Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Matt Orsagh's avatar

"Will never garner political support" is a tricky one. As our politics is currently constituted, no it won't. But as more people realize that we are going to have degrowth by "choice or catastrophe" as Peter Victor says, then they will search for ways to choose "choice". But most people don't know what that means, or what that looks like. That's a large part of why I am writing this, to get these ideas out there to a broader audience.

Expand full comment
Toma's avatar

I'm a little uncertain about what the definition of degrowth is. I'm assuming that it means reduced consumption of resources and consumer goods and a reduction in population over time lowering the growth rate.

I've been preaching that for years now. At this juncture in time reduction in consumption is the only way to slow climate change if at all possible. Unfortunately our society has been programmed and controlled into believing that more is better and that is not going to realistically change in time. We do not have the technology currently to change to a reliable "green energy" society. Hawaii is currently 50% "green energy" and has the highest electric rates in the country. The main problem is backup storage for when solar and wind are not generating. It's being fluffed over and ignored. The entire electric grid is going to have to be restructured as well.

What amazes me most is the fact that electrical engineers haven't brought up these facts. It's nowhere to be seen on the internet. Because it's not politically correct?

My guess/opinion is that the catastrophe is going to occur in the next 5 to 10 years. Maybe less. In 20 years I have not been able to convince one person of the necessity of reduced consumption.

Keep writing. I'm not trying to dissuade you. Maybe you can start something. If not people are going to find out the hard way.

Expand full comment
13 more comments...

No posts