58 comments on Energy Quality and Economic Value
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
58 comments on Energy Quality and Economic Value
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
TOD:Europe
- Peak Gold, Easier to Model than Peak Oil? - Part I
- Carbon Capture and Storage
- Oilwatch Monthly November 2009
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- International Energy Agency calls 'Peak' on OECD Oil Demand
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
- The Bullroarer - Friday 20th November 2009
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- Early Warning
- The Energy Blog
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.”
—Albert Einstein
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.










GAIA Host Collective
I think it's important at that point to remember that while our growth in the sciences and tech. does derive FROM our ancestors' excess derived value, that it also frequently contributes back INTO our production and access to energy. We don't need to reinvest the energy that it once took to concieve, devise and testout, prototype a steam engine, waterwheel or a cotton-gin, but those creations and their many offspring will continue to offer us ways to get more work done than we could have in simpler agrarian conditions. Many of these tools still require energy to forge and build.. but our technical developments are nonetheless cumulative, and are recorded.
As long as we have access to those records, then we have access to the 'interest earned' on the surplus energy, long since spent, that created them. We have also added that to the now-prodigious canon of human technological development over the last 30 to 50 centuries, and from which we can find other combinations that will be possible with a good bit less initial energy than if we had to earn those advances all over again from our current store of excess energy.
DISCLAIMER: I know.. 'Technology can't save us', and I don't think that this canon of human technical achievement is any kind of a guarantee of Safety, Happiness or BAU. But I also think that our tools and our tool-making history is effectively an organ of our species at this point, and that it is viral (self-replicating), it regrows when it gets cut off (see; Dark Ages, and then what happened AFTER them..) and seems to be subject to the laws of Survival and Development of the fittest, and so grows, regrows, branches and mutates freely. Like DNA and mRNA, it has widely dispersed copies of itself, AND Blueprints and verbal descriptions of itself that can be read, translated, reverse-engineered and modified by sufficiently aware humans with a pinch of literacy, training or time. (Pick any two).. oh yeah, and enough chutzpah at the end of a hard day just surviving in which to work on this.
Bob
I'm happy to be challenged, here, -1.
That response was very succinct.. mind elaborating?
No challenge here I quite agree with you on that 'intrest earned' on on the surplus energy, long since spent. and will negate that -1 as soon as I post this.
YES we WILL with that latent expertise and knowledge be able to bridge the coming - Couch Potato Gap!!
Thanks, Ignatz.
For what it's worth, I'd expect we've now probably seen peak 'couch-potatoe' (wah..) not that there aren't scads of folks out there that still try to play the part. ie, It's not always really easy to tell when a sloth has turned a corner in his life, and whether it was witting or otherwise.. 'you have to examine these things in great -detail.' (Ben Knox, in Local Hero)