michel on efficiency ness
michel bauwens on efficiency ness for planetary survival
via tweet [https://x.com/mbauwens/status/1883388435492393260]:
If you were intrigued by @jasonhickel ‘s study, which claimed that: * “”Provisioning decent living standards (DLS) for 8.5 billion people would require only 30% of current global resource and energy use, leaving a substantial surplus for additional consumption, public luxury, scientific advancement, and other social investments”.” Then please have a look at similiar studies which we have collected here: https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Category:Thermodynamic_Efficiencies#Key_Statistics
Here are 15 datasets: How to achieve the necessary Factor 20 Reduction of our modern matter/energy usage ? The relationship between global energy and global GDP between 1971 and 2016 How would we calculate the effect of commons-based mutualization on reducing the human footprint The Circular Economy is only sustainable under 1% raw material consumption growth Global Footprint Network: biophysical accounts of over 200 countries Intensive Industries costing society 10% of GDP It is not attitudes that govern our impact on the planet but income The world’s richest 1% produce about 175 times as much carbon as the poorest 10% Both absolute and relative decoupling from the use of essential resources is impossible, because of the physical limits of efficiency Unequal per capita access to the Atmospheric Commons $111 of growth is required for every $1 reduction in poverty Global Scenario for Providing Decent Living with Minimal Energy On the need to move towards a CHON future by 2050 Report: Achieving the Good Life For All Within Planetary Boundaries: Biophysical Boundaries Transgressed versus Social Thresholds Achieved by Nation Satisfying Human Needs at Low Energy Use
adding page because of this part in particular – which is also the intro to the page (from link to p2p thermo efficiencies above):
How would we calculate the effect of commons-based mutualization on reducing the human footprint
Proposal by Michel Bauwens:
1) moving artificial scarcity driven design (generalized planned obsolescence) to global open design communities and their sustainability driven motives saves x percent of matter and energy
this is still improving sea world.. deeper would be to facil the dance (that is already org’d around legit needs)
2) moving towards more shared physical infrastructures saves x percent of matter and energy
again.. if we trust the dance.. best use of energies..
3) moving to open supply chains and open book accounting and its speed up effect on circular economy integration saves x percent of matter and energy
whoa.. tons of whalespeak here.. ie: accountable ness; circular economy ness; ..
4) moving to a cosmo-localized production (4a) for on demand (4b) distributed production saves x percent of matter and energy
again.. makes no diff if still supplying/producing for sea world
to me.. all cancerous distractions.. until we grok legit needs.. so ..
need 1st/most: means (nonjudgmental expo labeling) to undo hierarchical listening as global detox so we can org around legit needs
otherwise we’ll keep perpetuating the same song.. the whac-a-mole-ing ness of sea world.. of not-us ness.. have to get to root of problem if want a ‘cut-the-waste-efficiency-ness’
more notes/quotes from page/link:
This section is dedicated on the general premise that we need to transform the production for human needs within a framework that preserves the Planetary Boundaries and resource constraints, which require a new relationship between humanity and the rest of the web of life.
rather.. need to grok legit needs.. essential ness et al.. so that we get back/to garden-enough ness.. back/to graeber stop at enough ness
As far as we know, Simon Michaux, in his report on the Resource Balanced Economy, is the only expert to have outlined the strategic logic of this transition.
simon michaux.. simon on unsustainability et al.. still doesn’t get to the root of problem.. we have to let go of ‘strategic logic ness’.. ooof.. need to try ie: unjustifiable strategy of a sabbatical ish transition
The tradeoff between efficiency and resilience is confronted by every sector of society.
“Resilience is the capacity to experience an interruption in the supply of a required input without suffering a serious, permanent decline in the desired output. Humanity lives on a finite planet that started with a fixed amount of each resource input. To support population and economic growth, consumption of the planet’s finite resources has increased. As a result, the resources have been continuously depleted and deteriorated. The fertility of agricultural land, the concentration of mineral ores, the quality of surface waters, and the populations of marine fish are among thousands of indicators that show the long-term average quality of resources is declining. Producing ever greater output from ever diminishing inputs has forced production to become more and more efficient. However, even enormous technological advance has not altered the fact that consumption deteriorates resources. It has merely reduced the rate of deterioration..t by reducing the rate at which we use resources to produce each unit of what we want.” – Dennis Meadows
‘merely reduced the rate of deterioration’.. ie: mufleh humanity law et al.. need 1st/most: means (nonjudgmental expo labeling) to undo hierarchical listening as global detox so we can org around legit needs
the thing we’ve not yet tried/seen: the unconditional part of left to own devices ness
[‘in an undisturbed ecosystem ..the individual left to its own devices.. serves the whole’ –dana meadows]
otherwise we’ll keep perpetuating the same song.. the whac-a-mole-ing ness of sea world.. of not-us ness
Without Structural Reforms, Increased Efficiencies are Useless..t
.. If any engineer ever had the illusion that they would be working to improve the world through efficiency, he or she should think again — and take a good, hard look at how businesses and industries are, by the very logic of single-minded profit-seeking that moves them, hijacking the efficiency gains and transforming them (when ‘successful’) into gains in sales and in profits, and usually also into increases in global resource consumption. More fuel-efficient automobiles or airplanes, for instance, are a total scam — not in themselves or as feats of cutting-edge engineering, but because they make driving or flying cheaper per kilometer, so that all of us car or airline users can do more kilometers than before with a ‘clean conscience’, all the while helping companies reap profits from diverting their engineers’ well-meaning micro-level efforts into ecologically deleterious impacts at the macro level.” – Christian Arnsperger
part\ial ness is killing us.. for (blank)’s sake.. perpetuating the same song.. the whac-a-mole-ing ness of sea world.. of not-us ness
“Studying alternative provisioning systems, in both their physical and social aspects, is necessary to understand how well-being may be decoupled from resource use..t
aka: org around legit needs (authenticity & attachment)
[michel’s ‘how we calculate..’ that prompted me to add page falls in here]
Both absolute and relative decoupling from the use of essential resources is impossible, because of the physical limits of efficiency
deeper.. ie: not just limiting.. but killer.. kelly efficiency law et al
Global Scenario for Providing Decent Living with Minimal Energy..such a world requires a massive rollout of advanced technologies across all sectors, as well as radical demand-side changes to reduce consumption..t – regardless of income – to levels of sufficiency.
rather.. there’s a legit use of tech (nonjudgmental exponential labeling) to facil the seeming chaos of a global detox leap/dance.. for (blank)’s sake..
Satisfying Human Needs at Low Energy Use.. all assessed needs could be sufficiently met at 60 GJ/cap of final energy use..t Beyond that level, additional energy use comes with little to no improvements in need satisfaction: a doubling in energy use is associated with less than a 5% increase in need satisfaction.”
biggest roadblock.. we have no idea what legit human needs are.. ie: maté basic needs.. so just perpetuating survival triage
_______
nothing to date has gotten to the root of problem
legit freedom will only happen if it’s all of us.. and in order to be all of us.. has to be sans any form of measuring, accounting, people telling other people what to do
how we gather in a space is huge.. need to try spaces of permission where people have nothing to prove to facil curiosity over decision making.. because the finite set of choices of decision making is unmooring us.. keeping us from us..
ie: imagine if we listen to the itch-in-8b-souls 1st thing everyday & use that data to connect us (tech as it could be.. ai as augmenting interconnectedness)
the thing we’ve not yet tried/seen: the unconditional part of left to own devices ness
[‘in an undisturbed ecosystem ..the individual left to its own devices.. serves the whole’ –dana meadows]
there’s a legit use of tech (nonjudgmental exponential labeling) to facil the seeming chaos of a global detox leap/dance.. for (blank)’s sake..
ie: whatever for a year.. a legit sabbatical ish transition
otherwise we’ll keep perpetuating the same song.. the whac-a-mole-ing ness of sea world.. of not-us ness
______
______
______
______
______
______
be you. 