The Oil Drum

The book "From Cradle to Cradle" talks about this.

I suspect it will not be possible to bring renewable energy systems on stream fast enough to halt the collapse of mine production rates.

From the little research I have done on this on the energy situation in UK, US, French, Japan I am relatively sure they are now past the point of no return.

Current net energy exporters may be able to build themselves a renewable energy infrastructure if they their energy resources are not seized/destroyed by war.

With ore grades dropping in many minerals over the last few decades we have been using greater and greater quantities of energy per unit resource. The Energy required to mine and process an ore rises exponentially with falling ore grade.

If we take Gold production for example the historic production rate has grown exponentially following the energy curve. But now it may fall by the double exponential because both the easy to get at high grade ore is depleting and the available net energy will be collapsing.

I guess those of us who survive this transition will learn to live happier less material lives like Nate Hagens reindeer :)

Sorry to be so pessimistic. On the bright side we can make lots of money using our acknowledge of the resource sector. We may not live to spend it or enjoy it but it will be fun while it lasts :)

Personally I do not see much of a future in recycling even though I believe that in only a few years we will recycling almost everything. Simply because production will be falling exponentially.

There is a very real risk of a "disorderly" descent. I do not believe modern "capitalist" systems in the US/UK etc. will be sufficiently resilient to prevail.

I hope mining dose adapt to using new tools and techniques but I suspect much will simply be abandoned.

P.S. sorry for the lack of reference did not have time to include them.

My own view is that things will have to be standardized, that is, one or two versions of computers or home entertainment stuff, clothing, etc.. And, further, that parts be interchangable. For example, the parts in the mini-car are interchangeable with the 1 ton truck. Finally, that these things be produced for looong production runs - like, maybe, ten years until changes are made.

I know this undercuts the idea of introducing more energy efficient models as tech advances. But my guess is that it is more energy efficient to not have to replace an item for a moderate advance.

Todd

However, to be most effective, that will require that products be designed, from the beginning, so that they can be disassembled and reclaimed, and the contents reused. While there is a lot of logic in that approach, sometimes it is hard to get that into the heads of folk who are only designing for maximum efficiency in use, and a manufacturing process that keeps the price down far enough that you can sell the product.

Recycling sounds so green. It can be if it saves or creates more resources than it uses, but there are countless examples where this is ignored. Losing money recycling, is losing resources. A town government nearby where I live decided to be environmentally friendly by recycling plastics. Everyone though this was a wonderful idea, so collection of plastic containers began. It turned out that it cost much more to do this than they gained, but they kept on doing it because it was politically correct, when in reality it was like cutting down three trees to save one. They only looked at the benefit and not the cost.

As long as recycling is profitable, it is sound and of course should be done. I just don't see it as any great solution to resource acquisition since even when it is sound, it is marginal. It reminds me of corn ethanol where the return is at best 30% as compared to the current return for oil of near 500%; it may work marginally, but it is not going to come near replacing what we have today.