20 years: this is the time left to humanity to live on this planet

[J-Pierre]

My blog has perceived this, but only a kick in the ass of politicians can make them make some good decisions.
https://lejustenecessaire.wordpress.com/
Because I have the impression that ecological problems are going to happen faster than expected ... and that politicians are more adept at themselves, than at all together.

[Ahmed]

Remundo,you write:

Energy is the prerequisite for a decent standard of living.

It's a phrase that sidesteps at least two things: what "a decent standard of living" is and how much energy is required to achieve it. Another oversight, which population would be affected by this decent level, because I fear that we will have to make choices, as is already the case, since the ease of some is obtained to the detriment of others ...

[Christophe]

A little less pessimistic!

[Exnihiloest]

Political environmentalism is neither united nor democratic

"Ecology is an eminently useful and respectable science. Its object is to study the interactions between subjects in an environment (in the broad sense) defined by geographical considerations, (this is the case for the study of so-called environments natural, the most discussed, or regional technico-economic studies) or purely intangible considerations (ecology of intellectuals, of the bourgeois class of large cities…).

A pseudo ideological science has been grafted onto this real science. It is based on a catastrophist dogma : we lead, with our technical progress, and our way of life, humanity to disaster by the depletion of resources and climate change. We will call it ecologism.

However, history shows that technical progress has always triumphed over the dead ends in which it was supposed to lead humanity to growth. The invention of the propellant helped feed a growing population of hunters, the invention of agriculture further increased the availability of food, slavery, the driving force and limit of the manufacturing industry, ended with the steam engine, the exhaustion of forests has been stopped by the arrival of fossil fuels, modern agriculture quintuple yields ... and the accession to prosperity lowers the birth rate. Furthermore, for all these upheavals, there was no real "transition". They occurred without being predicted or anticipated.

According to the UN, even if there are still intolerable situations for some inhabitants of this planet, all the indicators are green. "
Michel Negynas
https://mythesmanciesetmathematiques.wo ... ocratique/

Here, I have an alter-ego.

[sen-no-sen]

Regarding the UN and the lights in the green:

The 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals. Any objective in the list is antagonistic to at least one other objective in the same list. For example, eradicating poverty (objective 1) supposes that monetary incomes increase (which is also necessary for objectives 8, 9 and 10), therefore GDP, therefore production, and this also increases pollution of all kinds , pressure on ecosystems, and increased consumption of non-renewable energy, since it is precisely fossil energy that has enabled economic growth (objectives 12, 13, 14, and 15).

Similarly, now that we are 7,5 billion, improving health (objective 3) increases the size of the population and therefore increases the pressure on the environment (for example animal populations in Africa disappear as the population increases there. , and it is mechanical, since humans and animals compete for the same land for food), etc. etc.

As it stands, these SD objectives therefore push us to do the exact opposite of what a manager in a constrained universe must do: think about managing his priorities. It is an incitement to recklessness, when the question of the day is what we accept to give up to preserve the rest!

https://jancovici.com/transition-energetique/choix-de-societe/a-quoi-sert-le-developpement-durable/

[Exnihiloest]

The green lights are the ones that are moving in the right direction, like the poverty that is decreasing globally.

Catastrophism is the worst weapon of conditioning.

[izentrop]

Catastrophism is the worst weapon of conditioning.

Trump and Bolsonaro are your friends

[Ahmed]

The reduction in poverty depends above all on the index used to measure it and, as one suspects, it is a strategic element which can easily be reassessed according to what one wants to make it say.

[sen-no-sen]

From an objective point of view, it is difficult to be optimistic given the many negative externalities produced by access to "progress".
Because if it is fair to assert a relative drop in hunger in the world it is important to introduce it within a systemic and meta-historical analysis.
The increase in demography coupled with access to a higher standard of living intrinsically increases the destruction of ecosystems which in turn impacts the quality of life of the inhabitants.
The improvement of living conditions is currently taking place through an accumulation of future problems, a source of war conflicts and epidemics.
We can only speak of progress in a subjective and temporary way, except if humanity wants to survive it must see far very far and not only from the point of view of presentism.

[J-Pierre]

Again, everything revolves around money and therefore of productions which bring in (and which theoretically give work).
The problem comes that if the salary is capped by competition, the dividend takes advantage of this capping and grows (with capital) without government constraints (the theory of runoff puts government budgets to dry) ...
As long as the income from capital does not participate (in a constrained manner) in the problems of the world, not only will the problems remain but will enrich capital (the misfortune of some made ...).
Money is the blood of the economy, and the ecology of the world needs a massive transfusion which avoids wars and economic migrations, yellow vests, etc, etc ...
The richest 1% knows paradises, and makes hell live for a large majority of the world, but who wants to save hell?
https://lejustenecessaire.wordpress.com/
We need a form of economic dictatorship that allows everyone to live, but with the necessary fairness and abolish economic competitiveness.