While I don't disagree with your well composed insights, there is one additional aspect that might be considered - reclamation/recycling of previously mined materials. Using lithium as a timely example, when lithium based batteries "wear out", the Li does not magically cease to exist. It remains and can be reconstituted back to its original pristine form for reuse. Granted, there would be an energy investment to accomplish this, but that investment would be orders of magnitude less than mining for virgin material. The same holds for all other elemental ores, precious or not. Until manufacturers have a profit motive to pursue actual recycling at an industrial scale, it seems that this logical approach doesn't enter the public conversation. There will come a time when, instead of slipping into another dark age, folks may actually come to realize that the local landfill is both figuratively and literally a potential gold mine. I would welcome any opinions on this point and thanks again for your thought-provoking works.
Great writing as per usual. I do find the co2/rising sea level stuff hard to stomach. Not that it really matters because the energy concerns will hit first.
To my mind the climate propaganda/green agenda/great reset is the cover story to manage degrowth (while continuing to make money for the 'stakeholder capitalists' as we slide down the Seneca cliff). After all you can't tell people civilization is ending.
96℅ of NOAA weather stations in urban heat islands..
A very sobering analysis and perspective on future prospects for human societies in a resource depleted world. The forming bottleneck for human population sustainability is not an everyday consideration currently. But as you predict, it’s a process that seems inevitable.
I am aware of that argument and I would point out the difference between "can't" and "don't". Chemically, any compound that can be synthesized can be decomposed back to its component elements/compounds. Utilizing that logic, it should be impossible for plants to synthesize sugars and complex carbohydrates from carbon dioxide and water and then aerobically respire these products back to water and carbon dioxide (yes folks, plants aerobically respire just like us). Industry currently views the separation of plastic components as economically unfavorable and doesn't care about the ecological cost. If you don't believe that plastic can be broken down and re-manufactured back you can get a glimpse of partial decomposition by leaving your plastic bottle out in the sun for a string of days. I have 5 gallon buckets that crumble in your bare hands after UV exposure of a couple of years and disintegrate further with longer periods. Atoms and molecules are nature's Lego pieces and if something can be made, it can be unmade.
I watched Stargate, and Star Trek and both shows indicate that all advanced mining is done with a pickax, and basket. Where do all these trucks and stuff come into the picture??
Hi Natasha and thank you for taking the time to comment. At no point did I contend that there have been "pilot projects and scale up plans" to my knowledge. I would be thrilled to find out there there are, but do you really believe that "obviously they'll have to be published"? Have you not perceived how published material masquerading as actual science tends to follow the money? As an example, consider the ubiquitous "safe and effective" mantra that was entirely based on bastardized pseudo-science and statistical manipulation. But how could so many people have fallen for such a ruse, conveniently wrapped in the trapping of what they believe science should be? Or maybe the declaration of "global boiling" by the UN Secretary General based on obviously undeniable "science". I see no reason to agree with your use of the term "obviously" in order to bolster your point. With regards to the "laws of physics", I would direct your attention to what would be more accurately known as the first law of thermodynamics - that energy is neither created or destroyed, but only changes forms. I am unaware of any law of thermodynamics (or physics) that explains why any chemical synthesis process (such as hydrocarbon polymerization of plastics) would be irreversible. Can you provide an example of an irreversible chemical process, please? When you next look at yourself in the mirror, take a moment to appreciate the fact that your physical existence is a beautiful and miraculous result of ongoing bidirectional chemical processes. If these processes were not reversible and reproducible, we (and all other life) would not exist. The universe and our earth, by my limited estimation (very limited, I grant), functions on countless cyclic, reversible processes on the smallest to the grandest scale. I cannot find any evidence, as of yet, that can illustrate how the predicament faced by our allegiances to modernity, cannot be addressed effectively by emulating what the natural world illustrates so vividly for us. I understand that everyone is justifiably concerned about our current societal condition, but growing afraid, angry, and despondent over it all is a sure way to be drawn into the control grid that impairs our ability to think critically. If you look at one of my earlier exchanges here with a couple of other readers regarding their conception of "ecological overshoot" and related concepts, no one has spoken to my contention of the reversibility of all chemical processes and, when source information was offered to me, it was all from a single source that publishes such rigorous and important "scientific" findings as "How A City Is Designed Can Create Less Biased Citizens" which elaborates on how the physical design of cities has a large impact on the "obvious" widespread "systemic racism" from which our nation suffers (https://phys.org/news/2024-02-city-biased-citizens.html#google_vignette). I suppose my main message in response to your comment is this - have hope for the future and rest assured that, although the path ahead may seem dark, keep your spirits high and together we will find the light. Kind regards.
Including recycling in this equation that B presents to us to make complexity sustainable only increases energy-material cannibalism. Optimal, non-ruinous recycling requires cooperation (not capitalist competition) and simple technology. Living organisms cooperating manage to recycle at rates of 99%, while humans in their complex and competitive industrial system do not exceed the rate of 50%... Recycling metals at the trace level in complex devices requires a lot of energy and materials, a cost that a company that is forced to compete in the market cannot afford... Recycling, sustainability and low complexity go together.. when we simplify (a.k.a. collapse) we will be able to recycle and be sustainable... again.
A few months ago I listened to a 'Mining and Metals' forum put on by one of the big accounting/consulting firms. Industry leaders seem to think they are going to use hydrogen to power the mining vehicles.
While I don't disagree with your well composed insights, there is one additional aspect that might be considered - reclamation/recycling of previously mined materials. Using lithium as a timely example, when lithium based batteries "wear out", the Li does not magically cease to exist. It remains and can be reconstituted back to its original pristine form for reuse. Granted, there would be an energy investment to accomplish this, but that investment would be orders of magnitude less than mining for virgin material. The same holds for all other elemental ores, precious or not. Until manufacturers have a profit motive to pursue actual recycling at an industrial scale, it seems that this logical approach doesn't enter the public conversation. There will come a time when, instead of slipping into another dark age, folks may actually come to realize that the local landfill is both figuratively and literally a potential gold mine. I would welcome any opinions on this point and thanks again for your thought-provoking works.
Thank you B🙏
Great writing as per usual. I do find the co2/rising sea level stuff hard to stomach. Not that it really matters because the energy concerns will hit first.
To my mind the climate propaganda/green agenda/great reset is the cover story to manage degrowth (while continuing to make money for the 'stakeholder capitalists' as we slide down the Seneca cliff). After all you can't tell people civilization is ending.
96℅ of NOAA weather stations in urban heat islands..
https://heartland.org/opinion/media-advisory-96-of-us-climate-data-is-corrupted/
UK Channel 4 documentary from 2007 (when investigative reporting was still a thing)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BY-gRFSaP7o
A very sobering analysis and perspective on future prospects for human societies in a resource depleted world. The forming bottleneck for human population sustainability is not an everyday consideration currently. But as you predict, it’s a process that seems inevitable.
Thanks B. I'll include this in my next blog post.
What does diesel do? Well lets take a look:
https://energyskeptic.com/2024/off-road-vehicles-and-equipment-need-diesel-fueled-engines-for-power-mobility-and-efficiency/
One might argue that civilization and 'intelligence' are the two worst things to every happen to a species
I am aware of that argument and I would point out the difference between "can't" and "don't". Chemically, any compound that can be synthesized can be decomposed back to its component elements/compounds. Utilizing that logic, it should be impossible for plants to synthesize sugars and complex carbohydrates from carbon dioxide and water and then aerobically respire these products back to water and carbon dioxide (yes folks, plants aerobically respire just like us). Industry currently views the separation of plastic components as economically unfavorable and doesn't care about the ecological cost. If you don't believe that plastic can be broken down and re-manufactured back you can get a glimpse of partial decomposition by leaving your plastic bottle out in the sun for a string of days. I have 5 gallon buckets that crumble in your bare hands after UV exposure of a couple of years and disintegrate further with longer periods. Atoms and molecules are nature's Lego pieces and if something can be made, it can be unmade.
Hey! Hold on there!!
I watched Stargate, and Star Trek and both shows indicate that all advanced mining is done with a pickax, and basket. Where do all these trucks and stuff come into the picture??
Or is that just dilithium?
Hi Natasha and thank you for taking the time to comment. At no point did I contend that there have been "pilot projects and scale up plans" to my knowledge. I would be thrilled to find out there there are, but do you really believe that "obviously they'll have to be published"? Have you not perceived how published material masquerading as actual science tends to follow the money? As an example, consider the ubiquitous "safe and effective" mantra that was entirely based on bastardized pseudo-science and statistical manipulation. But how could so many people have fallen for such a ruse, conveniently wrapped in the trapping of what they believe science should be? Or maybe the declaration of "global boiling" by the UN Secretary General based on obviously undeniable "science". I see no reason to agree with your use of the term "obviously" in order to bolster your point. With regards to the "laws of physics", I would direct your attention to what would be more accurately known as the first law of thermodynamics - that energy is neither created or destroyed, but only changes forms. I am unaware of any law of thermodynamics (or physics) that explains why any chemical synthesis process (such as hydrocarbon polymerization of plastics) would be irreversible. Can you provide an example of an irreversible chemical process, please? When you next look at yourself in the mirror, take a moment to appreciate the fact that your physical existence is a beautiful and miraculous result of ongoing bidirectional chemical processes. If these processes were not reversible and reproducible, we (and all other life) would not exist. The universe and our earth, by my limited estimation (very limited, I grant), functions on countless cyclic, reversible processes on the smallest to the grandest scale. I cannot find any evidence, as of yet, that can illustrate how the predicament faced by our allegiances to modernity, cannot be addressed effectively by emulating what the natural world illustrates so vividly for us. I understand that everyone is justifiably concerned about our current societal condition, but growing afraid, angry, and despondent over it all is a sure way to be drawn into the control grid that impairs our ability to think critically. If you look at one of my earlier exchanges here with a couple of other readers regarding their conception of "ecological overshoot" and related concepts, no one has spoken to my contention of the reversibility of all chemical processes and, when source information was offered to me, it was all from a single source that publishes such rigorous and important "scientific" findings as "How A City Is Designed Can Create Less Biased Citizens" which elaborates on how the physical design of cities has a large impact on the "obvious" widespread "systemic racism" from which our nation suffers (https://phys.org/news/2024-02-city-biased-citizens.html#google_vignette). I suppose my main message in response to your comment is this - have hope for the future and rest assured that, although the path ahead may seem dark, keep your spirits high and together we will find the light. Kind regards.
Fantastic description of the reality we're in. Now,.can anyone but a tiny minority of people accept this?
Including recycling in this equation that B presents to us to make complexity sustainable only increases energy-material cannibalism. Optimal, non-ruinous recycling requires cooperation (not capitalist competition) and simple technology. Living organisms cooperating manage to recycle at rates of 99%, while humans in their complex and competitive industrial system do not exceed the rate of 50%... Recycling metals at the trace level in complex devices requires a lot of energy and materials, a cost that a company that is forced to compete in the market cannot afford... Recycling, sustainability and low complexity go together.. when we simplify (a.k.a. collapse) we will be able to recycle and be sustainable... again.
A few months ago I listened to a 'Mining and Metals' forum put on by one of the big accounting/consulting firms. Industry leaders seem to think they are going to use hydrogen to power the mining vehicles.
Thank you. Fine article.
Another great piece of insight