Safe Haven | Preservation of Capital
"Everything should be made as simple as
possible, but not simpler." - Albert Einstein
HOME ARCHIVES FORUMS SEARCH SITE MAP ABOUT US

<<- Previous Message Next Message ->>
<- Previous In Thread Next In Thread ->
From:William Tamblyn
Received:01/21/2004 08:40 PM
Subject:Re:Overshoot

Siegfried,
 
I not only completely ignored the role of modern medicine in that post, I completely ignored the role of modern agriculture as well.  It was a fairly long post as it was.
 
Here's what I said in a follow-up post on agriculture (I'll get to medicine in a moment):
_______________________________________________
 
Modern agriculture feeds the world.  Below is a snippet of an article that deals with the role played by the fossil fuels in modern agriculture.  (The emphasis is mine.)
 
 
AGRICULTURE
The very important role of oil and natural gas in agriculture, beyond the obvious fuelling of agricultural machinery, is often unknown. But these raw materials are the base for fertilizers by which to increase crop yields and for pesticides to protect crops from insects and diseases and to control weeds that compete with food plants. The most widely used fertilizers are compounds of ammonia, made from natural gas. Bartlett (1978) says: "Modern agriculture is the use of land to convert petroleum into food". Emphasizing the importance of petrochemicals in US agriculture, Pimentel (1998a), states
  • If the fertilizers, partial irrigation [in part provided by oil energy], and pesticides were withdrawn, corn yields, for example, would drop from 130 bushels per acre to about 30 bushels.
  • However, this is assuming legumes can also be used to provide a little nitrogen. Without the use of legumes, yields would decline to about 16 bushels per acre. This is about the corn yield in developing countries.

The references are at http://www.intuser.net/ufes4.php where you will find:

Bartlett, A. A. (1978). Forgotten fundamentals of the energy crisis: Am. Journal of Physics, 46(9), 876-888.

Pimentel, D. (1998a). Letter dated March 24.

_______________________________________________

As I see it, Siegfried, advances in science, technology, medicine, and more were the direct result of two things: modern agriculture freed up people who formerly had worked the land and - even more important - the use of fossil fuels gave these freed-up people "energy slaves" that enabled them to be very creative and productive indeed.

Below (with my emphases added) are snippets from an article that explains a bit more about "energy slaves."  A search for that phrase would find many more articles.

Regards,

Bill

http://www.theglobalist.com/DBWeb/StoryId.aspx?StoryId=2018

Globalist Bookshelf > Global Energy
The History of Energy Since 10,000 B.C.
 

By John R. McNeill | Friday, April 20, 2001

<big snip>

From ancient times forward, notably in Persia, China and Europe, windmills and watermills added slightly to the energy supply of agrarian societies.

Incremental improvements followed for many centuries. But in the 18th century, steam engines tapped hundreds of millions of years' worth of photosynthesis, burning coal to convert chemical into mechanical energy.

Coal of course had found uses for centuries, mainly as a fuel for heating. But the steam engine's capacity to convert that heat into mechanical energy capable of doing work opened up new possibilities.

The use of steam engines

The first steam engines were notoriously inefficient, losing more than 99% of their energy. But by 1800, gradual improvements allowed efficiency of about 5% and a capacity of 20 kilowatts of power in a single engine, the equivalent of 200 men.

By 1900, engineers had learned how to handle high-pressure steam, and engines became 30 times as powerful as those of 1800. On top of this, steam engines — unlike watermills and windmills — could be put anywhere, even on ships and railroad locomotives.

Worldwide energy harvest

This created another positive feedback loop, in that it allowed transport of coal on a massive scale, providing the fuel for yet more steam engines.

19th century industrialization rested on this fact. World coal production, about 10 million tons in 1800, shot up 100-fold by 1900.

The worldwide energy harvest increased about fivefold in the 19th century under the impact of steam and coal. In the 20th century, it rose by another 16-fold with oil, and (after 1950) natural gas and, less importantly, nuclear power.

20th-century growth

No other century — no millennium — in human history can compare with the 20th for its growth in energy use. We have probably deployed more energy since 1900 than in all of human history before 1900.

Very rough calculations suggest that the world in the 20th century used 10 times as much energy as in the thousand years before 1900 A.D. In the 100 centuries between the dawn of agriculture and 1900, people used only about two-thirds as much energy as in the 20th century.

The explosion of world energy use

Even on a per-capita basis energy use grew spectacularly, four- or fivefold in the 20th century.

In the 1990s, the average global citizen (an abstraction of limited utility) deployed about 20 "energy slaves," meaning 20 human equivalents working 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.

The economic growth of the last two centuries, and the population growth too, would have been quite impossible within the confines of solely muscular energy.

<snip> 



Peter <> wrote:
Interesting thoughts, but the role of medicine is completely ignored. Longevity has virtually doubled in that past two centuries and improved medicine played a very large role.
 
Siegfried
-----Original Message-----
From: William Tamblyn [mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 11:37 AM
To: Peter
Subject: [Longwaves Forum]Overshoot

Someone in another group asked me today if it was my view that half the world's population would disappear once the fossil fuels are gone.
 
That and more, I told him.
 
Here is the argument I presented in support of my view: 
 
In a preview of his soon-to-be-released book Birth of Plenty: How the Modern World of Prosperity Was LaunchedWilliam J. Bernstein says "not long after 1820, prosperity began flowing in an ever-increasing torrent; with each successive generation, the life of the son became observably more comfortable, informed, and predictable than that of the father."  [emphasis added]  He goes on to attribute this to "property rights, scientific rationalism, capital markets, and improvements in transport and communication."
 
I could not disagree with his analysis more than I do.
 
In Longwaves Message 1497 I quoted a snippet from the December issue of the the ASPO Newsletter. That snippet included the following:

"from the time of Christ until around 1750, peasant farmers employing sustainable agricultural methods only just succeeded in supporting a population in the 300 to 500 million range. The entry of coal-based energy was accompanied by a rise in the population to about one billion by 1850 when the first oil wells were drilled. A six-fold increase in population followed rising in parallel with the growing oil production." [my emphases]

Although coal had been used for centuries, it was not until about 1820 that major changes came in the use of coal:

http://www.pitwork.net/terrymc%20mining.htm

<snip>

At Killingworth the Grand Allies asked George Stephenson to design a locomotive.

Stephenson's designs led to a number of engines on the Tyneside wagonways by the early 1820's, but the big breakthrough came with the public demonstration of the Stockton to Darlington railway in 1825.

The railway allowed further coal mining expansion north of the 90-fathom dyke.

North of Backworth the household High Main coal deteriorates and the Low Main coal suitable for steam production dominates.

The demand for steam coal in industry and transport was growing and formed he basis for future coal mining expansion.

<snip>

As I see it, it was the  increased use of fossil fuels - first coal and then oil - that led to the increases Bernstein is attempting to explain.  His "property rights, scientific rationalism, capital markets, and improvements in transport and communication" probably played a role, but to ignore what was happening with the fossil fuels at that time is to miss the most important factor as I see it.

Now look at what the population was before we started using the fossil fuels - only around half a billion.

Regards,

Bill


Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes

 

<<- Previous Message Next Message ->>
<- Previous In Thread Next In Thread ->

 

« Opinions expressed at SafeHaven Forums are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily represent the opinion of SafeHaven, its management, or the forum moderators. »

 
 
Top of Page
Read ourDISCLAIMER
HOME | ARCHIVES | FORUMS | SEARCH | SITE MAP
ABOUT US | LINKS | CONTACT US
Copyright © 2000-2009 - SAFEHAVEN.com
Server Admin by DIGITAL ADMIN
SafeHaven Web Site FEEDS
Get RSS Feeds