162 comments on Olduvai Theory: Toward Re-Equalizing the World Standard of Living - Richard Duncan
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
162 comments on Olduvai Theory: Toward Re-Equalizing the World Standard of Living - Richard Duncan
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
- Thanksgiving Open Campfire Thread
- How Relocalization Worked
- How to Set Up and Run a Bicycle Repair Company
TOD:Europe
- Unique Times -- and the Future
- Peak Gold, Easier to Model than Peak Oil? - Part I
- Carbon Capture and Storage
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
- The Bullroarer - Friday 27th November 2009
- International Energy Agency calls 'Peak' on OECD Oil Demand
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
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.
“It is only through labor and painful effort, by grim energy and resolute courage, that we move on to better things.”
—Theodore Roosevelt
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
mcain6925 -
Well, I would agree that if energy prices go up faster than your personal energy consumption goes down, then you are financially worse off than when you started, all other things being equal. I never said we were not on a downward spiral, as I think we definitely are, the only thing in contention being how steep that spiral is.
However, that does not appear to be what the authors of the article are talking about, as the only thing they seem to think matters is this global per capita energy consumption as some sort of a surrogate for standard of living, and that's where I (and apparently a lot of other TODers) think the authors' premise is flawed. I say call this per capita energy consumption something else, but don't call it 'standard of living'.
I also tend to agree that availability of capital (real capital, not the stuff willed into being by the Fed) could very well constitute the limiting factor as to whether or not we will be able to keep things from coming apart at the seams.
Fundamentally, they're referring to something like this:
http://home.comcast.net/~mcain6925/etc/energy.gdp.gif
that relates per-capita GDP and per-capita energy consumption. GDP is not the only thing that goes into standard of living, of course, but there's a relationship. Certainly no one will assert that the average standard of living in the US (the largish circle at the upper right end of the regression line) and the average standard of living in India and China (the two very large circles down and to the left) are comparable. That there are no national economies occupying the upper left portion of this particular space suggests no one knows how to operate a high-GDP economy without high energy consumption (including Japan, which has been fairly fanatical about this for 70 years). Similarly, that there are none occupying the lower right portion suggests no nation has managed to have high energy consumption without correspondingly high GDP.
For the record, I believe that I used 2004 data when I put this together. Data from The Economist's annual world statistics booklet.