic output keeps growing rapidly, until these costs become overwhelming and it all suddenly crashes down. Everything looks great until you're on the verge of catastrophe.

But to this day, people look at our growing economy and think it refutes LtG, because they assume LtG predicts a gradual decline.

Re: The Limits to Growth (1972) [pdf]

#14

Post by ultra-jeremyx »

The point of system dynamics is not predicting the numbers--it's understanding the system. If you look at historical data over time and see values increasing, decreasing, and remaining steady, it would be nicer to have an endogenous understanding of what causes those changes instead of extrapolating based on the historical data. When you understand _how_ the system works, then you can reason about where the leverage points are.

I always loved that the biggest leverage point in any system is to change the system itself!

Re: The Limits to Growth (1972) [pdf]

#15

Post by jk2323 »

wjnc wrote: post #12
tom_mellior wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No exhaustible has been depleted yet What did they predict would be depleted by December 2017, and where did they predict it? Be specific please. > The world has seen massively more population growth than they modelled Has it? What does their model predict for December 2017? Be specific. ( http://sustainable.unimelb.edu.au/sites/default/files/docs/M... shows an almost perfect fit of population growth predictions an…

Are you not asking of me a much higher degree of rigour than the Club of Rome demonstrated? The simplest: No exhaustible has been depleted yet. See table 4. Add the years in columns 3 or 4 or 5 to 1972. Gold, mercury, silver were predicted to be exhausted by 2017. None are.

"The simplest: No exhaustible has been depleted yet"

You are correct. In fact, they never will be depleted. Same with the oil. Most of the oil that is still in the ground will stay there.

"These forecasts are made possible by assuming the limit on the amount of oil extracted is the amount of oil in the ground. In fact, the limit is likely to be a financial (debt) limit that comes much sooner." https://ourfiniteworld.com/2014/01/13/why-eia-iea-and-rander...

Please also see: Extracted: How the Quest for Mineral Wealth Is Plundering the Planet https://www.amazon.com/Extracted-Mineral-Wealth-Plundering-P...

It is well possible we are beyond the peak already. This brings us to the "Seneca effect" http://cassandralegacy.blogspot.com/2011/08/seneca-effect-or...

Otherwise: Business as usual.

Re: The Limits to Growth (1972) [pdf]

#16

Post by wjnc »

spodek wrote: post #10
wjnc wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With all respect to the authors, the thinking at that point in time and the impact it made on the world and you: Much of their predictions haven't stood the test of time. -No exhaustible has been depleted yet and the price mechanism combined with technological progress seems pretty able to set incentives straight. Look at what the oil price bubble of the '00s did for electric cars and batteries in the now. -The world…

You've mischaracterized their work. They didn't predict what you said they did. They showed a range of possible outcomes based on assumptions, among many. You seem to have picked one outcome as their only one and called it their prediction. They created a model based on a systems approach whose output depended on assumptions on physical properties of the planet and future human choices. Given the large uncertainties,…

Say I agree (at least I get your point ;) - I'm curious how does one test (in the empirical science sense) a systems perspective with regards to predictions / scenario's? Because at least in popular opinion the Club of Rome is known for a pretty grim worldview and political advocacy.

Perhaps I'm too much schooled in traditional economics but Robert Nobel wasn't too kind [1] and even in my environmental economics classes we spent quite some time deconstructing the Club of Rome.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Club_of_Rome#Critics

Re: The Limits to Growth (1972) [pdf]

#17

Post by wjnc »

johnsea wrote: post #11
wjnc wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With all respect to the authors, the thinking at that point in time and the impact it made on the world and you: Much of their predictions haven't stood the test of time. -No exhaustible has been depleted yet and the price mechanism combined with technological progress seems pretty able to set incentives straight. Look at what the oil price bubble of the '00s did for electric cars and batteries in the now. -The world…

> although local situations obviously have tragic effects (Syria, Venezuela) Considering people who came to Europe in the last time you can at least add Afghanistan, Pakistan, Palaestina, some African countries to this list. And I'd say (apart from often atrocious politics) it's b/c there are too many young men and no work. > Material goods production (plastics) is at an all time high with worldwide measurable effect…

Don't conflate being critical of the CoR of not being afraid for our environment. Mostly I am saying that the global market has shown to be more robust to changes in population and that supply and demand has been able to accomodate more changes than the CoR held for possible. That's positive point for our global system. It seems robust within the parameters of the last 150 years.

Re: The Limits to Growth (1972) [pdf]

#18

Post by api »

spodek wrote: post #10
wjnc wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With all respect to the authors, the thinking at that point in time and the impact it made on the world and you: Much of their predictions haven't stood the test of time. -No exhaustible has been depleted yet and the price mechanism combined with technological progress seems pretty able to set incentives straight. Look at what the oil price bubble of the '00s did for electric cars and batteries in the now. -The world…

You've mischaracterized their work. They didn't predict what you said they did. They showed a range of possible outcomes based on assumptions, among many. You seem to have picked one outcome as their only one and called it their prediction. They created a model based on a systems approach whose output depended on assumptions on physical properties of the planet and future human choices. Given the large uncertainties,…

Would it be fair to say that not all their possible outcomes were doom and gloom but that the media seized on that because it gets the most attention?

That being said... we do know that infinite exponential growth of an economy in a finite bounded space is not possible. Eventually it must either plateau or crash. We hope it plateaus. There are some positive signs in this area including most notably the decline of birth rates with development but there is no guarantee those trends will not reverse.

"Infinite" exponential growth at the scale of the universe might be possible, but the distances between even planets (e.g. Earth and Mars) make separate economies at that scale more or less separate systems. We could colonize Mars and continue growth there until that either crashes or plateaus, but that would not impact the growth model of Earth very much.

Re: The Limits to Growth (1972) [pdf]

#20

Post by wjnc »

jk2323 wrote: post #15
wjnc wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you not asking of me a much higher degree of rigour than the Club of Rome demonstrated? The simplest: No exhaustible has been depleted yet. See table 4. Add the years in columns 3 or 4 or 5 to 1972. Gold, mercury, silver were predicted to be exhausted by 2017. None are.

"The simplest: No exhaustible has been depleted yet" You are correct. In fact, they never will be depleted. Same with the oil. Most of the oil that is still in the ground will stay there. "These forecasts are made possible by assuming the limit on the amount of oil extracted is the amount of oil in the ground. In fact, the limit is likely to be a financial (debt) limit that comes much sooner." https://ourfiniteworld.…

I find it hard to have an open discussion if you're mainly dropping links without much added substance in the content (quotes like "business as usual", "keep bullshitting" don't help). The links are really long, actually seem to contain some relevant points, but also raise my BS-filter-flag (especially the links to 'prehistoric' economics papers).
Post reply on HN