FW: marginally DECREASING costs

["Geoff Edwards" <g.edwards@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

William

Whether humans or pond scum, we must live within the biophysical constraints
of our environment, or our 'milieu' if you regard 'environment' as a
pejorative term.

The biophysical capacities of the planet (including throughput of
photosynthetic production and waste assimilation) are finite. There is
strong evidence from scientists of all stripes that these capacities have
been exceeded for some years, perhaps since the 1970s in some countries.
Unless remedied, this in due course can lead only to collapse of the
ecological systems on which life depends. To date the rich countries,
because of their buying power, have to a certain extent been able to
insulate themselves from scarcity by sucking resources from all over the
planet, but this cannot continue indefinitely, because the systems really
are limited and interconnected. Not to mention equity and justice
considerations.

Most of the solutions that mainstream economics proposes for the ills of the
world depend upon increased economic growth, that is, increased consumption
of energy and other natural resources. This cannot continue much longer.

Economics may choose to ignore or deny the existence of the second law of
thermodynamics (entropy), but that does not invalidate the law. All relevant
evidence suggests that natural systems still conform to this law. If
economics is to have any relationship with reality, it should be willing to
accept insights from other disciplines.


Regards


Geoff Edwards B.Sc.(Hons.); M.Pub.Ad.
PhD Student
Griffith University
Brisbane, Australia


-----Original Message-----
From: pkt-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:pkt-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On
Behalf Of William B. Ryan
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 3:05 AM
To: pkt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; socialcredit@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: marginally DECREASING costs


<**>Oil is the major case in point - non-renewable
and soon (within a human generation or two - well
within the 'time-scale of human existence' - to run
out at present and projected rates of use.
----------------------------------------
The question is: Projected by whom?  Particularly in
the case of petroleum, not only are the reserves
prodigious, they might well be replenishing.  I've
archived some relevant materials at
http://www.geocities.com/new_economics/replenishment/

It becomes largely a matter of esthetics, not
economics.  Do we prefer swamps - with frogs, snakes
and alligators - to rice paddies that feed people.
If we do, we find other ways to feed people.  There
are plenty of ways.  And we take ecological arguments
into consideration in developing the world of
tomorrow.  We are humans, not pond scum.

What we have seen recently on this list is the
economics of pessimism.

Entropy is quite irrelevant to economics.


---original message---
Date:  	Wed, 17 Dec 2003 12:53:28 +1000
From:  	"Julian Hinton" <jhint@xxxxxxxx>
Subject:  	RE: [ERANet] marginally DECREASING costs
To:  	<ERANet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply To:  	ERANet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

William, I don't know what email you are responding to here. Your
comments are decontextualized and hence seem confusing.

You say "It may seem logical that we live in a finite world of
limited resources, but within the time-scale of human
existence it is *effectively* infinite.

The world has never run out of a "non-renewable"
resource and never will because they exist in such
prodigious quantities."

This seems to dismiss the whole thrust of environmental economics over
the last 30 years.  It is precisely the opposite case that is widely
excepted by most in this email forum.  Oil is the major case in point -
non-renewable and soon (within a human generation or two - well within
the 'time-scale of human existence' - to run out at present and
projected rates of use.  Another example is natural species
bio-diversity: non-renewable and declining rapidly as species are made
extinct. Or do you want to argue that genetic engineers can manufacture
a corresponding and compensatory amount of artificial bio-diversity?




____________________________________________________________
Free Poetry Contest. Win $10,000. Submit your poem @ Poetry.com!
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;6750922;3807821;l?http://www.poetry.com/contes
t/contest.asp?Suite=A59101