The first thing these

The first thing these scientists should ask is: What do we need more energy for, who is demanding it and who benefits ?

Our system, promoted by braindead economists and paid off politicians, is replacing half human horsepower with 10 or 100 hp of electric, or oil energy and calls it "efficient", because the waste raises the GDP fraud and makes some crooks rich.

In reality the demand for more energy is to maintain the power of gross overcapitalization and the imaginary value of imaginary money, created from the air to collectivize and control the economy by a new politbureau, Soviet system, now called capitalism.

The biggest and cleverest racket in human history.

Rural communities are wiped out, millions are forced into cities, requiring huge inputs of unnecessary energy to survive.

Local production systems are destroyed to separate the producers from the users, requiring long distance transport, much of it halfway around the world, and the commuting by billions to jobs they could easily do in their own communities, again for the fraud of "efficiency", in reality to enslave, collectivize and grow the power of a criminal, communist/capitalist ruling sector.

Perhaps, one day we may just get some economists who can add 2+2, and who can prove that the present criminal system is endangering the survival of humanity and civilization for no logical reason.

Ed Deak.

"Declining energy quality is

"Declining energy quality is probably the root cause of the current recession," concludes King.

Nope. It might be a "novel theory" but it's just wrong. In agreement with Ed's comment, the root cause is the way money is introduced into the economy, i.e., printed out of thin air by private banks who loan it into existence and demand repayment of principal plus interest. It would be nice to get articles that point out these facts.

Interesting read, though.

The Crossroads and The Crosshairs...

"I guess when one is cognitively stuck on the necessity for an ever-expanding market paradigm, one can come up with all sorts of two-bit rationales." igbymac

Nope. I don't think you're missing a damn thing, neither all those above me here who have commented thus far.

And I'll briefly echo here: It's the endless growth paradigm, more even than the money supply issue and who controls it (as huge an issue as this is), that lies at the heart of this energy issue... the same as it does all the issues around waste management, pollution, crashing fish stocks etc. There's just too friggin' many of us sucking on the pipe of the greed system that is capitalism... which in its rush to make the rich richer, ever encourages more population growth, cheaper labour, higher GNP, rates of exploitation and resource consumption.

It's suicidal, and we need to face up to it. And when we do that, it doesn't take terrible long, or shouldn't, to connect with the other side of the reality, that it is the fear and greed driven, casino capitalism mentality driving it all. Historically, capitalism has created modern economies and systems of modern labour and other organization efficiencies within the economy, in the pursuit of endless "private" wealth. But the usefulness of this has simply smacked head on into the brick wall of the system's saturation and chaos point. Capitalism requires endless growth, which simply cannot continue.

We need to achieve population and economic activity levels that are more rather than less sustainable. Which means an economy built around the real needs of people rather than bankers and corporate monopoly capitalism. We need an economic order that can maintain "stability" and social and individual "well being", as opposed to "endless growth"... meeting the needs of people as opposed to the periodic wild gyrations and collapses of fear and greed driven, so-called "competitive" casino capitalism.

We need to set up to manage ourselves, our expectations of the planet and its capacity to supply... as opposed to an insatiable ruling class need for wealth creation... which as Ed says, can only be achieved by stealing the share of others or from the over exploitation of the planet at the expense of the future and the life sustaining systems we are all dependent on.

We are at a decision making time in history... again. And there are those in the Green movement, just as there are in Left politics, who are looking to avoid conflict, and cut a deal with "the system", leaving its "power and socio-economic relations" intact, that simply cannot be tolerated much longer.

moron growth

While there may be a correlation between declining energy quality and economic mayhem, the focus on that correlation obscures the bigger picture. EROEI is one component of that picture. A full cost accounting of the energy we use would be more helpful.

Until recently we’ve not had to concern ourselves with all of the energy costs that spin off from our use of hydrocarbon energy. There’s been an abundance of cheap energy, which has masked the real cost … including future environmental and social costs …of extracting and using energy, particularly fossil fuels. As a result full cost accounting has failed to garner much attention. This has allowed energy hogs to pass much of the cost that is responsible for the affluence they enjoy, on to future generations.

Now that the planet is facing shortages of non-renewables, particularly fossil fuels … and despite what Russian scientists claim, abiotic oil will not fill the oil reservoir as fast as it is being emptied, and neither will fracking or green alternatives … we can expect serious changes to our quality of life.

Increasing the supply of energy and non-renewables to a population that is rapidly expanding past the 7 billlion mark will become extremely costly. Increasing that supply to a population that wants to enjoy the “American dream” is a fairy tale.

You missed something Jerry

You put the cart before the horse. It is BECAUSE OF THE INTEREST that must be paid on the money created out of nothing by banks instead of government,that the growth must continue.
Until the monetary system is taken away from private banking,
there can be no sustainability. "Our money supply has been privatized! In Canada, we have OUR OWN BANK, the Bank of Canada (BoC), but don't use it. Currently, the BoC creates only some 5% of the money supply. Private banks create the rest- as debt + interest. This video is about how to use the BoC to create more debt-FREE money for Canada + a bit of history. The single shareholder of the Bank of Canada is the federal government. If YOU had your own Bank, would you go down the street to BORROW from another bank? But that's what the governments of Canada do. It's "so preposterous it staggers the imagination!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsdJuAM3k48

We have to take back money power from the banks that we handed over in 1972.If you want to end "casino capitalism" you have to start with the basics. It is more than passing strange that neither the NDP or the Greens talk about this.

While we are about it, getting out of NATO would also help "sustainability".

The Shipping container has changed the worlds economy

World trade has been revolutionized by the invention of the simple shipping container.

The sea has always been the most efficient way to move goods. The invention of the shipping container has magnified this efficiency many times. It is almost the same cost to have goods shipped here from Asia as it is to have goods shipped from 100 km away.

The added cost of shipping due the energy consumed during the trip from Asia adds almost nothing to the cost of the end products.

See Power and Plenty: Trade, War and the World Economy in the Second Millennium by Ronald Findlay, Kevin H. O'Rourke. Princeton University Press, 2009

The problem is that most of

The problem is that most of that shipping is not needed, because most of those goods used to be made and can be made locally and efficiently. Some of us grew up with it and saw it, and practiced it how it is done

"Monetary efficiency" and "cheaper" do not t exist, as they piles debts on others and the environment, preventing the development of useful jobs, therefore it is a fraud, designed to enslave, steal and rule.

Ed Deak.

Right on!

I see many commentaries quibbling with points in this article, but I have to admit that King appears to be spot-on in his analysis.

Yes, infinite growth in a finite Earth is impossible. Yes, printing money endlessly is problematic. Yes, investment income causes all sorts of havoc. But let's not shoot the messenger. King merely points out that all these things are symptoms, rather than underlying causes.

Humans are fundamentally no different than yeast. We will consume all our resources and die in our own excrement, give the opportunity.

I welcome the end of the petroleum age. With it will come tremendous losses to those who are unprepared. But it will also bring sanity to those who prepare.

The Cheney/Bush oil wars!

Big oil made money in 2001 when oil was trading at $25 dollars a barrel...The difference between $90 dollar oil and $25 dollar a barrel oil is roughly $2 trillion dollars taken out of the US economy, per year..

Canada has $250 billion dollars taken out of the economy, per year..

Do the math...The USA has had over the last 10 years have had $20 trillion dollars removed from consumer spending, or consumer saving..Canada has lost $2.5 trillion dollars in the same time frame...

This folks is the real reason dollars keep getting printed...

You want to stimulate the world economy, bring oil down to $30 dollars per barrel...

We have real choice to make, let energy companies destroy economies or rein in the Exxon mobile`s and the like.

It really is that simple.

The monetary figures for a

The monetary figures for a barrel of oil, or anything, represent nothing.

I remember when gas was .06 cents a litre, now it is $1.40. So which, was, or is, the correct figure ?

Regardless of the excuses, the figures do not represent the terrible damage done to the ecology, the Earth, humanity, the seas, atmosphere,etc. by the increased use of oil, plus the incredible property damage done to individuals, societies, and the millions killed injured, crippled for life, in wars and unnecessary accidents, because of a fraudulent economic theory and imaginary monetary values, plus "wealth creation" that mean nothing, excep to fool people to follow .

Of course, I now expect any good "conservative" to ask :"Do you want to go back to wheelbarrows, stone axes, and the caves ?"

There's a difference between a glass of wine and alcoholism.

Ed Deak.

Very important topic and great comments...

Ed and everyone have brought up some of the important parts of this picture, and I'd like to offer one more. I recently discovered a book, which I haven't quite finished reading yet, by John Michael Greer, published in March 2011 by New Society Publishers, on B.C.'s Gabriola Island. It's called "The Wealth of Nature: Economics as if Survival Magttered" and I highly recommend it.

The book gives an in-depth discussion of some of the most crucial issues touched on in the comments on this article and more. I think Greer gets even closer to the 'reality' beneath all the numbers and hype. His suggested solutions are practical and common-sense, and very much in line, I think, with Ed's understanding and certainly with anything resembling a future I would want to inhabit or envision for whatever off-shoot of homo sapiens, so-called, that might persist.

Please read the book, but one thing from it I'd like to highlight here is that (happily) the way out of our dilemma lies in recognizing that most of our REAL energy needs are for modest heating and cooking and other things that can be met by small scale, local, renewable, sustainable, and non-polluting DIFFUSE energy sources. These can be and were met until the glut of cheap, CONCENTRATED petroleum energy sources were discovered and developed, starting about 300 years ago.

Our present intensive use of concentrated energy sources and economies based on them resulted from the cheap abundant sources, but those sources are finite, polluting, and no longer cheap. More and more energy and environmental destruction is required to access them and make them usable. Greer points out how long those stocks took to come into being and how fast they've been squandered, but also that the important aspects of human life that make it 'decent' and desirable are not dependent on the use of fossil fuels or any other intensely concentrated source.

Our real needs can be met in a way that provides an exceptionally high quality of life by using small, local, mixed diffuse sources and reshaping our economies and lifestyles to maximize quality of life based on such a paradigm. I would say that would be a much better quality of life and without the inherent ecosystem pollution and destruction of using concentrated sources that we have now.

Please do read Greer's book! His analysis of the economics is very straightforward and cuts through a lot of the nonsense we've had thrown at us.

Ooops! Typo...

Sorry, didn't proof-read carefully enough. The book's title is "The Wealth of Nature: Economics as if Survival Mattered" by John Michael Greer.

shedding_light

Great choice of reading material. For those not into buying books J. M. Greer’s world view is available at http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com/

Greer’s energy zietgiest reflects reality. In the future he envisions he places yeast and humans in proper perspective. Though some may think otherwise, there is a difference in their capacity to plan ahead.

Bytesmiths & A Drop in the Bucket

Bytesmiths:

I see many commentaries quibbling with points in this article, but I have to admit that King appears to be spot-on in his analysis. ... King merely points out that all these things [incl. infinite growth in a finite Earth] are symptoms, rather than underlying causes.

You'd best explain yourself if you think his analysis is spot-on. Corporate Kapitalism is rooted in consumption, and the greater the consumption, the better. This is THE fundamental plank to the ideology, and certainly no 'symptom' of its illness.

A Drop in the Bucket: "You want to stimulate the world economy, bring oil down to $30 dollars per barrel..."

What an ethereal remark: 'stimulating the world economy' means what? and to whom? "Increase consumer confidence in the economic slight of hand that is capitalism" is about the closest I can get to understanding what is meant. Somehow peoples 'confidence' in fictions never seems to die. The religion of kapitalism is upon us.

"If all economists were laid end-to-end -- it would be a good thing." ~ JK Galbraith

Money and Things...

"You put the cart before the horse." mopled.

To continue with an analogy from the animal kingdom, I guess this problem of the role of corporate banks, money supply and debt can present itself as a bit of a chicken and the egg problem. :-) But again, allowing that this "money printing power" of the banks is a major problem in the overall devaluation of the "value" of money, by making it over plentiful, and in its encouragement of debt and waste, I still maintain that the central problem arises out of the "dominant" role and power of "finance capital" within capitalism, even within the ruling class itself (vis a vis industrialists, mining, agriculture capitalists etc. They all bow and kow tow to "finance capital".).

And their power is sufficient, even over government, global trade and development etc, that effectively, for some considerable time now, they have been left in charge of the "financial policy" of the capitalist state. And it would take a revolution to change this balance of power within capitalism, where he who has the most money capital and power over it, enjoys the greater amount of democracy, hence power to control all things.

The financial policy of the capitalist state is already privatized, and driving to privatize all other "social functions of the state"... such as the medical system, even military functions in the US (Black water etc.). They are in pursuit of total dominance of all aspects of social and economic life.

So again I say, while the power to print paper money is a really serious issue, it grows out of the capitalist egg into a freak chicken nightmare. It is nonetheless a product of capitalism itself, the arrived at dominant status of global "finance capital", or the class and economic relations within this system of economy and power.

This money printing issue, in my view, is neither the horse or the cart, but one of the reins that steers it left or right, or back wards. The Big Finance Capitalist is the one in the driver's seat holding onto the reins... which the politicians only think they control. In reality, they are but the grooms of finance capital. (The rest of us are all "the horse".)

"I remember when gas was .06 cents a litre, now it is $1.40. So which, was, or is, the correct figure ?" Ed

The correct figure, after the costs of production and distribution etc are all met, is what the "consumer", across the whole of the economy, will or will not/cannot stand still and open his/her wallet to pay for it.

Regardless of supply, if no one "values" it to pay the price, or is otherwise unable to, then the price must come down by whatever means, or production be abandoned, and the commodity fall into disuse. If no one can or will pay the price, whatever it be, it has no value, certainly not "market value".

Galbraith and Economists...

"If all economists were laid end-to-end -- it would be a good thing." ~ JK Galbraith

Now I like that one, igbymac. :-) Indeed.

That's why Galbraith, one of

That's why Galbraith, one of the few economists who had brains, never received the Bank of Sweden Prize, falsely called the Nobel Prize for Economics.

They had to lie even on this.

Ed Deak.

Fiat Lux: see below

"Of course, I now expect any good conservative to ask, "Do you want to go back to wheelbarrows, stone axes, and the caves?"

Well, I did. I went back to wheelbarrows from the bobcat. Given the choice to move 26 tons of gravel recently, I could either hire a bobcat or three high school students. I chose the students. It took four days to move the gravel, instead of four hours with the boabcat, but it cost exactly the same amount of money. The difference was the carbon footprint and the route the money will take en route to Revenue Canada.

We assume that heavy equipment is needed for any physical work, when a shovel and a wheelbarrow will do. In India they call it the use of "appropriate technology". I call it the creative use of a spade.

The students needed the money and they had the muscle power and the motivation. By the way, two of the three were girls.

There may not be that many opportunities to turn back the clock by using muscle power to move dirt, but maybe we need to start looking for ways to hire real people instead of using heavy equipment. Call me Irish, but one of the best jobs I ever had was as a construction labourer. Aaarr.

Fish- I'm a tradesman and a

Fish- I'm a tradesman and a small rancher, developing the highest degree of self sufficiency, that pays off very well, so I know what you mean.

By the way, I was paralyzed and almost killed by heavy metal poisoning, my workmates died of cancers many years ago, from the spraying of fruit trees without any protection, our Cambridge professors assured us were perfectly safe.

We have all kinds of equipment, to make our lives easier, but use them only sparingly, with tanks of fuel lasting for months.

At 84, I'm not much good at moving dirt, but my wife, 83 and I have moved quite a bit of gravel in the past few days, incl. this morning.

Self sufficiency means freedom, that's why economists get the fits when they hear the words.

Ed Deak.

Maybe I should have said "tail wagging the dog"

but even staying with the horse/cart analogy isn't it time to take the reins back from the Banksters?

As for the price of oil, it's tied to the $US. Since that's going down the tube because of Banksters printing money to bail out Banks and then charging the taxpayer interest on it. This conversation on energy is ass-backwards.
The article mistakenly blames poorer sources for the price of oil, when it is deliberately created inflation.

Call it "capitalism" or what ever label you like, I don't care.

Just take back the right of the people to control the money supply. We know it works, we ran Canada that way for 34 years.

Control of our money supply

Control of our money supply is the source of elite power. Because it is produced, out of thin air, as debt with interest, the debt owed exceeds the money supply by over three times, and every new loan exacerbates the situation, to elite advantage.

Without money reform, the future is bleak, hell, the present is bleak! Enough of banker/elite rule. I prefer peace, love, and prosperity for all.

What is wrong with wheelbarrows, Fiat Lux?

"Of course, I now expect any good conservative to ask, "Do you want to go back to wheelbarrows, stone axes, and the caves?"

I recently had a project that included moving 26 tons of gravel. A bobcat could have done most of it in four hours, but I hired three high school students instead. It took four days to move the gravel, and I had to work at it myself, but the cost was the same.

The Pyramids were made with manual labour, and so was part of the Panama Canal. There is nothing wrong with manual labour at all, but most British Columbians look down their noses at hard work. Call me Irish but I love a bit of hard labour and so do many of our young people. It is good for the soul.

Double entry. My bad.

Oops.

Space energy

For 20 trillion or so dollars we could have almost infinite cheap energy from the sun which could be beamed down to earth. This would not include the costs of transmission structures.

It would be "clean" energy wich could be transformed into "clean" portable energy such as hydrogen or various other synthetic gases.

The major oil/gas/energy companies will fight any attempt to establish such things tooth and nail. Their ececutives are very stupid people because the materials are worth even more as "chemical feedstock", especially when there is hugh amounts of cheap energy available.

"Space energy" is what we need soon.