Subject: Energy and Human Evolution >> From: James Joyce>> The economy converts low-entropy matter/energy into high-entropy >> matter/energy. By definition, this is not sustainable. > >This is true in a pure sense , however in a practical sense, the issue >of ever increasing entropy will only be cause for concern when the >amount of solar energy (and to some extent geothermal energy) entering >our "system" does not meet the needs of the system. Hence when the Sun >dies, so will life on earth. Given the odds that a comet will finish us >off before the sun burns out, I don't see how such an argument has much >relevance in the current sustainablity debate. This is not true. The problem is not the increasing entropy of the entire earth system, but the increasing entropy of the low-entropy systems that humans require for life. For example, the Moon receives as much solar energy as Earth, yet is dead. A case in point is oil. It's on a one-way trip down the entropy hole and our society can not survive without it. David Price said it best: "The human species may be seen as having evolved in the service of entropy, and it cannot be expected to outlast the dense accumulations of energy that have helped define its niche. Human beings like to believe they are in control of their destiny, but when the history of life on Earth is seen in perspective, the evolution of Homo sapiens is merely a transient episode that acts to redress the planet's energy balance." Energy and Human Evolution, by David Price >From Population and Environment: A Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies Volume 16, Number 4, March 1995, pp. 301-19 1995 Human Sciences Press, Inc. Archived at: http://dieoff.org/page137.htm~kklemowtlandsbk.htm.html Bioenergy List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES: http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/bioenergy-list-archive/ Jay Hanson wrote : > ..... The problem is not the increasing entropy of the entire > earth system, but the increasing entropy of the low-entropy systems > that humans require for life. For example, the Moon receives as > much solar energy as Earth, yet is dead. Energy and low-entropy energy systems are of course not the only requirement for life. For the Moon to even have a shot at supporting life, it needed an atmosphere .... then the next step to overcome was the snowflake in hell odds of life actually evolving. Sorry to keep refuting your arguments ... but I just don't agree that the future is as gloomy as the Entropy "theory" suggests. > > A case in point is oil. It's on a one-way trip down the entropy > hole and our society can not survive without it. David Price said > it best: > > "The human species may be seen as having evolved in the service of > entropy, and it cannot be expected to outlast the dense > accumulations of energy that have helped define its niche. Human > beings like to believe they are in control of their destiny, but when > the history of life on Earth is seen in perspective, the evolution of > Homo sapiens is merely a transient episode that acts to redress the > planet's energy balance." I certainly agree that (a) current society cannot survive without oil and (b) that Homo sapiens is merely a transient episode in the Earth's history. However, I, like many others, think that rather than waiting for the fossil fuel oblivion, we should at least take a shot at evolving society so that it can survive without oil. After all, there is nothing that is currently made from oil and coal that can't be made from biomass .... at a cost of course (but then what price do you put on the survival of society). I see this list is just one small part of the effort to maintain our society. As far as (b) is concerned, such an argument is often used as a justification for many irresponsible actions, on the basis that it doesn't matter anyway. I would hope that Homo sapiens could take a more positive attitude than this .... if not perhaps we deserve our inevitable demise. I hope the many indiviudals reading this debate are not tiring of the argurably philosophical tones of our recent postings .... if so, please chime in with something of a more technical nature. I'd hate to be seen as hijacking what is a list devoted to more practical pursuits. James Joyce Engineer Sugar Research Institute Mackay Australia Bioenergy List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES: http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/bioenergy-list-archive/ From owner-bioenergy@crest.org Mon Jul 20 10:02:47 1998 X-Status: >I hope the many indiviudals reading this debate are not tiring of the >argurably philosophical tones of our recent postings .... if so, please >chime in with something of a more technical nature. I'd hate to be seen >as hijacking what is a list devoted to more practical pursuits. Keep opinions flowing; you're doing just fine, James. Ian Bywater, B.Sc.(Eng), C.Eng, MIEE, MIPENZ General Manager Convertech Ltd P O Box 13-776 Christchurch New Zealand "Convertech - The gateway to the new carbohydrate economy" Phone:+64-33-79-33-01 Fax: +64-33-79-33-03 email: bywateri@convertech.co.nz www: http://www.southpower.co.nz/conver.htmioenergy-list-archive/ Bioenergy List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES: http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/bioenergy-list-archive/ From: "Energy and Human Evolution" by David Price >>But the exhaustion of fossil fuels, which supply three quarters of this energy, is not far off, and no other energy source is abundant and cheap enough to take their place. A collapse of the earth's human population cannot be more than a few years away. If there are survivors, they will not be able to carry on the cultural traditions of civilization, which require abundant, cheap energy. It is unlikely, however, that the species itself can long persist without the energy whose exploitation is so much a part of its modus vivendi<< I appreciate a lot of what I've read on this thread, and in this referenced paper. It is unfortunate though to see the view of fossil fuels as the only energy source which is cheap and abundant enough to meet our needs. Based on my information, this is not a true statement. As in natural systems, the transition toward a wasteless society is both possible, and profitable. When looking at integrated energy solutions, the possibilities of cascading benefits (i.e., recovery of waste heat and other process outputs as feed stocks or energy inputs for other processes) are very real, and are often so much more inexpensive for the user that these systems can be repaid in a very short period of time. The largest block to widespread use ofthese systems is not technological or economic, it's the perceptions that statements like these create and reinforce. The whole perception of how difficult it might be to meet Kyoto-level reductions is another expression of a limited way of visualizing the problem/solution. Natural systems have no waste that isn't a part of the regeneration of the whole system. While challenging, I don't believe this is an unattainable model if we can think out of the box long enough, and are willing to accept sustainable design standards.. We can likely exceed Kyoto with extremely minor shifts in usage and efficiency in our country, which has an advantage of being the largest user/waster with a relatively small population base. What I'm saying is the leverage can work both ways, not just in favor of greater destruction. We can seed the change the rest of the world requires if we honestly include as many of the real costs of energy production and waste/pollution management in our model. This means getting over the antiquated debates over externalities etc. that are nothing more than quasi- economics. In the end, we are fooling ourselves thinking we can get something for nothing, or that we can continue operating on an energy balance sheet that completely ignores the necessary, inevitable, and truly logical shift required to rely only on current solar income. Perhaps we are now evolved enough to realize we need not wait until our own devastating feedback loops wreak total havoc before we do something as "radical" as getting off our suicidal fossil-fuel dependency. Tony Novelli IoNova BioMechanical Systems Bioenergy List SPONSORS and ARCHIVES: http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/bioenergy-list-archive/