This is what happened to Canada.
never heard of it
The Seneca Effect: Growth is slow but collapse is rapid (2017) [pdf]
21–30 of 72 posts
Re: The Seneca Effect: Growth is slow but collapse is rapid (2017) [pdf]
#22This report was written by the Club of Rome, notable for having made some of the silliest predictions about population growth in the 20th century
[deleted]
Re: The Seneca Effect: Growth is slow but collapse is rapid (2017) [pdf]
#23It's also just like any 4x strategy game. You can harvest resources and build and build but once those resources are depleted they deplete very fast because you have grown capacity for intake. I'm glad we aren't worried about peak oil anymore but the climate and food scarity is going to be the next pitfall to avoid.
Wait, when did we stop being concerned about peak oil and why?
Because there's hundreds of years of known supply even at current consumption and we already have viable alternatives.
Re: The Seneca Effect: Growth is slow but collapse is rapid (2017) [pdf]
#24I thought this was talked about in high school biology... S-curves for populations that settle. Sometimes a population goes above the carrying capacity and it crashed and oscillates until it stabilizes. Humans are in an exponential J-curve that seems to keep going, but it's just because our culture and technology continually raise the carrying capacity on an S-curve. But if we "break" either culture or tech, then the…
An aside ... it is not safe to assume that the population stabilises. Chaotic results are possible if growth is fast. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logistic_map
Re: The Seneca Effect: Growth is slow but collapse is rapid (2017) [pdf]
#25Surprised to see terebess.hu on the front page of HN. For over a decade, it has been my go to source for books on zen.
Re: The Seneca Effect: Growth is slow but collapse is rapid (2017) [pdf]
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wait, when did we stop being concerned about peak oil and why?
Because there's hundreds of years of known supply even at current consumption and we already have viable alternatives.
Really?
Name one that is safe to handle, easy to convert, and has even 1/2 the energy density.
Re: The Seneca Effect: Growth is slow but collapse is rapid (2017) [pdf]
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wait, when did we stop being concerned about peak oil and why?
Because there's hundreds of years of known supply even at current consumption and we already have viable alternatives.
Any chance you’re a Doomberg reader? I’ve followed his recent writing and interviews on peak oil and I also enjoyed this Peak Prosperity video [1] arguing in opposition, looking at the short lifetime of fracked oil fields and lack of big post-Permian deposit finds. Also, oil is necessary as feedstock and in manufacturing infrastructure for oil alternatives.
Still, it’s frustrating that there’s such a disagreement on basic facts between two quantitative and careful thinkers.
Re: The Seneca Effect: Growth is slow but collapse is rapid (2017) [pdf]
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because there's hundreds of years of known supply even at current consumption and we already have viable alternatives.
Really? Name one that is safe to handle, easy to convert, and has even 1/2 the energy density.
I’m convinced that “density” is not a helpful metric here. There’s plenty of diffuse energy, and it’s advantageous to collect it near where it’s used, rather than make big pipes and ship it around
Re: The Seneca Effect: Growth is slow but collapse is rapid (2017) [pdf]
#29I am hoping that the modern world is not one single system that can crash all at once, but is rather many systems, such that a crash leaves room for new things to grow bigger
it didn't used to be, but now it is. the magic of growth and interconnection
Re: The Seneca Effect: Growth is slow but collapse is rapid (2017) [pdf]
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wait, when did we stop being concerned about peak oil and why?
combination of two things; first, we came up with new ways to get oil out of the ground, so it extended the deadline considerably. second, economic growth and oil burning decoupled, so instead of needing more and more oil we hit a steady number. hopefully, we transition off it soon. but we’re no longer thought likely to run out, even if we don’t
I don’t see a viable plan to transition for plastics, so I suspect that oil consumption will remain substantial until plastics get enough expensive that we find viable alternatives. Conversely I don’t think we’re actually in danger of transitioning off of oil consumption in any real way in the next 20 years.