Getting Honest About the Human Predicament | 2024 Teacher Workshop
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 ноя 2024
- Getting Honest About the Human Predicament
Presented by Art Berman, Director and Geological Consultant, Labyrinth Consulting Services
Follow Us//
Website www.uhcl.edu/t...
Facebook / texasenvirothon
Instagram / texasenvirothon
Twitter / texasenvirothon
Please consider supporting Texas Envirothon by volunteering or making a donation.
www.uhcl.edu/e...
The mission of the Texas Envirothon is to develop knowledgeable, skilled, and dedicated citizens who are willing and prepared to work toward achieving a balance between the quality of life and the quality of the environment.
Can't believe this hasn't been viewed more. I've been following Nate Hagen for about a year, and he's all over this topic. People on all sides of the argument have much to learn from this. For me, the upshot of this reality is that I and my generation (post-WW2) have had healthy, well-fed, relatively easy lives thanks to FF's. Now the bill has come due, and I fear my grandchildren will have to pay it. Assuming they survive the energy transition, or, as Nate says, the Great Simplification.
This is a downer subject for the overwhelming majority of humanity. Plus, it's a predicament without solutions.
@@richdiana3663 Certainly this species of downer presenter never offers any solutions.
55:20 "We have to make some very significant adaptions or else we may look at -- you know -- becoming a much less dominant species if you will."
* Totally useless information. Dude's talked for an hour and they still haven't simply asked him for his best guess suggestions for a best way forward, and so all he's offered is basically:
It can't be done, it won't be done, we're all screwed.
Give me back this hour. I've learned nothing new.
58:05 "The only thing we can control is to teach our children ways which they can be psychologically more resilient..."
- This Art is clearly a fossil fuel industry marketing plant.
And he owes me US$100 for wasting my hour of life.
@@richdiana3663 spot on and this is why nothing will get done. There is nothing to do! Collapse Acceptance.
Ya me too
Nate's acceptance of the catastrophic climate crisis story seems to be fundamental to a lot of his world view. And yet he has never really listened to the critics of the climate crisis narrative. He did interview Doomberg but he hasn't taken time to listen to the contrarian scientists. Nate is honest and obviously smart so he may get his mind blown when he finds out the so called 'deniers' are actually telling the truth and that climate science itself has been corrupted/captured. That will be a good day. We can stop wasting time money and effort to solve what is an un-proven hypothesis, at best, and probably complete nonsense. Climate is being used as a convenient foil in the green battle to preserve natural resources. Let's have an honest discussion and analysis of the resource depletion concern. Leave climate out of it. There is no reason to believe rising CO2 is driving climate change.
This is an important one. A must see and must hear. Thank you ..
Thanks, Art - for telling it straight. I'll add; the deeper cause for overshoot is that we have evolved a mind and its workings to enable maximum power over competitors, maximum energy and materials are tools to this evolutionary biology end. But we evolve only over multi-generations. We've created a world we are not biologically suited to live in. When you're Homo Sapiens, the tragedy is not when you lose the bio competitive battles. The tragedy is when you win. Because then you take down all other life, and then your own as well. I've been teaching my students this for many years, but fewer and fewer want to hear it. They want cake/eat too, w/ solar panels, fast EV's, etc., for all 8 billion of us. They're numbers-blind and want to stay that way, stubbornly.
I think it's a different deeper cause, we have this belief that if we can just get somewhere then everything will be ok, when I'm an adult, when I retire, heaven, living overseas, we talk more of religion than we do evolution and there is very little discussion of how we are going to evolve as a species, how we want too. I blame the mindset of religion as the deeper cause, instead of appreciating what we have we look to something else.
How many of us have really dropped our consumption 50% over the last 30 years though, if students haven't seen their parents/peers change then what examples of good living with the reductions in consumption are they supposed to use as an example?
@@antonyjh1234Great points, all!
@@antonyjh1234 I have reduced my own consumption quite a bit having retired and living in a 100 years old apartment complex which has used no steel or concrete since that time. I agree that religion probably contributes to the problem, Didn't Jesus come to make us rich as the mega pastors like to say.
As a teacher, your remarks carry extra weight. OMG our kids have become numbers blind (I majored in math).. . May I suggest the following, every day for the first 5 minutes of class, tell your students what is wrong with the world. Any topics you want such as solar farms, EVs, endless wars, government corruption, financial fraud, etc. Then resume business as usual as if you said nothing. In other words, expose them to reality for 5 minutes every day. You can reply here with the results, I will see it. 😊
@@xqt39a And this is the issue of degrowth that we really should embrace, your costs once you have shelter, food covered aren't that high, soon in a post oil world there will not be a choice and I can see how the current economic model means all debt/money becoming worthless can be an issue but 20% of our energy is electricity, we could stay home or do away with jobs for jobs sake, the current model can not continue, we need a slow down and I know your whole life of growth mindset will be hard for people to get their heads around to go the other way. I think the world had over a 350% increase in numbers the last 80 years, the next 80 years will be around 35%, if markets etc need more growth than that where or how will it come about..
Refreshingly straightforward talk about the elephant in the room. Art's closing remark is still diplomatic. If Art says 'use less energy', this also means 'be (materially )poorer' . And he could have added: 'have fewer babies'.
I will never cease to be amazed that the aspect of grotesque overpopulation is rarely discussed. We talk endlessly about our diminishing resources and the precariousness of our collective situation without focusing on the CAUSE of it! I totally understand the sensitivity of the issue, but the inescapable reality of it is an issue that needs to be addressed more than any other. We, as a species, all 8 billion of us are literally "eating the Earth alive"!
He did... but from the angle of "overshoot" rather than population per se. It's pretty obvious that if we did what needs to be done that entails a whole lot less people rather quickly.
@@nsbd90now When did he mention ? having less kids? He talked about his 4 grandkids. He spent 15 minutes dissing renewables and the people who promote them. I must have blinked.
Overpopulation within this system, it is a subjective opinion to say overpopulation is a cause of overshoot. Last year the world had to market enough food per capita of the world for everybody to gain weight so there is not a supply problem, it is a distribution one. We have record amounts of obesity while people still starve.
The lawn is the world's largest irrigated "crop", that we fertilise, irrigate and then mow with a fossil fuel machine, so it looks nice.
Africa has 9 of the worlds 13% that is arable land and it's largely untouched and resources up the waxoo and now money is going to them for projects like irrigation, the point is we don't know what the future holds post oil.
The real cause is what those 8 billion people do, not how many of them they are, if we had stayed at 2 billion people they might not have changed to anything more efficient etc and be in exactly the same situation, even 200 years ago when it was 1 Billion people and they just started using coal. 1 Billion people using energy like they did would then be the cause so it can't be overpopulation being blamed. 80 years ago we found energy slaves that we don't pay the external costs of in the form of diesel and petrol, the energy in one tank of diesel is equal to 3-5 months of my electrical energy, but we don't drive less. 20% of our energy is electricity, the rest is in fuels that people don't mind emitting, just to go for a sunday drive.
Point is, we barely do things right now so why blame there being too many people instead of looking at those incorrect ways and adjusting those first before we call anything a cause and therefore to blame when it could be other things instead and the amount of population is a result, not a cause.
@@solarwind907 "Dissing"? He explained what real percentage they are of our total energy mix, how is this putting anything down?
@@antonyjh1234 you must’ve listen to a different video than I did
I cannot believe how much this video explains. I live for 20 years in the same building which was built 100 years ago. My concrete consumption is probably with bounds. The solution to this problem is understanding it.
I have a 2005 small car… which has about 37,000 miles on it. WISH there were established ways to Car Share, have 1 car per 3-4 adults, and PRIORITIZE Walking/Biking/Train/Bus - and simply quit flying …
@@eugeniebreida1583 Yep Only Superman has the right to fly now. He earned it the hard way ! (his planet blew up!)
I would like to see a analysis on the waste of power / energy of the war machine and government, I imagine that would be a eye opener.
Yes, it seems an unspeakable oversight that the worlds War Machine(s) were not even mentioned. Impacts on our planet almost boundless… And ongoing…
DoD is world’s #1 polluter
Solar panels and electric cars won’t solve all our problems. Neither would putting in a heat pump furnace and heat pump water heater. Neither would civic action to promote renewables. Neither would supporting policies and candidates who take our concerns seriously. But it’s a darn good start.
Right on.
Either it's the right thing to do, or it isn't.
Reducing our carbon footprint as individuals, as companies, towns, cities, and counties as much as is currently humanly possible is clearly the right thing to do.
- I'm so sick of naysayer numpties who use phrases like "rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic" - it's so bitterly cynical it really makes me wonder whether Mr Berman's time is paid for by the Atlas Network. Their funders within the fossil fuel industry have so much invested in us believing there's nothing we can do, so we may as well just kick back and enjoy doing nothing but meekly accepting the status quo...
when we KNOW -- even if we are all going down together (and we DON"T know that!) -- the right thing to do is at least start to reduce the power and scope of the fossil fuel industry in every way possible, from ending the obscenely huge annual subsidies and thereby at least put renewables on an even footing, through to taxing them properly for a change; and then we ought also have been ending advertising and marketing for their pernicious carcinogenic products since decades ago too.
Agreed. FYI, Art Berman, the speaker on this video, is listed on his Linked In page as "a petroleum geologist with 35 years of oil and gas industry experience." Some of the things he says in this video seemed implausible to me so I looked him up. His opinions and lack of candor make sense now.
FYI renewable energy can replace most if not all of the energy we now generate from the burning of fossil fuels. Will it take energy to build these systems? Of course. Will it take time and money? Yes. Is it impossible? Hardly.
The good news is the technology exists today. The political will, not so much.
Sorry this talk was given to teachers. Hopefully they use their critical thinking skills and do some of their own research.
Some references: Union of Concerned Scientists, National Renewable Energy Laboratories.
Where is the sense in “going green” if it produces more carbon than it reduces?
Accurate data &
Fundamental mathematics has to be the best place to start
@@whenuakitekid renewable energy systems DO NOT use more power than they produce. The energy pay back for a solar panel, last I checked was less than 2.5 years. I personally have a panel, a Kyocera, 50 watt that is stamped 1977 and it still produces power. Closer to 40 W now in full sun, but still not bad for almost 50 years old. Name brand solar panels come with a warranty to put out 80% of nameplate after 25 years. They routinely do that.
Somebody lied to you.
Here's a logic question for you, if PV modules used so much energy to produce, why are they so cheap to purchase? You'd think just the opposite, that they'd be very expensive since it takes so much energy to produce one. Fundamental math is indeed important : )
@@whenuakitekid Apparantly, there's no sense in ever going green. How could you even begin? Everywhere you could possibly start isn't green in and of itself and so therefore it's useless to even start. EVs, for example, aren't green - well they are actually, but let's pretend they aren't - when they are manufactured using today's industrial technology and charging them with today's coal fired power plants. Everything green is only green in combination with other green things. Therefore, do nothing? No. You recognize that you have to do a lot of green things before any of them are actually green.
This is a very large project that involves the major countries in the world, not just America. The hardest thing to do in a project with many people from different locations is to keep everyone focused and going in the same direction. Everyone needs to be sold what the objectives and goals are and to get them onboard with these goals and objectives. This is hard work.
Yep - As Art says, it's time to 'get honest about the human predicament'. What can we do? Well we can't do anything much if almost nobody understands the reality of our predicament. Get real. #TalkCollapse
Truth hurts. Excellent presentation!
Live closer to your work.
Yes. Difficult for travelling salespersonages and all who earn a living by visits to engineering sites spanning 600 km (I was one for 15 years).
Thanks for your reply. I was a machine tool service technician for two years to save money after college. I flew all over and drove rental cars. Then I designed a work truck. I became a house painter and camped in a step van as close to the job as possible. Now I'm retired and still drive my tool truck about 3,000 miles per year to stock up at my place. I learned a lot about camping. I know this is not for everyone. It's difficult to make a living using no energy
It is so ironic that the discovery of agriculture allowed for civilizations to develop, but it was also planting the seeds of our eventual self-destruction. And yes, of course that pun was intended! This also makes me think of things like The Fermi Paradox and "Great Filters" through which life never passes...
In the 50s the USDA had film reels for their extension agents promoting rotational grazing, sustainable cover/forage crops, complimentary livestock pairing and treated compost and manure spreading as the obvious method of fertilization for pasture and vegetable fields. It wasn't until the 60s-70s that oil was put in everything. "Modern agriculture" didn't exist 60 years ago. Veggie oils were taking over for fuels and plastics until fossil fuel lobbying took off. Boomers gave up their hippy fight in the late 70s and early 80s and started voting in the Bidens and Reagans of our history. We don't have to look far back to find where we went wrong.
@@TheHonestPeanut It isn't the agriculture per se that is the problem... it's the civilizations. They always overshoot and collapse.
@@nsbd90now again, it was really a problem until about 50-60 years ago. A few things happened in the 70s and 80s and continue to happen with exponential growth. Civilization didn't overshoot anything. It's one part of it that we latched on to. It happened during the cold war.
@@TheHonestPeanut Civilization has indeed overshot the planet's ability to renew resources. That is kind of a major aspect of climate change. However, there are indeed three major forces at work in the US over the past half century that contribute to our collapse: 1. Republicans kept racism alive after the Civil Rights Act via "The Southern Strategy". 2. A half-century of stagnant and declining wages due to voodoo trickle-down Reaganomics. 3. "The Powell Memo" written in 1971 by future Supreme Court Judge Lewis Powell warning business about the danger an educated citizenry capable of critical thinking posed to them. The dumbing of America is by design.
Capitalism needs an exponentially increasing population.
23 countries by 2100 are going to lose 50% of their populations due to old age, unless they have higher immigration, China 500 million, Japan another 50 million, over 65 is going to be 28% in some countries, they have bought and driven all they want and post oil is around the corner.
The world had a 800% increase in the last 200 years, the next 200 could by all accounts see a decline. If the world is a business and in the last 80 years there has been over 300% growth in population and the next 80 might see just over 30% then it's hard to see capitalism continuing. Degrowth is coming.
Recycled concrete is crushed for aggregate, not new placed concrete (unless there is some process I don’t know of that cooks out the cement and lime). It is crushed and takes a crap ton of energy to do it. Although, this is still good because many places are running out of aggregate (gravel) as well.
I'm not trying to discount any part of what you said - just trying to learn. How is it that we can run-out of things like gravel or sand when the entire planet is composed of similar materials?
@@IanSizzler It's less a matter of "running out" and more a matter of what's left taking more and more burning of fossil fuels to make useful - either because it's farther from where it's needed, or takes more sorting or crushing, and all that is difficult to electrify.
Art is the best.
This provides a critical reality check: Total energy consumption must be reduced ASAP. That means (a) reducing energy used per person, and (b) reducing the human population. I'm very surprised no one asked about the human population after the presentation or in comments so far.
Do you think Russia or China will come on board?
From BuisnessInsider Sept 18 2021: “The companies polluting the planet have spent millions to make you think carpooling and recycling will save us”
From Hegemonic_Imposition: “According to Oxfam... the top 1% of the wealthy managed to steal almost a quarter of the total required wealth to address climate change in just two years. Evidently, the rich could easily address climate change and not even break a sweat - and worse, they could have done it any time in the last 50 years. Studies have shown that just the top 10% of wealthy Americans are responsible for 40% of the world’s planet heating pollution. It’s also well understood that the top corporations in the world account for over 75% of global greenhouse gas emissions. The top 1% of the wealthy now own half the world’s wealth, yet average consumers are the ones being asked to make sacrifices? ... Put properly in context, you quickly understand that the wealthy, both private and corporate, are responsible. Instead of addressing climate change they chose to actively undermine and suppress climate data to continue exploiting the world’s resources for personal wealth and they will live in infamy as the bloated, disgusting, selfish psychopaths that they are...”
@@lukefitzgerald6043 Luke, always wait for the other person to do the right thing first. Good plan.
Anyway, I don't have much faith in most of the people in the US coming on board anytime soon. It's like asking a drug addict to stop using. Even if they want to.
Overpopulation within this system. Last year the world had to market enough food per capita of the world for everybody to gain weight so there is not a supply problem, it is a distribution one. We have record amounts of obesity while people still starve.
The lawn is the world's largest irrigated "crop", that we fertilise, irrigate and then mow with a fossil fuel machine, so it looks nice.
Africa has 9 of the worlds 13% that is arable land and it's largely untouched and resources up the waxoo and now money is going to them for projects like irrigation, they could be fine which is good because they are supposed to be almost half the world by 2100 but a big thing we are missing is 23 countries are going to lose 50% of their population by 2100, why is this ignored? China is supposed to lose 5-600 million in that time, and all modern countries are going to have elderly percentages over 25%, these people have bought all their white goods, cars etc, all these consumption graphs are the result of growth like never before, 800% population growth in 200 years, there will be lucky to be 30% growth in the next 80 years, while we had over 300% the last 80, so we might be at a settling point and we have to look at how we will evolve post oil, start planning for how all will live,
The real cause is what those 8 billion people do, not how many of them they are, if we had stayed at 2 billion people they might not have changed to anything more efficient etc and be in exactly the same situation, even 200 years ago when it was 1 Billion people and they just started using coal. 1 Billion people using energy like they did would then be the cause so it can't be overpopulation being blamed. 80 years ago we found energy slaves that we don't pay the external costs of in the form of diesel and petrol, the energy in one tank of diesel is equal to 3-5 months of my electrical energy, but we don't drive less. 20% of our energy is electricity, the rest is in fuels that people don't mind emitting, just to go for a sunday drive.
Point is, we barely do things right now so why blame there being too many people instead of looking at those incorrect ways and adjusting those first before we call anything a cause or needing to be fixed and therefore to blame, when it could be other things instead and the amount of population is a result, not a cause. We found diesel and petrol but it doesn't mean we can't take things with us post oil or that coal won't be around once society evolves. 20% of our energy is electricity, add 5% for food/transport, add 5% for medical/emergency, round up 10% and by telling people they can have shelter, food, medical care, for free, if they stop working and we could reduce emissions 60% within an election term, it would mean a lot of change but growth has stopped population wise for a lot of countries and I think that's the real reason a lot of govts haven't done anything, they are waiting to see the natural decay of consumption as boomers pass over and gen x have basically bought all their stuff. The upshoot could also see a down swing that doesn't seem to get mentioned, we could be on the cusp of a multi decade recession, which of course will also be the fault of the boomers.
@@antonyjh1234 I agree but what about the desire for commodities with the rising standard of living of the poor in Africa and India won’t that eclipse the decline in consumption from the exiting boomers?
What is the effect of Planned Obsolescence on resource consumption and pollution?
When have you heard economists talk about the *depreciation* of durable consumer goods?
What is Net Domestic Product?
You’re absolutely right. I’m not a scientist but I an follow everything you’re saying about the situation
Energy is the economy, oil is the worst energy we kept/keep subsidizing and still are depending on right now. But because the oil companies fooled us for decades here we are. Look at us, everything is changing and we stuck on whether we can or can't. Those graphs are a result of our oil fiend policies. God help us.
Graduated as an environmental scientist at EPA, before al-G0re's Carbon Cap & Trade Scheme (actual legal name) monetized the AGW Big Lie for Carbon Tithe Taxes _paid into government General Funds for their own salaries and pensions._ So transitioned to power engineer for most of my career, including hydro, cogen, geothermal, nuclear and solar, where I did some innovative research, using DoE databases _and found energy is a dead end._ So transitioned again to teaching HS STEM, doing remarkably well, even State Superintendent noticed, ... right up until Common Core, when they told us we were 'instructors' now, not teachers, our job was just to 'keep students on task on their (government) laptops', and 'keep your thoughts to yourselves', ...my 40 years of environmental science and engineering. Mao's Red Revolution began in a girl's middle school, and led to the deaths of some say 30,000,000 merchants, businessmen and academics. Read Cheng, 'Life and Death in Shanghai' in EPUB, after you watch this eco-psyop. Then save your bucks, fly to Phnom Penh and do bodhisatva by the Tower of Skulls.
Thank you for sharing this information
Thank you for sharing this important perspective - goes to show that culture and technology must synchronize in order to make substantive change. Also important are the distribution of needed goods - learning to produce locally from ubiquitous non-fossil materials, - mutual aid between communities for basic necessity, and as a default part worker and stakeholder ownership of certain means of production needed for basic quality of life. Business decisions need to be linked directly to impacts on shareholders. Not hopeful that detached corporate shareholders can willingly undergo fluctuations in valuation that must be endured to create positive paradigm shifts in the way we make a living. If we structured companies like organisms, functional value rather than perceived value is baked into the business along with incentives to maintain and improve function of the "organs" and "environment" (read supply chains, partners, and competitors)
We walked to school, our kids rode the bus now they are individually picked up. Seems to me we are welking backwards!
Art knows energy.
cristal clear thinking very clearly presented. tough.
Great to see you’re Spreading your Words of Wisdom there Art 🕊🌏😇💖
Straight talker..❤
I believe that our predicament is often referred to as the great filter
The biggest source of problems is solutions. Old truism. As for technology and industrial capacity being the savior of humanity, I refer you to the Will Rogers truism......... "If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?"
Well said!
Have you ever tried to date with a woman, shiwing up in old clothes and a 1984 Chevy C10 6.2 l V8 Diesel? I quit having status long ago and live a very subsistent life. Socially totally unacceptable, hardly any consumption, and my Chevy burns less than a modern car... If more people lived my way, the economy would have collapsed long ago . Keywords are high quality, longevity, right to repair, hands-on know how, small eco building, debt free, pay as you go. Food for thought...
The key is to develop the "Bad Boy" look. You didn't say whether you managed to develop the surefire "Bad Boy" look with the old clothes and a 1984 Chevy C10 6.2 l V8 Diesel. I had a vomit-green Ford Anglia in 1970 and it takes real skill to develop the "Bad Boy" look lounging on a Ford Anglia looking tough & nonchalant.
The only way your V8 diesel burns less than a modern car is if you don't drive it. Having said that, keeping an old car uses less resources than pushing it in the landfill and buying a new one every 20 years.
636 kilowatts of energy in a 60 litre/13 gallon tank of diesel, that's 3-5 months of my electrical energy, a third of a gallon is more energy than I use in a day in the middle of summer with the air con going 24/7, it depends how you use that thing that one day might be a museum piece.
Thank you all for your thoughts. I suggest you followed my handle to my website to see the work part. In stark contrast to my private life, professionally 30+ years in trucking and seafaring as deck officer and 750 kW engineer, I saw about half the planet. An average superyacht burns around 500 l per hour for propulsion, add around 100 l per hour for generators, mainly for air conditioning - for pleasure. Brought down by the plandemic I went land based driving a 72 t 9 axle 34 wheels b train, hauling fuel throughout the Canadian prairies. The truck burns around 60 l per 100 km in the flats. All emotions aside, a 500 ton superyacht is the most efficient means of transportation 🤣. As an anecdote, the rural Tesla charging stations around here are diesel powered, the flimsy grid can't handle EVs, especially not in winter at minus 50 C plus wind chill. Putting the engineering hat on, why are today's cars heavier than 40+ years ago? Why does a 2009 Chevy Silverado V6 burn 16 l of gasoline, if my 1984 Chevy V8 burns 10 l of diesel? How much energy does the def production and distribution take? Why are we as a species using more energy in total numbers despite all the progress? Having worked for the elite, it is not that there's not enough energy, it's just that we the people use too much of the elite's resources. If your hour is worth usd 10 k, then using a private jet makes total economical sense, and you get your favourite whiskey served after the hyperbel flight (great fun by the way). Thousands of questions need answers... Having given up to a certain degree, I underline longevity and abolishing planned obsolescence to start with, with the right to repair and guaranteed 30+ years of spare parts... Happy discussing 😃
@@lowtechderrick I chose low tech living And working… along w/educating others/fighting urban battles re Land Use issues…
I watch my large US City as it pollutes, deforests, destroys itself/inhabitants.
The Real Estate industries/brokers play large here, arm in arm w/government officials, both elected and administrative…
Art Berman is a masterclass in deflating delusion.
I've said for a very long time, that problems will not begin to be solved until you can create a means for people to come to conclusions about things and coordinate after the fact. And that starts by having people talk to each other out in public. And the reason this doesn't really happen right now is that almost everywhere is a restaurant. Likewise, the COVID debacle was fundamentally caused by a lack of people being involved in their own affairs and this was also essentially caused by restaurants. Instead of people having their own contingency plans and creating their own response to a pandemic, the government came in and shut everything down.
I don't care if you all think I'm crazy, the fact of the matter is this: YOU CAN'T RUN A SOCIETY WHEN PEOPLE DON'T TALK TO EACH OTHER OUT IN PUBLIC.
He's right that it takes energy to make concrete and steel. However that's not a reason to not use concrete and steel more efficiently. Using steel to build a coal fired power plant or for a new plane for a billionaire is a lot less efficient than using it to build a tower for a 15 MW off shore wind turbine. He kind of left out the part about renewables not needing to burn fossil fuels to generate electricity once they are built.
One note, the only wind turbines I've seen that have plastic blades are the ones you buy on ebay that are basically lawn art. The big ones are very carefully made from fiberglass. I'm sure it takes a lot of energy to build a WT but they can generate a lot of power for a long time. Same thing for solar panels. They have been powering satelites in space, most with zero maintenance, for decades.
His message that we need to use less energy is spot on. Also need to have less kids. No matter what we do at this point, it's going to be painful.
On having less kids, if your favorite candidate is anti abortion you may want to look around a little more. Just sayin'
There's 3-5 months of my electrical energy, depending on the season, in one tank of diesel, nobody talks about stopping this as a proposal, nobody ever says maybe we shouldn't allow huge amounts of energy to be emitted, more per capita than others use in generations, then we say other people having kids is the cause.. Maybe stopping everybody emitting 636 kilowatts of energy per tank of diesel, is a quicker option.
@@antonyjh1234 I think you're saying burning less fossil fuels now would be more effective than reducing future population. We need to do both.
FYI tens of thousands of climate scientists have been talking about using less energy for decades. The research shows burning fossil fuels causes greenhouse gases to be emitted, raising the average temperature of the earth. 90% of this energy is going into the oceans. We are losing glacial and sea ice at the poles. That is changing the albedo (reflectance) of the earths surface. As the earth warms we're melting permafrost, releasing great stores of CO2 and methane. If things continue to warm we will reach a point where even if humans completely stopped burning fossil fuels the earth will continue to warm due to the positive feedback loop we're creating. (GHGs released into the atmosphere from melting permafrost make the earth warmer, the warmer earth melts more permafrost and releases more GHGs and so on).
Until we make it illegal to buy elections (until we take all corporate lobby money out of elections) little will change. The oil salesmen are now admitting there's a problem but telling us there's nothing we can do about it.
Wind turbines are not renewable. See Nate hagens. They are however rebuild able and require resources for each rebuild.
@@ouimetco Renewable energy definitely includes wind, solar and hydro. Wind turbines require maintenance and repair. coal, gas and diesel power plants require maintenance and repair as well. But they also require FF 24/7 or they don't run. Burning FF emits greenhouse gases. That's what we're trying to reduce/eliminate.
EVERY kind of generator takes energy and resources to build and maintain. Wind, PV and Hydro do not produce GHG's while they're producing power. They do not require fossil fuels to RUN.
When he says that wind turbine blades have plastic blades, he’s referring to the fibreglass, which is plastic, and the resin that binds the fibreglass together, which is plastic. The fact is that you can’t have wind turbines without the fossil fuel industry, which produces plastic. The same goes for solar panels.
Great guest
Meh:
tedious unhelpful bore.
@@EcoKiwiMagazine Just went over your empty head is all.
He could shorten his talk down to one minute. Just say “I’ve lived my life all wrong. I’ve been in the resource extraction industry my whole life.
The hippies were right. Live small, have less kids, grow what you eat, ride a bike. Use less so that others may live. Thank you.”
"less kids" S.B. "fewer kids" unless you mean the kids S.B. smaller, which was my brilliant plan (mountaineering up mushrooms, exciting spider hunt safaris with mini-guns).
I've been following this topic since 2005 and discoved the Carbon Institute, ASPO, and others concerned. Unfortunately, there is nothing we can do despite all the good intentions. May I suggest we are ignorant of who has the sovereign right to govern human affairs? Evidently (considering the evidence), man has failed at governance.
25:55 The major -dip in oil on the graph is from the oil crisis in the mid-late 70s, when People in the US couldn't drive their massive gas guzzlers so much. The second smaller -dip later on is the 2008 crash. SOMEHOW WE SURVIVED BOTH CRISES
Art's not a doomer. I envy him...
680 Terawatts Heater heating Earth ecosphere (oceans 93%) & melting ice for 2010-2021 because "greenhouse gases (GHGs)" keep increasing.
45 Terawatts Total human energy-producing heat (generated, delivered + generation/line losses) with current coal/oil/gas/fission/wind/solar PV mix
Predicaments don’t have solutions, only responses
Oil, energy, money and organization are interconvertable substances. One is converted into the other.
48:10 the Chinese apparently have a working modular molten salt reactor up and running in the Gobi Desert. See Simon P Michaux ‘A walk in the light green’ presentation.😊
You fingered it! Until we stop being a consumerist society, things will get worse. Quit the advertising and peddling, things don't want, or need. There is too much crap in the world. Learn to live simply. It all starts with ethos; it's about VALUES.
The 3 fold overshoot is the overarching problem and it happens to roughly coincide with the energy efficiency of fossil fuel use. One good example is that the combustion engine has not improved much in the last century.
Look up "Collapse Acceptance"
I hope that any life form that may be able to proceed after homo sapiens will somehow learn from our mistakes. It is doubtful because it will take hundreds of thousand - if not millions -of years to recover from human arrogance and hubris. Maybe, just maybe, life on Earth will resume in a self-sustaining fashion.
Imagine what the planet would look like if we humans never showed up. I think, breathtakingly beautiful.
Sounds like some of these comments didn’t listen to the talk.
Also sounds like most did not bother to look this guy up. FYI,
Art Berman, the speaker on this video, is listed on his Linked In page as "a petroleum geologist with 35 years of oil and gas industry experience." Some of the things he says in this video seemed implausible to me so I looked him up. His opinions and lack of candor make sense now.
FYI renewable energy can replace most if not all of the energy we now generate from the burning of fossil fuels. Will it take energy to build these systems? Of course. Will it take time and money? Yes. Is it impossible? Hardly.
The good news is the technology exists today. The political will, not so much.
Sorry this talk was given to teachers. Hopefully they use their critical thinking skills and do some of their own research.
Some references: Union of Concerned Scientists, National Renewable Energy Laboratories.
@@solarwind907 Thank you for your reply. I take it that, given your RUclips pen name, you’re a huge proponent of “renewables”-a better word is replaceables. And a better phrase than “energy transition” is energy addition. Read up on Jevons paradox, which is playing out in this current scenario: the more efficient energy becomes the more energy-not less-is used. As we add “renewables” our fossil fuel consumption has increased, not decreased, which is a good example of Jevons paradox.
And, of course, industrial civilization is utterly dependent on concrete, steel, asphalt, plastics, fertilizers, and would collapse without these fossil-fuel derivative products. Was it this talk that points out that EVs are made of steel and plastic and drive on asphalt? Not to mention that their manufacturing is dependent on fossil fuels. And, of course electricity is not an energy source-it’s an energy carrier.
Actually global warming is a symptom of the primary driver of collapse and die-back/extinction. And we humans have-and continue to-cause massive species extinction and biodiversity loss around the globe, which will catch up with us. Global warming is merely a symptom of the planetary overshoot of our species, of our massive ecological footprint. I recommend William Rees as a top authority on this overlooked topic. I also highly recommend the seminal book, Overshoot, by William Catton. These sources get to the crux of our real downfall-too many of us for this planet to support in harmony with its many other creatures and lifeforms.
A walking, talking, extinction event.
Dead Species Walking
Plastics are made from the distillation of oil, the 13.3 million barrels per day we use here in the US. However, "plastic" can be made from biodegradable materials. The enormously powerful fossil fuel industry controls the narrative that we are utterly dependent on oil, although our ancestor made do before oil was burned in the mid to late 19th century. Our real problem is our gigantic "ecological footprint" (Bill Rees) and massive human overpopulation, 3,000 times more numerous than were our ecologically balanced ancestral Hunter-Gatherer clan/band members, numbering less than 150 (the Dunbar number) per clan/band. Water power was out energy source during the early industrial revolution, before we "progressed" to coal and steam power. Oil and coal have allowed for our massive overpopulation and painted us into an impossible corner. We are now increasing our heat energy generation by about 0.20 to 0.25 degC surface air temp increase YEAR TO YEAR, so at this rate we may see 3.0 degC by 2030-31. This can be seen in the 1.2 trillion tons of melting global ice annually, 3.3 billion tons per day, in the 321 million cubic miles of oceans heating on the surface to 70 degF, and the 1 trillion tons of water vapor evaporating from those overheated seas. Thanks for this great presentation!
Welp, the Fermi Paradox is solved.
❤
You need to be way louder, bro! ❤
Larrissa Coffee... that question is one I have wondered too, Africa is supposed to be almost half the world by 2100, I suppose the question is to define the word "productive" for them and that would mean growth for growths sake, over sustainability could be something they don't embrace, that would mean changing the economic and media system of course but the internet is 30 years old, another 10 and the world could be very different, by example. It is the bourgeois, us now, that must change first before any societal change can happen. Added : System change is possible but we don't understand the real problem all around us, there is 636 kilowatts of energy in a tank of diesel, that's 3 months of my electrical energy in the middle of summer australia with the air con going 24/7. We have to stop driving overall could that mean lower oil prices making rising countries able to afford cars more? Give the poor people, half the world, an extra 5$ a day and it doubles their consumption, they are a long way from buying a hew escalade, so scalable would mean sustainable, in light of oil running out.
It's sad losing all hope, dreams and aspirations, so I suppose the first step is to get to acceptance, the second step is to not find it acceptable, then figure out what that means and there's no easy answer there but system change is happening, the last 80 years saw world population have over 300% increase all off the back of diesel and petrol, the next 80 years might be under 40%, in a capitalist system of growth and populations over 65 reaching 28% has never happened before in the modern world afaik, 23 countries are due to lose 50% of their populations by 2100, china 5-600 million, the system of growth is going through system change, I suppose the hope is the next 80 years in Africa will not be like our last, in a debt based system, are they going to be able to receive enough debt, even if they get enough money are they ever going to be able to buy the same amount of energy, I can't see it long term but 5-10 years, for sure, and I always say if somebodies going to be 5 minutes late they will be 10 and if 10 then they don't mind 20, and if this is years of oil then 5 years seeing massive reductions from the modern worlds side might also mean prices have to rise, still keeping our levels of consumption of oil and all its products from people who might have a 400% increase in daily income.
At 9:30 If my choice is between a lower standard of living vs death by global warming, I'll lower my standards pdq.
The issue with that is that it's a poorer human that has the choice between a lower standard of living vs death by global warming, not the wealthier humans and certainly never the wealthiest humans, those who will increasingly be paying for a few orbits of Earth for a fun look from space like Sir Bert Virgin-Branston the English Pickle King. Not him.
I wonder if the speaker drives a car? Does he fly to Hawaii? Does he fly to visit his grandkids? And the same questions for the audience. Do you use your heater when it's cold, or aircon when it's hot? I do. How much "stuff" do you own? What did you buy today? Your conclusions lead me to think that we won't solve this voluntarily. We can probably look forward to poverty, war, starvation, disease, and a return to human slavery. Ooops! Did I say that out loud? But that is the history of life on earth. We are spoiled, living in a temporary lucky period of abundance. Look at how nature operates. Boom in the Spring and bust in Winter, every year. A fish lays a million eggs and 10 survive. A plant produces a million seeds and 10 germinate. Is it going to be different for us? This was a good discussion. Thanks.
UUMMMM
SCHOOL BUSES.
DUHHH
Anton, indeed Religion has been a force for no-good.But it was us; we, who invented Religion. While I have sympathy for the felt need for something greater to admire, to inspire; religion has been a horrific response to that need, creating death and horrors throughout history. I think Religion is a bit orthogonal to my point. I agree with your general sentiments, but I don't see it challenging my point. Artists, composers, Nature lovers, have had a much more positive response to that felt need for a deep spiritual (I use the word differently than narrow religion) experience and affirmation.
I'm calling BS on the Jenga tower going to collapse. We're currently in a phase of the game where we have maybe moved a few pieces a couple millimeters, but we're not even close to pulling out even a single piece.
Unless he's talking about pieces crumbling due to our INaction. I'd be behind that idea, though that'd be a pretty weird version of Jenga.
That's called denial babe.
GDP is a terrible measure of economic prosperity. If we focus our energy usage only on things we need and not our wants, we can reduce our emissions, but GDP will definitely reduce.
In my opinion, energy and wars are big business and big $$$$$$$$$$$ for the corporate elite.This is the main issue, efficient energy is not big $$$$$$$$$$$. Is efficient energy out there I am sure there is but If you cant put a meter on it its very limited $$$$$$$$$ for big corporate, the inter relationship with big corporate and corporate government is another issue where one hand washes the other until that issue is solved humanity cant expect much with any form of a resolution with respect to energy consumption, or new forms of energy.
17:00 jóvenes paradox
Using a finite source like its infinite does not work ever.
People who pay attention to this type of thing and are honest and open-minded to not simply knee-jerk react as if alternative energy is the total answer... need to also look at all the work from Peter Joseph. He is the one who has been shouting about how our "system" IS THE PROBLEM. It is Capitalism (at all costs) that ruins everything. It's because making money is almost directly opposed to sustainability and CARE for our planet.
10:07 correlation isn't causation. We don't need petroleum to make plastics and fuels and lubes. In the 50s the USDA pushed sustainable ag, rotational grazing and biodiesel which was just diesel then. Diesel tractors got popular because they could run on veggie based fuels. This talk is as crappy as this hacks microphone.
Hahahahhaha. Deniers are hillarious.
@@IanSizzler deniers of what? Everything I mentioned is recorded history 🤷
AI and bitcoin mining will just increase our energy consumption.
Spreading more fear uncertainty and doubt will get us nowhere. This is just more encouragement to sit on our hands and change nothing. There are alternatives to coal oil and gas.
Politics and sustainability are incompatible 😢
This gentleman goes to great lengths to call himself an expert, yet he seems to fancy himself an expert in everything. His points on energy are fairly accurate. Energy = economic prosperity. In addition energy = life. For all those people on earth who are deprived of energy there exists extreme poverty, starvation, and short life expectancy. Reduction of energy would be done at the cost of humanity. The climate alarmism and predictions of the earth’s demise have been dramatically overstated for decades. The predictions of global warming and rising sea level catastrophe were that by 2020 it would be too late. Florida was supposed to be underwater. That undercuts most of these arguments for radical and immediate changes to our most basic necessities for human life and prosperity. The jenga argument is absurd and exactly what we mean by climate alarmism. He says “as obvious as gravity.” The arrogance of this gentleman is typical of what we see in this discussion. He has a narrow band of knowledge that he thinks he can extrapolate to areas for which he is completely unqualified to make broad proclamations. Unfortunately this is not uncommon.
"The predictions of global warming and rising sea level catastrophe were that by 2020 ... Florida was supposed to be underwater". "@tarkwright651" == Silly liar (a huge liar, just what people need in a rational debate as I'm sure video Host & Guest would agree. Right ? Oh yeah)
Yet 8 countries run entirely on renewables. and there are at least 10 more that are over 50% and the world is changing rapidly. Also... this is something we HAVE to do... not acting to reduce CO2 is going to hurt, the baby boomers don't care coz they will be dead by the time it gets nasty, just like all the debt they have left in their countries and the migrations are just to keep the economy going before they die, even if it blows up and collapsed a week later.
I don't agree with this whole "oil and coal are essential" and the whole "well we may as well give up coz its impossible" - we didnt even know how to use oil as fuel till 1910. Burn what you like except for the stuff that was buried millions of years ago.
Cows and Farms are fine - govts attacking Farmers over climate change are using bad science.
"8 countries run entirely on renewables. and there are at least 10 more that are over 50%" I bet dollars to doughnuts they don't. I bet dollars to doughnuts that it's only their electrical energy that meets that.
It's too late. Runaway is guaranteed.
@@grindupBaker I apologise, you are correct - thats what I meant,
Please report to my head office for your donut voucher(s), note that we prefer giving out ice creams, but donuts are fine too.
Anyhow Electricity can replace them in all but extreme where ever they are. Oil and Gas tech have hardly improved since the 80s, Electric Heating (with heat pumps) is incredibly efficient, as it does not make heat, it just exchanges heat differences) batteries are about to move to the sodium/manganese type (no more cobalt or lithium) which hold more power, are much cheaper and safer, we should have had them in the nineties.
In the meantime the Oil and Gas are measured by their latent energy, not by the amount of productive energy they end up producing, for example Petrol in a car is lucky to produce 10% of its potential, once the energy costs of extraction, chemical separation, delivery by tanker, delivery by truck, then once in a car and ignited, it turns 30% of the energy into heat, 20% into light (which becomes heat), and 33% of the remainder is lost in mechanical drive trains, assuming the vehicle is running efficiently, and not belching unburned fuel then there is bullsh like idling (ask VW about that) (the loss in aero dynamics because of the stupid radiator etc etc all this means only 10 percent of oil's potential energy is employed productively when used in a domestic vehicle, for electric cars, that number is something like 95%.
Lets not forget the subsidies paid to the Oil companies, these are more than $US1Trillion in the US alone; every year...surely that pisses you off?
@@IanSizzler If it gets bad (its already bad) we can dump Sulpher dioxide into the stratosphere. It would cost a few hundred million dollars and give us back about 2-3 average celcius degrees, we know it works because Mount Pinotubo's last eruption did exactly that, we cant do it for more than 2 or 3 decades (dunno why)... In case you think the govts won't allow it, Bangaladesh (40% of its land is already below sea level) have already said they have prepared for it, and would launch such a project if times got rough... But The REAL saviour is Russ George putting FeO2 in the Canadian Atlantic (this post is too long already but check him out he is amazing..
@@oscargoldman85 Ah yes let's stop the forest fires by cutting down the forest too. You're delusional. Literally.
In the future we can't be as many of us are drinking and eating....population size is also an issue. Luckily women are deciding to have less offspring if at all.
That's Natural Selection at work. The groups or genetic types that pump them out the fastest will be the new humans. Couldn't be simpler.
Women are deciding?
@@IanSizzler yes, for themselves....
Art Berman, the speaker on this video, is listed on his Linked In page as "a petroleum geologist with 35 years of oil and gas industry experience." Some of the things he says in this video seemed implausible to me so I looked him up. His opinions and lack of candor make sense now.
FYI renewable energy can replace most if not all of the energy we now generate from the burning of fossil fuels. Will it take energy to build these systems? Of course. Will it take time and money? Yes. Is it impossible? Hardly.
The good news is the technology exists today. The political will, not so much.
Sorry this talk was given to teachers. Hopefully they use their critical thinking skills and do some of their own research.
Some references: Union of Concerned Scientists, National Renewable Energy Laboratories.
He spit straight facts for an hour. Did you even watch?
@@IanSizzler I did listen. He didn’t exactly lie, he just left out half the truth. That’s what oil company Shills do.
There are many things that can be done to slow down if not reverse climate change. He just left those things out.
And if you believe nothing can be done, there’s no reason not to keep buying plenty of natural gas, oil, and coal, now is there?
I was born at night, but not last night.
6:00 - //... and nobody wishes to deny people of healthcare....// Excepting Palestinians of course...
It’s an oil guy trying to get people to give up with the transition to renewable energy by making the challenge seem hopeless.
We are locked on to the path we are on. Confronting the reality of our collective predicament will commonly elicit the responses of denial, anger, bargaining, depression and ultimately, acceptance.
because it f*#kin' IS
❤This guy is absolutely right! Only one other guy out of all the dozens and dozens of wise people that I have listened to. He was a metalurgical engineer speaking at the Oxford Debating Society. Strangely, my wife and I have long worried about all the problems that are being put on the back burner, if not forgotten all together together.
He’s probably the right guy to bring this message. I’ve heard him interviewed many times. Living in Alberta, Canada, I’ve learned to spot oil propaganda. When our captured politicians here say the ‘oil is everything’ argument, it’s much more condescending and caustic. They talk about plastic straws and root beer to make people angry.
I wondered about his allegiances... but I have trouble finding fault with most anything he said. He's not wrong. Consumption is the issue, not the source of energy. That status quo has got to end. And it will, one way or another much sooner than most want to admit.
Perhaps the people that see overpopulation as a primary problem could cease contributing to the “problem”
Already have. No kids for me. If you're suggesting suicide for the people that actually know what is going on vs. the deniers I'd say you've got that entirely backwards. Hope your kids and your kids kids don't suffer too much! 🙃
@IanSizzler I think everybody except Donald Trump and 67 Hot Models should top themselves tout de suite so's population is near zero, problem solved stat and future species consists of a sustainable 1 billion Hot Donald Trumps. Luvverly planet. This thread is about what's called "Dominance", "Natural Selection", "Survival of The Fittest". That's what it's ALL about. That's what Life is about. That's the SOLE purpose of Life. "population"
Art's poor microphone audio quality makes this unlistenable
Bummer because this was one of the better talks I’ve heard on the subject.
It’s rough but doable. And well worth the effort.
@@jennysteves agreed 👍
do a special on chemtrails...thanks
Yep, call it the "Bull Shit Special". It could double as the name of a politician's whistle-stop train
Good lord.
We have a capitalism predicament, not a human predicament
Crude oil is fairly plentiful.
Mmmmkay. Low brow take of the day. Big dumb caveman energy.
All these Doomsayers hopping on the bandwagon of climate change catastrophe. When in fact the World is flourishing thanks to CO2 being released into the Biosphere.
Real.shame.audio is crappy