Solutions for econological transition and anti-crisis?

[plasmanu]

It's irrelevant and can be bullshit.
But it was Napoleon who made this region wood.
To have boat masts.
Nature did not allow it. Surely not by chance.
Recurrent storm on swamp => few trees at the base.

[sen-no-sen]

it seems that this idea of ​​modifying our behavior is taken with much delay and doomed to Fail

I feel like a slight, but then a very slight pessimism in your words!

The regeneration capacities of ecosystems are absolutely fantastic, it can take a few years to see an explosion of life in areas that have been devastated.
Of course, a species that has disappeared remains forever, but we must not fall into pathological pessimism.

The solutions for a more just world are there, all that remains is the "trigger" to begin the transition.

[The shadow]

for having done research in a biotope contaminated by man 50 years later I can tell you that the wounds are tenacious when you make cuts in order to verify the pseudo power of nature

study carried out with rigor

http://www.guyane.pref.gouv.fr/impact-d ... uyanaises/

[sen-no-sen]

for having done research in a biotope contaminated by man 50 years later I can tell you that the wounds are tenacious when you make cuts in order to verify the pseudo power of nature

Refer in this case to the great phase of extinctions and we will indeed see "the pseudo power" of regeneration of life.

I absolutely do not seek to relativize the misdeeds of human activity, but I do not see or lead pessimism like:
it's fucked up, there's nothing left to do... that does the business well for those who want everything to stay in place.

[plasmanu]

Man is a wolf to man.
And he is an ogre for nature.
But not all men: fortunately.

[The shadow]

there are many examples of the disappearance of species and entire branches of the homo erectus

the museum is full of them

I only speak the known ones

[Obamot]

The reality is very different from what he suggests:

https://www.econologie.com/forums/post232579.html#232579
https://www.econologie.com/forums/post232479.html#232479

So I doubt that someone with such immature reactions has studied the forest he claims ...

Anyway, in absolute terms, extract anything to see what we do with it, pffff ...

It will always be too much!

Except for the paper industry today! We don't cut enough wood to maintain the forests (and above all because oil and everything else is still sold too cheap ...)
So let's replant the forests!

the surface of 22 soccer fields per day in Brazil when in France considering the price they want to sell the wood it's really taking people for sheep ... for oil the cost per liter is 3 cents € and sold at 100 € per barrel = 159 liters look for the error

And how he peddles a mixture of false ideas and indisputable points * mixed with strokes to make the buzz! Sometimes it is necessary to re-establish the reality of the facts:

http://www.bois.com/particuliers/mieux- ... er-du-bois

...>

Since the Bianco report, it was estimated that the forest produced more wood than it cut, which encouraged more dynamic forestry,

And that's without taking into account the endemic lack of forest maintenance!

"During an internal conference on March 7 and 8, the Director General of the ONF, Pascal Viné announced that the data which had led to launching the whole establishment in the" producing more "of wood in volume were erroneous"

Bravo politicians!

But no, in Europe (because it is our home we are talking about), the forest is not over-exploited: it is the opposite.

* (it is true that deforestation of tropical forests is a huge problem: but here it is correct to reason in terms of consumption / local production)

[Ahmed]

The shadow says "rough", but it is premature to take offense: I am sure (well, I hope) that he will understand that it is necessary to use a minimum of diplomacy to avoid misunderstandings ...

Especially since he says interesting things and your reaction, Obamot, is a little quick when you say that "It is sometimes necessary to restore the reality of the facts:" by citing a propaganda text for this purpose.
I think it would be more urgent to stop destroying rather than wanting to "help nature" for all purposes, an attitude which is only the continuation of our will to dominate nature under a respectable presentation, so even more harmful.

[Obamot]

Yes, his words are not without interest. But a little calm please!

I don't really like it when some forumThey drop their "missiles" for us, and then admire the "result of their effect in our ranks" ... We are no longer at the playground and this forum is far too important and our time too limited to lend itself to this exercise. Then for that, we already have Dede!

Propaganda may not be! Between zero emissions and zero consumption, with the current situation, it is necessary to find a median line. Even if it is insufficient, this is what we are facing!

We have to get out of the paradigm: growth = consumption.

No growth is not necessarily consumption, but for this to be possible, it will take imagination. And restore confidence with the "creatives", and return the confidence they lost by protecting their production as it should ...

Wood is going to be used more and more: it is renewable energy and the most remarkable solar energy storage material! Man can never do without it! But from this point of view, I agree with the Shadow. It is essential to save tropical forests. But you have to put the right priorities ...

As for the debate of the purists to whom I do not fail to refer almost on every occasion. It is not in vain. Because we do not have much time left before the clash ... And we are very far from being ready!

In this perspective, and to respond to the concern of this thread ... I would suggest to a cutting-edge and courageous government, to create a city of "after oil», So as to simply represent for real, what awaits us! And to find all the means / methods which would allow its inhabitants to make a decent living from local exchanges and productions! And by calling on the cream of the crop of technologies that are simple to implement and non-polluting today ... A laboratory city of the future, with its own economy and its own taxation, where all the economic parties / actors (etc) concerned could come and try out their “life-size” solutions!

[Ahmed]

I maintain that it is propaganda to claim that the forest needs humans to thrive and to make, I quote, "beautiful trees"!

You write:

No growth is not necessarily consumption, but for this to be possible, it will take imagination.

As I do not suspect you of wanting to maintain the confusion, but rather of being (slightly) victim of it by the use of an inappropriate term, I think that you mean that one must invent a new way of "development" human who would be in total opposition to the current model ...
The expectation of stamped "creatives" or of the state, even in the very restrictive and preliminary form of a "biosphere" could only lead, at best, to a lunapark serving as a pretext to continue the "business as usual ": every time, it's the syndrome of the" natural park "guaranteed!

And even:

Because we do not have much time left before the clash ... And we are very far from being ready!

This is, alas, very true, and the problem is not a lack of imagination or means, because other modes of operation are still possible.
No, the big obstacle is the inability of the various forces of change to function, intellectually speaking, outside the current schema, to persist in not understanding that alienation extends to analysis critical.
The most modest of them think that it is enough to change puppets for everything to improve, more radicals believe that it would be enough for the means of production to change hands so that immediately, by a strange transmutation, the destruction of man and nature is reversed and the tomorrows are singing ...

to be continued