Energy - "Degrowth is impossible" (Bertrand Piccard)

[sen-no-sen]

Perhaps its surfaces have another vocation at the origin ...

I invite you to read my article (I'm not going to copy and paste):
https://sites.google.com/site/olivierda ... grosolaire

I absolutely do not question the merits of renewable energies and their potential capacities to replace the modes of production of the moment.
My initial remark is based on the imposture which consists in affirming that the pursuit of growth is possible thanks to renewables and all in the best of worlds, this is very clearly what indicates Bertrand Picard.
The world is not intended to become a gigantic wind / solar park to satisfy "our *" growth impulses.
There is no doubt that a hypothetical virtuous future will go through renewable energies, but only after a deep awareness of the determinisms at play which are I recall technologism et Exponential economism.

In the historical context this time, it clearly appears that renewables are in fact only a palliative to fossil fuels, more particularly to depleting oil.
Note also the strategic directions of the two giants (Russian and American), the policy of Putin is strongly oriented on gas exploitation, the policy Trumpeter on that of coal ... the time to master the merger in about 30/40 years (Lockheed martin is on track).
So we shouldn't dream too much about a world powered by 100% renewable energy, sorry ...



* Impulses aroused by memes (ideas that replicate by imitation) that colonize our brains.

Ahmed you write:

the most polluting and less profitable activities were exported out of sight, while on the spot "responsible" companies used these standards to eliminate local competition unable to finance this development ...

Similarly, energy can take on two opposite faces depending on the location of the planet ... funny way of reconciling opposites ...

Indeed, it is an effective way to do degreasing with good conscience,Mr Thatcher knew something!

[Kokopelli seeds]

I absolutely do not question the merits of renewable energies and their potential capacities to replace the modes of production of the moment.

OK

I really agree with you, basically.
But then don't stay on the surface of the analysis, and really go back to the source of the problem: capitalism is only a consequence.
Let us meditate on what Otto Gross, Colinne Serreau and Amma tell us.

[chatelot16]

while we are still rich, we could invest heavily in the production of renewable energy so as not to need growth, but who does? the price of oil drops a bit and we stop all renewable projects ...

so we will consume all the oil until the last drop and when there is no more it will be necessary to reduce the energy consumption

and before there is none there is already an economic activity which slows down and more and more unemployed people who are obliged to reduce their consumption until becoming homeless

if we were effectively governed we could manage this decrease so that everyone keeps a place ... but if we continue to do whatever it will be painful for the poorest, and then painful for everyone with the war or revolution it's going to cause

[Ahmed]

Capitalism is cause more than consequence; let's say that it replaced old forms of domination, less able to dissipate as much energy and therefore to destroy as effectively the possibility of life on earth ...
The solution obviously does not lie in a return to these past alienations, but in the collective and lucid invention of a future, the best, or the least bad, possible.

[Kokopelli seeds]

Capitalism is cause more than consequence

The fundamental origin of the ecological crisis we are experiencing is the Abrahamic patriarchy, in other words the enslavement of the womb of women by men to ensure father-son filiation ("in the name of the father and the son "). Matri-filiation does not require women to enslave the phallus of Men because a Woman is always certain that the child being born is indeed hers.

When one is able to appropriate the body of a Woman, then then one appropriates the Earth.
Otto Gross's analysis is of a rare lucidity.

Any analysis that remains at the level of the "capitalism" layer is superficial and will therefore not resolve anything.
And that is why all the communist attempts have so far failed in the world.

[Ahmed]

Otto Gross actually has the right to think what he wants ...

Does not his "lucidity" on the Abrahamic patriarchate owe much to the strained relationship he had with his father?

You write:

And that is why all the communist attempts have so far failed in the world.

Perhaps rather because they were only superficial communists and could more surely be cataloged as state capitalisms ...

[phil53]

I rather believe that capitalism is the uncontrolled expression of our primary fears. Which proves that what we lack is not technique but intelligence.
Some and not that the rich give capitalism the status of religion and we enter the myth, nothing can be explained, you have to believe.
So growth is salvation.
St growth pray for us!

[Janic]

The fundamental origin of the ecological crisis we are experiencing is the Abrahamic patriarchy, in other words the enslavement of the womb of women by men to ensure father-son filiation ("in the name of the father and the son ").

Ouch, have, have! But where are they going to get it all?
a) In biblical discourse there is no trace of "the enslavement of the womb of women by men to ensure father-son filiation " Otherwise quote!
b) ("in the name of the father and son")
But where are they going to get it all?
No such mention by Abraham (" you must give back to Caesar what belongs to Caesar… ») And incidentally to God what belongs to him!

When one is able to appropriate the body of a Woman, then then one appropriates the Earth.

Who appropriates a woman's body? Where then in nature everyone appropriates what does not belong to them. We take the food, the air we breathe.

Matri-filiation does not require enslavement of the phallus of men by women because a woman is always certain that the child who is born is indeed hers.

Less and less true with artificial insemination.

And that is why all the communist attempts have so far failed in the world.

They have failed because it is not enough to issue a philosophical discourse, it is also necessary that he finds the possibilities of its application in the real materialist world.

[lilian07]

Without going to the origin of man and his predation capacity which shows that decay in the sense that it is defined is impossible, I believe that if we define an acceptable threshold of comfortable viability without abuse which could Being able to exclude oneself from reptilian needs and to have a roof to protect oneself from bad weather, we could now greatly reduce our dependence on fossil fuels.
Moreover, by evolving with a different “mentality”, which is impossible and which I currently have difficulty in understanding, reducing our dependence would be drastic. Finally, considering our planet as one and the same “borderless” entity, the idea of ​​a “green” evolution with growth would be probable. We immediately see that one of the paths that exists in “theory” is infeasible for this century.
The potential source of energy would then be of course that of the sun, a single small square of 60 km of side of PV would be enough to cover 24h of our world consumption, 2 surfaces well arranged on the planet would then be enough for our current level of consumption which grows continuously. This is the so-called centralized energy system but it also works decentralized as close as possible to the consumer with our roofs which are enough to shut down our nuclear power plants.
This simple technical consideration which is far beyond a societal feasibility is apparently simple but in reality behind such a concept there is a lot of lack of know-how, a radically different infrastructure and even much more research and development than it does. appears there. To be convinced of this, it is not enough to philosophize but to understand the mechanisms and theory involved.
Like a mathematical problem it will take time to arrive at this possible solution and like a mathematical problem the solution which includes multiple resolutions will certainly not be this one .... because technological breakthroughs will disturb this narrow vision linked to our restricted perimeter the problem of insufficient fossil resources today.
To put it simply, there will be no decrease and things will come gradually by transition and by exhaustion of the simplest resource to exploit because it is impossible to burn stages in a human society as it is impossible to burn stages with science and research.
Contrary to what could be deduced from this post, a lot of ingredients are missing to reduce our footprint by using renewable sources and the technology is far from being robust and mature. The share of renewable is less than 2% on a global scale. The population is increasing and needs are growing. In addition, energy consumption seems directly linked to the GDP of a country and these "green" considerations only concern the rich "less than 1% of the population" and among its rich less than 5% of the people.

[sen-no-sen]

The fundamental origin of the ecological crisis we are experiencing is the Abrahamic patriarchy, in other words the enslavement of the womb of women by men to ensure father-son filiation ("in the name of the father and the son "). Matri-filiation does not require women to enslave the phallus of Men because a Woman is always certain that the child being born is indeed hers.

There is indeed a relationship between the economic system and the monotheistic religions, but the latter has much more to do with the organization of society from a structural point of view * than because of patriarchy / matriarchy or a fundamental philosophical reason .

There exist and there have existed number of primitive tribes founded according to a patriarchal mode, without their last giving rise to any form of capitalism.

Capitalism is the name we give to a phase of Exponential economism, appeared following a quantitative leap in the exchange of information between companies, in particular from "enlightenment".
This process has little regard for the agents they deploy, men and women do the job very well and without any discrimination.
Besides, economism naturally tends to make the differences between men and women disappear, as we see today and should ultimately lead to a world populated by asexual entity (transhumanism / post-humanism).


* Due to the selection mode r ou K: the companies dissipating a lot of energy will naturally develop monopolistic structures, by effect of coalescence.
This is confirmed by the evolution of beliefs: ranging from animism(belief in a multitude of spirits) then going through the polytheism(belief in several gods), monolatrism(belief in several gods but considering one more important than the others), then the monotheism(only one god).
A society of belief monotheistic will therefore be better able to see within it the tools necessary for the appearance of an exchange network allowing the advent of an economy as understood today.