5. Dennis Meadows - Perspectives on the Limits of Growth: It is too late for sustainable development
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 июл 2024
- Roberto Peccei
Roberto D. Peccei is a Professor of Physics and Astronomy at UCLA, a member of the Executive Committee of the Club of Rome, and President of the Fondazione Aurelio Peccei. As a physicist his principal interests lie in the interface between particle physics and cosmology, and as a member of the Club of Rome he is broadly interested in the kind of economics that need to be
developed to ensure a sustainable world. Peccei was born in Italy, completed his secondary school in Argentina, and came to the United States in 1958 to pursue university studies in physics. He obtained a B.S. from MIT in 1962, and M.S. from NYU in 1964 and a Ph.D. from MIT in 1969. After a brief period of postdoctoral work at the University of Washington, he joined the faculty of Stanford University in 1971. In 1978, he returned to Europe as a staff
member of the Max Planck Institute in Munich, Germany. He joined the Deutsches Elektron Synchrotron (DESY) Laboratory in Hamburg, Germany, as the Head of the Theoretical Group in 1984. He returned to the United States in 1989, joining the faculty of the Department of Physics at UCLA. Soon thereafter, he became Chair of the Department, a position he held until becoming Dean of the Division of Physical Sciences of the College of Letters and Sciences in1994. For the last decade, he was Vice Chancellor for Research at UCLA, overseeing all research programs in
the university. In July of 2010, he returned to the faculty. Peccei was the Schroedinger Professor at the University of Vienna in 1983, the Boris Jacobsohn Lecturer at the University of Washington in 1986, the Phi Beta Kappa Lecturer at UCLA and the Emilio Segre Professor at the University of Tel Aviv in 1992, and delivered the first Abdus Salam Memorial Lecture in
Pakistan in 1997. He has served on numerous advisory boards both in Europe and the United States in the last 25 years. He presently also serves as the Chair of the External Advisory Board of the Institute for the Physics and Mathematics of the Universe in Japan. He is a Fellow of the
American Physical Society, the Institute of Physics in the United Kingdom, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the World Academy of Arts and Sciences.
Dennis Meadows
It Is Too Late for Sustainable Development
My formal remarks will have three goals: explain the essential and still unique contribution of our 1972 report to the Club of Rome, describe how my own understanding about the interaction of limits with physical growth on the planet has changed over the past 40 years, and justify my proposal that humanity's focus should now be more on resilience than on sustainability. It is far
too late to achieve sustainable development, as that term is commonly understood. A precipitous decline in resource and energy use is coming in the next decades, and the most important goal now is to adopt policies that will reduce its negative impacts on the values that are most important to us.
Dennis Meadows was appointed to the MIT faculty in 1969. In 1970 he assembled a team of 16 scientists to conduct a two-year, computer-model based study on the long-term causes and consequences of physical growth on the planet Earth. That project was funded by the Club of
Rome and lead to 3 reports, one of which, The Limits to Growth, was presented for the first time to the public in the Smithsonian Institution Castle in March 1972. The book was eventually translated into about 35 languages, and it was selected as one of the most influential environmental books of the 20th century. He worked subsequently with Jørgen Randers and with
Donella Meadows, senior author of Limits to Growth, to produce a second edition in 1994 and a third edition in 2004. Before becoming Professor Emeritus of Policy Systems in 2004, Dennis Meadows was a professor for 35 years at MIT, Dartmouth College, and the University of New
Hampshire earning tenure in schools of engineering, management, and the social sciences. He has received numerous honorary doctorates in the US and Europe for his contributions to environmental education. His many awards include the 2009 Japan Prize. He has co-authored 10 books and designed numerous computer-based strategic planning games that are used in many
nations to teach principles of sustainable resource use. He remains very active, especially in Europe and Japan, speaking, writing, and advising corporate and government leaders on issues related to growth.
Preliminary remarks begin at 6:30. Topic of discussion begins at 11:08.
you da real MVP
This book was one of the earliest scholarly works to recognize that the world was fast approaching its sustainable limits. Forty years later, the planet continues to face many of the same economic, social, and environmental challenges as when the book was first published.
But now of course everything is much worse and the stakes are even higher
@@TheJohnRowley Is it? the world population seem to have grown from 7.1 to 7.9 billion during that decade, that is not exponential growth, and most of that bulk was during 50's-80's now people have 1 maybe 2 children and according to some researchers 3 is sustainability in an industrial country and 4-5 children in countries with high mortality. There is no fusion reactor but we don't even need one if we are not even going to use perfectly safe new fission nuclear technology. Other than the terrible contamination of water with pesticides, plastics and chemicals, I would say the environment is fine. The only thing that needs to happen its to cap how big and wealthy a corporation can get. If we don't define a limit to wealth, corporations will do what corporations do: To maximize efficiency and advertisement psychology; churn a profit until the last brick, bird and aspirin bottle is turned into an iPhone and we truly run out of resources. Sadly, those wealthy people in the crowd are those that talk the talk but clap every time.
@@Ramiromasters Yes I believe the stakes are much higher now. I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here - is it to tell me that you think I'm not doing enough to support my point of view? The environment is definitely in bigger trouble now than it was when this talk was made because we are much further down the road of destruction.
@@TheJohnRowley Sure the fate of humanity and all species is on the table now that we have technology bigger than us, but at this point in time humanity doesn't face an immediate danger other than ourselves. Suppose climate went really bad in 50 years, so...? Tropical islands suffer hurricanes every year and they just won't leave. Could there be hunger? Sure but after the horrible famine balance would be restored, etc. So, sustainable development should always be a project in motion but I don't see an event that could collapse except one done by us trying to achieve some frivolous goal.
@@Ramiromasters As a species we are trying to achieve some frivolous goal - constant higher profits for a few people at the expense of our home (this planet). If the Thwaites Glacier breaks apart and melts - as it is predicted to do within 50 years - most coastal cities will be destroyed causing massive displacement of human societies, possible nuclear disasters and who knows what other knock on effects, not to mention what the changes to the sea temperatures will do to the weather and tidal systems. It has been shown recently that each year natural disasters such as floods, fires, hurricanes etc are increasingly at a startling rate. We are reaching a tipping point where balance will not be restored - at least not for centuries. The planet will survive one way or the other but most of us (humans) and the comparatively luxurious lifestyles we enjoy won't - in my considered opinion
Brilliant, and prescient humans, unlike too many other humans.
Its interesting that a scientist can clearly see and understand that exponential growth is not possible in a finite world. And he also knows that the consumption/exploitation of resources speeds up as we progress. Its such a simple idea to grasp, that its baffles me that people need proof for these claims. Its not exactly rocket science and people need to be taught this in school as the fundamental basis of our lives, to preserve the planet as well as we can, not exploit it as fast as possible.
Its a matter of mastering slide rules, a method used by engineers as well. Its gives a visceral feel for the exponential curve.
total energy blindness
And a financial collapse of the system
Is the World really Finite? In my opinion. The World is the Infinite experiencing itself as Many Finite Forms (Life) so not to be alone. Now as to Growth. Growth is motion and motion is continuous and eternal. Now it is true that the purpose of Motion is fundamentally Love. As such it is indeed wise to align our actions to Love.
The symposium was webcast live, and recorded for later viewing.
The Grand Challenges Consortia would like to thank the Club of Rome, the Cynthia and George Mitchell Foundation, and Pedro and Carol Cuatrecasas for their generous support of the event. We would also like to thank the National Museum of the American Indian for providing a wonderful venue for the proceedings.
The morning session focused on the lessons of Limits to Growth. The afternoon session addressed the difficult challenges of preserving biodiversity, adjusting to a changing climate, and solving the societal issues now facing the planet. The symposium ended with a thought-provoking panel discussion among the speakers on future steps for building a sustainable planet.
Equilibrium scenarios are the S-curve trajectory scenarios; overshoot-to-crash scenarios are the Hubbert's Curve trajectory scenarios.
nuclear fusion has a brilliant future and it always will have
W. John Kress is director of the Consortium for Understanding and Sustaining a Biodiverse Planet, one of the four grand challenges of the Smithsonian’s strategic plan.
Regarding the NYT and other reviews of this work.. to them Equilibrium IS Collapse.
This was recorded during a one-day symposium on March 1, 2012 and was held in the Rasmuson Theater at the National Museum of the American Indian, located at the following address. 300 Maryland Avenue Southwest, Washington, DC 20024, USA. (lat: 38.88824°, lon: -77.01685°). This is the 5th video from this Smithsonian Institution special symposium.
Perspectives on Limits to Growth: Challenges to Building a Sustainable Planet
The Club of Rome and the Smithsonian Institution's Consortium for Understanding and Sustaining a Biodiverse Planet hosted a one-day symposium on March 1, 2012 to celebrate the 40th anniversary of the launching of Limits to Growth, the first report to the Club of Rome published in 1972.
Serait-il possible d'avoir un sous-titrage en français s'il-vous-plait ?
De telles vidéos devraient être accessibles dans toutes les langues. Merci.
Cherche des vidéos de Pablo Servigne, pour des exposés sur le même sujet mais en français.
Well said Dennis.
Bonjour,
Vous arrivez à regarder BBC ou CNN depuis la France ? Pas moi, désolée.
Evidemment, si j'étais plus jeune et non malade, je me précipiterais à l'école.
Merci de vos conseils, je vais essayer avec des livres.......
I hope we don't try to solve this by littering every possible landscape with giant wind turbines, solar farms and transmission lines. That is not green thinking. Reducing the human footprint should mean in ALL realms, not just carbon.
The wind turbines especially will drive us all crazy. Low frequency sound and infrasound is not funny when you are able to hear it.
Imagine how many species we made deaf, blind and handicapped. Death seems a relief.
As far as the animal kingdom is concerned, or call it God's creation if you want, we are the asshole species.
+John Toobad death is a relief, just like sleep. We won't know how happy we'll be once we're all dead.
MrSvenovitch
Death is not like sleep. You never wake up once you're dead.
There is nothing anymore, once you are dead: there is no you, there is no such concept as happy.
I find myself at my happiest, when I forget myself.
Then you should be overjoyed. Nearly the entire planet has forgotten itself.
Sick f ers!@!
Fast forward a decade in 2022, population remains about the same as it was 10 years ago except some countries in fact were too low on birthrates to be sustainable, no new fusion reactor but no need because there is efficient fission nuclear energy, there is still plenty of petroleum and 0 beaches have been taken by the sea. That is not to say there are no limits of growth on a finite planet, but clearly these essays, that as stated are not capable of predictions, didn't really offered a more positive view of the world or solutions, thankfully the world turned out better than expected.
Also, those people living in pure excess are the same as those sponsoring this type of research; that does bring a conflict of interest as fatalism is indeed a pastime.
It's artificial, falsified, deceitful, filled with lie self-justification to justify a world where they rule as master, it's even more immensely hypocritical as those bloodlines make the most children's. Try to look at the family tree of the artificial, average politicians, at least here in france, they are immense.“Noble” family.
if your feeling empty inside, like somethig is missing... whats missing is Jesus. He is the Saviour of the world. Jesus=Truth
It bears asking what your definition of "rich" is. I don't think he's talking about th1% here, "rich" is anyone of middle income or above in a Western culture, those are the people with the discretionary income to buy vanity products.
The poor in both Western and non-western societies simply don't have the resources to make HIV an attractive business model. Drug companies would need to make these drugs with altruistic intent, and corporations aren't legally allowed to be altruistic.
A middle income in a western culture puts you in the 1% worldwide.
apprenez l'anlgais... je suis désolé, mais commencez de regarder BBC ou CNN. Vous verrez, après quelques mois vous comprendrez 90% de ce qui y est dit. Vous savez... le francais n'est que ma troisième langue. Si moi, je suis de capable de l'apprendre...
I learned about LtG several years ago and agree with its conclusions. I also believe the Globalists (Progressives who seek to embrace multiculturalism and diversity across the globe) are aware of the impending collapse and thought they had a plan. What has upended them was their lack of vision into why people care. I care about the globe, but I don't care about the people who are not close to me as much as I care about the people who are. Globalism argues that I should share for the common good of the world, but it does not take into account my individualism. Therefore Globalism is akin to Socialism. Ive heard Jorgen exclaim that China will be a much better at tackling these issue since they can change their ways on a dime, but I disagree. I think Totalitarian governments are corrupt and only pretend to do what they say.
Capitalism is the way to save the planet and it is occurring in spite of our selves. Tesla is designing sustainable electric cars. GM, Ford, BMW did not do that. Enphase is designing microinverters to power the planet sustainability. China did not design that. The technology will come and your standard model will be followed. I'm still trying to ascertain what the world will do while it collapses however. I do think the US will be last to be impacted greatly and also the first to rise from the ashes.
"I think Totalitarian governments are corrupt and only pretend to do what they say." // You are right. Navalny's investigations are the proof.
Capitalism is what's poisoned our planet's biosphere. LTG also made it clear what would happen if an effective response to our pollutants (CO2 levels were about the historical norm, 285 ppm) was nor "under development" by 1975. That year became the Tipping Point for global population overshoot and collapse, aka, the 6th Mass Extinction's global consequences, what Claude Levi-Strauss called the poisoning of the planet's food and water resources & accumulating in our lungs, livers, lymph nodes and children's future quality of life expectations. That Collapse was expected sometime between 2030 & 2050. Since Fukushima continues to contribute its toxins to Tokyo's aquifers, the Kuroshio Current, the weather systems spawned above it and the North Pacific, their seafood chains, and, eventually, the entire planet.
We've a local example: several years ago I took part in a local salmon count. We knew they were in Lake Washington, but on North Creek, where once you could almost walk across the creek on them, there were none. Why?
They'd become so contaminated they could no longer fulfill their prime directive. Orca were their prime local predator. Reports began to surface that their first born were dying from the accumulated toxins in their mother's milk. Later that year I heard similar reports of other subsistence feeders having problems with disabled children. That was also the year that Ban Ki-Moon warned the UN that we had about 18 months because "nature does not negotiate."
As with most pandemics, the weakest amongst are likely to be the first to go. At 75, I expect to be included in one extreme, the youngest the other; however, there are billions of other lifeforms in our food chains that are not as adaptable as us homo sapiens. Which are the strongest and weakest links in my food chain? I've no ideas other than they are probably different from yours, unless your children eat a lot of Pacific salmon.
CO2 levels, are at least one indication of our failure to invent, develop and deploy globally effective detoxification responses to our mostly man-made chemical pollutants, of which there are more than 90,000 inadvertently loosed into our biosphere (atmosphere, oceans, weather systems, soils and food) so I've been told. Of those others, governments appear to be loath to admit to the poisoning of the planet as the principle cause of global warming, climate change, salt water intrusion or sea level rise. Abrams, Hornets, ships, bombs and bullets have no positive defensive effect on those contaminants.
"Solve The Problem" Cooked or Contaminated to death is a global pandemic and conflict our descendants are ill prepared for.
What’s ironic about your statement that your attitude is exactly what is getting us into the predicament that is the premise of this study. Hopefully you’ll be alive to see this, because since your original comment was posted before the pandemic and from what it sounds like your probably an anti-vaccination/anti-masker and your chances of survival or much less than the rest of us.
@@javierriccardi enjoy your slavery brother. You are not special and your head will be on the block soon enough. It is then that you will wish you listened to the people you called crazy!