Oil and the economy are clearly and inextricably linked. Many analysts call oil the engine of economic growth. Certainly U.S. oil consumption patterns and economic output have experienced similar upward trends over the decades (see graph). It is difficult to find anything produced or consumed in the U.S. economy that doesn’t require oil as an input to its life cycle. It logically follows that changing oil prices or altering oil consumption patterns will affect economic growth. That’s why people (although probably not enough) worry about peak oil. They fear that the age of economic growth will come to an end.
The real issue, though, is whether economic growth is a desirable goal to begin with! Economic growth is simply an increase in the production and consumption of goods and services. It is driven by increasing population and increasing per capita consumption, and is typically indicated by increasing gross domestic product (GDP). Theory and evidence suggest that continued growth is actually “uneconomic” or costly to society . Ecological footprint analysis shows that the global economy is consuming 30 percent more resources than the Earth can regenerate each year , a deficit that cannot be maintained for long.
(Click to read entire article)
Blog Archive
-
?
2008
(616)
-
?
April
(112)
- Can The Optimum Carbon Tax Possibly Be Zero? by Ji...
- Schumer raps PSC for handling of RG&E takeover
- Millennium pipeline fuels economy
- Politicians call for widespread reform of governme...
- Cuomo On Member Item Fraud
- Fraud Is Everywhere
- Bush blames Congress for high gas prices by Klaus ...
- EST's Carbon Challenge: traditional versus energy-...
- Sustainable Energy Fair growing, organizers say
- The Biofuels Disaster Must End
- Zoning board to decide extending Reunion’s wind te...
- The Real Politics of Fuel Economy
- DEC to head turbine study
- Undoing America's Ethanol Mistake
- Forests And Farms Have Significant Role As Alterna...
- Iberdrola again threatens to call off merger By LA...
- Tonko files papers for Congressional run
- Solar Energy; Not Just Electricity
- Green Ink: Playing Hardball with OPEC
- Michigan can grow biofuels the right way
- CleanSkies.tv
- Bath utility proposal tabled
- Corporate Social Responsibility and Energy: Lesson...
- Transport energy now 'No. 1 issue' facing U.S.
- U.S. Earth Day goes political and corporate
- Earth Day Cartoon
- DEC Joins Six Public and Private Organizations on ...
- Commissioner Glynn Announces Environmental Initiat...
- Iberdrola's bid for Energy East on hold
- Mother Jones' Energy Issue: The Nuclear Option, Fo...
- PSC to take up and vote on Iberdrola acquition of ...
- New York has regulatory labyrinth
- NY Governor outlines initial steps to meet downsta...
- Republicans Ask for Investigation Into Carbon Offs...
- Landfill Gas Capture: Cutting Emissions and Saving...
- Bush Remarks on Climate
- Global Warming Tax Hikes Headed Your Way
- Public Service argues utility takeover proposal
- Looking Forward, an Energy Scramble or a Blueprint?
- Kansas coal dispute seen as important for national...
- Where our energy dollars go
- Editorial: Energy plan must consider whole state
- Iwo Jima Veterans Blast Time's 'Special Environmen...
- Massa ahead of Kuhl — in funds
- Winner proposing ‘easier EZ’ legislation
- FERC statement on market-based rates for wholesale...
- President's Remarks Recognize Political Reality of...
- Grants awarded to 52 land-trust organizations
- Bush: US to halt greenhouse gas rise by 2025
- Federal Financial Interventions and Subsidies in E...
- ChangeWave Survey Points to a Reduction in U.S. Co...
- Tax breaks for industry make way into housing bill
- NEW NOISE STUDY OF MAPLE RIDGE WIND FARM
- RG&E purchase may be in trouble, Iberdrola chief says
- Ethanol and bio-diesel: Fuels or threats to food s...
- Against human prosperity
- Time has come for renewable energy
- Help Us Find the Web's Best Stories on the Environ...
- Canadians Want More Protection Of Resources From U...
- How The Energy Revolution Affects You!
- Could Chemical Solar Power Beat Photovoltaics?
- Read our studies!
- White House weighing new U.S. CO2 proposal: sources
- Nonprofit to turn gas into energy
- Let's get off our duffs on energy policy - Congres...
- N.Y to develop energy board, plan
- The Audacity of Environmental Optimism
- H.R. 3221: New Direction for Energy Independence, ...
- PATERSON OUTLINES INITIAL STEPS TO MEET DOWNSTATE ...
- Gas Plant in L.I. Sound Is Rejected
- State politics could play havoc with energy plan
- Iberdrola could reconsider Energy East plan
- IDA Reform Effort Update
- PATERSON: I'LL SLASH BUDGET BY $12 BIL by DAVID SE...
- US Senate Votes For Solar, Wind Tax Credits; Faces...
- SEC Files Action On Fuelless Motor Fraud
- Weather hots up under wind farms
- Iberdrola to reconsider Energy East buy if NY cour...
- Budget built on borrowing, fees
- State seeks deep sites to hold greenhouse gas
- Strange Bedfellows: Manufacturers Lobby For Clean-...
- Paved with Green Intentions
- Texas firm now selling power in New York
- Citizen Power Alliance April 9, 2008 Letter to U.S...
- Legislators seek to repeal federal control of LNG ...
- Brazil Not the Best Model for U.S. Energy Independ...
- Corker says new energy policy would affect nation ...
- First Annual Summit Focuses On Alternative Energy ...
- World’s First Integrated Wind Turbines Inaugurated...
- U.S. energy policy is needed; coal will still play...
- More than just pond scum: Fueling the need for alt...
- Cooling Trend expected to continue throughout most...
- A 'dysfunctional, irrational' energy policy by Eri...
- Against the grain: What are they thinking? Part 2
- Tifton scientist working on new energy process
- Fallout from the Energy Policy Act of 2005 Pt. 2
- Ethanol: great politics, ineffective energy
- Fortune 500 company eyes Big Flats
- Senators offer bill to extend alternative fuel inc...
- Corruption in the awarding of wind farm concession...
-
?
April
(112)
Great post! One of the biggest obstacles to people getting behind the idea that population growth must be stopped is the inability of economists to envision a healthy economy without never-ending population growth. Indeed, beyond some optimum population, further growth becomes cancerous and begins to erode our standard of living and quality of life. I agree with your premise, that the optimum population has already been breached.
I should introduce myself. I am the author of a book titled "Five Short Blasts: A New Economic Theory Exposes The Fatal Flaw in Globalization and Its Consequences for America." To make a long story short, my theory is that as population density rises beyond some optimum level, per capita consumption of products begins to decline out of the need to conserve space. People who live in crowded conditions simply don’t have enough space to use and store many products. This declining per capita consumption, in the face of rising productivity (which always rises), inevitably yields rising unemployment and poverty.
This theory has huge implications for U.S. policy toward population management, especially immigration policy. Our policies of encouraging high rates of immigration are rooted in the belief of economists that population growth is a good thing, fueling economic growth. Through most of human history, the interests of the common good and business (corporations) were both well-served by continuing population growth. For the common good, we needed more workers to man our factories, producing the goods needed for a high standard of living. This population growth translated into sales volume growth for corporations. Both were happy.
But, once an optimum population density is breached, their interests diverge. It is in the interest of the common good to stabilize the population, avoiding an erosion of our quality of life through high unemployment and poverty. However, it is still in the interest of corporations to support further population growth because, even though per capita consumption goes into decline, total consumption still increases. We now find ourselves in the position of having corporations and economists influencing public policy in a direction that is not in the best interest of the common good.
It's absolutely imperative that our population be stabilized, and that's impossible without dramatically reining in immigration, both legal and illegal.
If you're interested in learning more about this new theory, I invite you to visit my web site at OpenWindowPublishingCo.com where you can read the preface for free, join in my blog discussion and, of course, purchase the book if you like. (It's also available at Amazon.com.) However, it appears that your blog has some substantial following. If you'd be willing to review my book, I'd be happy to send you a free copy. Just send me your shipping address.
Please forgive the somewhat "spammish" nature of the previous paragraph. I just don't know how else to inject this new perspective into the population debate without drawing attention to the book that explains the theory.
Keep up the good work on a great blog!
Pete Murphy
Author, Five Short Blasts