Re: Hubbert's peak

[Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>]

Devine, James wrote:
> I don't think that the validity of the bell curve is that important to
> the discussion of Hubbert's peak. His basic point -- or rather, that of
> his followers -- is the same as that of David Ricardo & Thomas Malthus:
> long-term diminishing returns in the supplies of natural resources leads
> to increasing misery and/or conflict.
>
> Of course, as with Ricardo & Malths, that ignores such matters as
> technical change (improvements in the efficiency of oil use, etc.)

There is another dimension to this question that was not really explored
in the time of Malthus. Whatever the technical breakthroughs in farming
that invalidated Malthus, they come at the cost of environmental
despoliation. The same thing is true of oil. Finding new supplies of
oil, as tenuous as this appears today, will only exacerbate problems of
global warming and pollution. To really attack these problems at their
root, it will require bringing population and resources into balance.
There is nothing in socialism that will provide some kind of magical
solution to soil fertility or greenhouse emissions. This is a question
of science, not political economy. All socialism can do is provide the
framework in which planning and science can reign supreme. But it will
not be able to furnish some kind of philosopher's stone that will
guarantee a limitless supply of salmon, fresh water, oil, etc. for a
population that will reach into the multibillions before long.


--

The Marxism list: www.marxmail.org