The End of Growth: Adapting to Our New Economic Reality, Heinberg, Richard, eBook - Amazon.com
Follow the Author
Richard Heinberg
+ Follow
The End of Growth: Adapting to Our New Economic Reality Kindle Edition
by Richard Heinberg (Author) Format: Kindle Edition
4.5 out of 5 stars 126 ratings
Length: 288 pages Word Wise: Enabled Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled
----
Economists insist that recovery is at hand, yet unemployment remains high, real estate values continue to sink, and governments stagger under record deficits. The End of Growth proposes a startling diagnosis: humanity has reached a fundamental turning point in its economic history. The expansionary trajectory of industrial civilization is colliding with non-negotiable natural limits.
Richard Heinberg’s latest landmark work goes to the heart of the ongoing financial crisis, explaining how and why it occurred, and what we must do to avert the worst potential outcomes. Written in an engaging, highly readable style, it shows why growth is being blocked by three factors:
- Resource depletion
- Environmental impacts
- Crushing levels of debt
These converging limits will force us to re-evaluate cherished economic theories and to reinvent money and commerce.
The End of Growth describes what policy makers, communities, and families can do to build a new economy that operates within Earth’s budget of energy and resources. We can thrive during the transition if we set goals that promote human and environmental well-being, rather than continuing to pursue the now-unattainable prize of ever-expanding GDP.
Richard Heinberg is the author of nine previous books, including The Party's Over, Peak Everything, and Blackout. A senior fellow of the Post Carbon Institute, Heinberg is one of the world's foremost peak oil educators and an effective communicator of the urgent need to transition away from fossil fuels.
----
Editorial Reviews
Review
Why have mainstream economists ignored environmental limits for solong? If Heinberg is right, they will have much explaining to do." --LESTER BROWN, Founder Earth Policy Institute
Heinberg shows how peak oil, peak water, peak food, etc. lead not onlyto the end of growth, but to the beginning of a new era of progresswithout growth. -- HERMAN E. DALY, Professor Emeritus, School of PublicPolicy, University of Maryland
By the time you finish this, you will have 2 conclusions: This is the end of economic growth and itis our problem, not our childrens'. It's time to get ready. This book is the place to start. --PAUL GILDING -- Former head of GreenpeaceInternational
Richard has rung the bell on the limits to growth.Our shift from quantity of consumption to quality of life is the greatchallenge of our generation. Frightening...but ultimately freeing.--JOHN FULLERTON - President and Founder, Capital Institute
From the Back Cover
As energy and food prices escalate and debt levels explode, paths thatformerly led to economic prosperty now lead to disaster. This bookproposes a startling diagnosis: the global economy has reached afundamental turning point--the end of growth. The Great Recession willnot end in "recovery." Still, we can thrive in coming years if weabandon the futile pursuit of growth in consumption and aim instead forimprovements in quality of life.
Richard Heinberg's latestlandmark work goes to the heart of the ongoing financial crisis,examining why it occurred, and what we must do to avert the worstpotential outcomes. Written in an engaging style, it shows why growthcan't continue in the face of resource depletion, environmentaldevastation, and mountains of debt.
The End of Growthre-evaluates cherished economic theories and describes whatpolicymakers, communities, and families can do to build a new economythat operates within Earth's budget of energy and resources. We canthrive during the transition if we set goals that promote human andenvironmental well-being, rather than pursuing the now-unattainableprize of ever-expanding GDP.
Read more
Product details
File Size: 2640 KB
Print Length: 288 pages
Publisher: New Society Publishers; Original edition (September 1, 2011)
Publication Date: September 1, 2011
Sold by: Amazon.com Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B0056C1V5U
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:
Not Enabled
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Not Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #128,239 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#19 in Environmental Economics (Kindle Store)
#14 in Environmental Engineering (Kindle Store)
#26 in Sustainable Development Economics
Would you like to tell us about a lower price?
Related video shorts (0)Upload your video
Be the first videoYour name here
More about the author
› Visit Amazon's Richard Heinberg Page
Follow
Biography
Richard Heinberg is the author of eleven books including:
Snake Oil: How Fracking's False Promise of Plenty Imperils Our Future (2013)
The End of Growth: Adapting to our New Economic Reality (2011)
Blackout: Coal, Climate, and the Last Energy Crisis (2009)
Peak Everything: Waking Up to the Century of Declines (2007)
The Oil Depletion Protocol: A Plan to Avert Oil Wars, Terrorism and Economic Collapse (2006)
Powerdown: Options and Actions for a Post-Carbon World (2004)
The Party's Over: Oil, War and the Fate of Industrial Societies (2003)
He is Senior Fellow-in-Residence of the Institute and is widely regarded as one of the world's foremost Peak Oil educators. He has authored scores of essays and articles that have appeared in such journals as Nature, The Ecologist, The American Prospect, Public Policy Research, Quarterly Review, Z Magazine, Resurgence, The Futurist, European Business Review, Earth Island Journal, Yes!, Pacific Ecologist, and The Sun; and on web sites such as Alternet.org, EnergyBulletin.net, TheOilDrum.com, ProjectCensored.com, and Counterpunch.com.
He has appeared in many film and television documentaries, including Leonardo DiCaprio's 11th Hour, and is a recipient of the M. King Hubbert Award for Excellence in Energy Education.
More information about Richard can be found on his website: richardheinberg.com
Show More
Ad feedback
Customer reviews
4.5 out of 5 stars
4.5 out of 5
126 customer ratings
5 star 67%
4 star 19%
3 star 10%
2 star 1%
1 star 2%
Top Reviews
Robert J. Crawford
4.0 out of 5 stars must-read: how energy cost, environmental degradation, rickety finance are transforming economicsReviewed in the United States on March 25, 2020
Verified Purchase
Heinberg has set himself an ambitious task: to convince us that our myth of endless economic growth is no longer tenable. The core of his argument is that 1) the price of extraction for energy and raw materials is steadily rising, which means that we are reaching a natural limit that nothing can change - not innovation, not substitution, etc. 2) Environmental stresses, from pollution and exhaustion of natural aquifers to global warming, are already reaching their limits. 3) We have tried to make up for lower growth by increasing our debt through an ever expanding array of questionable financial instruments. Once he has made this case, he goes on to sketch potential ways to adapt.
While there is a lot of truth to his analysis, he does not adequately address a 4th factor: that developed countries have thoroughly absorbed a number of basic inventions - the internal combustion engine, electrification, information technologies, etc. - and so have less capacity and need to grow. If for no other reason, this explains both why the US, Europe, and Japan are experiencing lower GNP growth rates (their consumers are sated on certain basic products and their infrastructure is fully developed) and why many industrializing countries, such as China and India, continue to grow at astonishing levels: these latter are modernizing their infrastructure while their consumers are hungry and eager for new products. To be fair, Heinberg briefly considers this, but he fails to develop it to the extent that is necessary to understand the modern economy.
Much of the book is a kind of basic primer on economics, e.g. supply and demand, how banks work and money functions. The explanations are pretty clear, if elementary. I believe the audience he was reaching for was about that of the high school graduate headed for college. Though I found these sections pretty pedestrian, they are unquestionably good background for the uninitiated.
Perhaps it is an impossible task, but I was disappointed in his prescriptions. They were vague and speculative. He sees a future where we must get rid of our current economic system, not just that of global specialization, but our expectation that we will continue to improve our lifestyles by increasing consumption forever. While I agree that we are headed for some kind of fundamental reckoning, perhaps a cataclysmic implosion, the scenarios that Heinberg concentrates on the development of local cooperatives, more modest lifestyles in a "gift economy" and the like. In reality, it is likely to be geopolitical and will wreak unimaginable havoc in wars, famine, and religious fanaticism.
This is a very worthwhile read. If somewhat outdated over the last decade, the concepts are solid and essential. Recommended.
HelpfulComment Report abuse
Janet M Hanson
5.0 out of 5 stars A paradigm shifting bookReviewed in the United States on January 8, 2012
Verified Purchase
I was fortunate enough to acquire this book after hearing Heinberg speak. Quite simply, this is a paradigm shifting book.
If things you hear create a sense of dissonance for you--like seeing a dead in the water economy and a president and congress who keep telling you how things are getting better. Or watching people you know go through bankruptcy while bankers get record bonuses. Or simply that empty feeling you get when you hear politicians and businessmen alike talk about getting America "back to where we were" and you think, "Really?", then this book is for you.
Heinberg painstakingly lays out the case for "the end of growth". He acknowledges the policy errors that compounded it but simply points out that we are past the point of peak oil, peak minerals and our environment is maxed out. We have to live with a reality based construct of what we have.
Now having read the book you are forever struck by the fundamental error in thinking exhibited by virtually all of the policy creating world (with some exceptions). This book deepened my despair at America's failure of leadership at the recent Environmental conference in Durban.
But Heinberg makes an argument for the fact that a less-consumption oriented culture can still be a very happy, more locally based culture.
Not unimportantly the book fundamentally helps you see where you want to go next in your own life. It helps you plan for your real future (though I have no desire to paint it as a handbook for the future) in a reality based way.
Paradigm shifting is not an entirely comfortable process. It was uncomfortable to read this book though I was already familiar with some but not all of the main ideas. But it is well worth reading.
3 people found this helpful
HelpfulComment Report abuse
Midwest reviewer
5.0 out of 5 stars I really think the author is on to something hereReviewed in the United States on February 16, 2013
Verified Purchase
I enjoyed reading this book. I really think the author is on to something here, and his hypotheses and conclusions cannot be easily dismissed. He gives several major reasons why economic growth in most of the world will slow and halt in coming years. Some of his reasons I am a bit skeptical of - for example, I tend to think governments of the world will find a way to work out their debt problems - but there is one overriding factor which will pull the plug on growth if unchecked, and the author's treatment of this factor is, in my opinion, the strongest feature of the book. This is, of course, the escalating price of energy, especially oil. As the author himself says, "No energy, no economy". The escalating price of oil - especially gas for cars and planes - will (and already has) put a major block on the ability of modern economies to flourish (not immediately, of course, but slowly and inexorably), especially without a viable alternative on the horizon. I have seen this in stark fashion in my own geographic area, where I have seen the price of gas rise 50 cents a gallon in just the last few weeks. It doesn't take a lot of deep thinking to realize that that's money that comes out of our pockets that can't be spent in other areas of the economy. Things wouldn't be so bad if there, in fact, a viable energy substitute which would become relatively feasible from a $ standpoint as the cost of oil rises farther. However, the author does a good job explaining why fossil fuels have (and had) uniquely favorable characteristics that are unlikely to be easily replicated by anything else on the horizon.
HelpfulComment Report abuse
S. Aldrich
5.0 out of 5 stars The world is changing right nowReviewed in the United States on October 15, 2019
Verified Purchase
World civilization will not continue on the energy intensive path it is on today. Peak oil is here and the world economy cannot growth any longer. Be prepared! Read and share this important book. Get on the Post Carbon website and get informed.
HelpfulComment Report abuse
See all reviews from the United States
Top international reviews
Translate all reviews to English
Paul Simister
5.0 out of 5 stars Essential readingReviewed in the United Kingdom on November 23, 2013
Verified Purchase
This book is a real eye-opener and shows that the common assumption that we can continue to grow the economy at 2% to 3% per year is invalid.
In fact it is complete nonsense.
We live on a planet of limited reserves and even worse, they are being consumed fast. Not only can we not grow, we are reaching the point where contraction will be forced upon us because we'll have run out of essential commodities or they will become so expensive to mine, we can't afford them.
To be honest, in some ways, the message of the book is too overwhelming as it ties together so many different strands of our everyday lives and shows that even if we dodge one bullet, there are a succession of others waiting to get us.
Because of this, you might find it helpful to read Life After Growth: How the global economy really works - and why 200 years of growth are over first. This does a great job of explaining that we live in two different economies that should run parallel to each other - a money economy and an energy economy. Unfortunately they are diverging fast and that means a sharp shock downwards in prosperity.
My only criticism of these books are that they are big on problems, short on answers. To be fair, we must all understand the problem before we will accept the political and economic consequences of the viable solutions.
It's easy to ignore the messages of these books because we don't want the outcomes to be true.
I don't want it to be cold and wet tomorrow but I'll go out prepared with a thick coat and an umbrella just in case.
Anything positive and helpful we do in advance of being forced to react to the crises will help.
Read this book. It's time to be very worried about the future.
About my book reviews - I aim to be a tough reviewer because the main cost of a book is not the money to buy it but the time needed to read it and absorb the key messages. 5 stars means that I think that overall it has some vital messages in it.
Read less
3 people found this helpful
HelpfulReport abuse
Jon Hatfull
4.0 out of 5 stars ReassuringReviewed in the United Kingdom on January 18, 2013
Verified Purchase
The insanity and immorality of the contemporary economic system, at least since Reagan/Thatcher if not long before, felt like The Emperor's New Clothes to me before i read this book. It seemed that despite most folk I discussed it with could also see little sense it, there was much shoulder-shrugging and hand-washing and a belief that it was all too complicated for ordinary people. In the nineties idealism capitulated to the 'spin' politics of so-called neo-liberalism, and whilst we decry the oppression of dictatorial regimes, we don't notice that we are similarly powerless to control our leaders and their ultra-rich sponsors. This book describes in plain English, without sensationalism or scare-tactics, the truth of the world's situation - and very realistic options for surviving any of the possible futures. Sometimes it's hard to cling to faith in the 'groundswell of public opinion', but it did bring down the Berlin Wall, so who knows? I like to think that, as described, the only hope for the future of our planet is, effectively, the kind of anarchism that serious thinkers described long ago. Far from the only book on the subject, as Richard Heinberg himself often reminds us, I would describe it as essential.
One person found this helpful
HelpfulReport abuse
Phillip C
5.0 out of 5 stars Essential reading for anyone left in the anglo saxon world ...Reviewed in the United Kingdom on March 4, 2016
Verified Purchase
Essential reading for anyone left in the anglo saxon world who thinks we might be on the wrong path or that there may be something else to life other than making money and consuming stuff.
HelpfulReport abuse
David T.
5.0 out of 5 stars Five StarsReviewed in the United Kingdom on July 24, 2016
Verified Purchase
Good text
HelpfulReport abuse
cal-man
5.0 out of 5 stars Everyone should read thisReviewed in the United Kingdom on February 15, 2016
Verified Purchase
Interesting and thought provoking. It ties in well with the changes we have to make when unemployment becomes the norm as machines take more and more jobs once done by humans.
HelpfulReport abuse
---
The End of Growth: Adapting to Our New Economic Reality
by
3.97 · Rating details · 819 ratings · 93 reviews
Economists insist that recovery is at hand, yet unemployment remains high, real estate values continue to sink, and governments stagger under record deficits. The End of Growth proposes a startling diagnosis: humanity has reached a fundamental turning point in its economic history. The expansionary trajectory of industrial civilization is colliding with non-negotiable natural limits.
Richard Heinberg’s latest landmark work goes to the heart of the ongoing financial crisis, explaining how and why it occurred, and what we must do to avert the worst potential outcomes. Written in an engaging, highly readable style, it shows why growth is being blocked by three factors:
Resource depletion Environmental impacts Crushing levels of debt
These converging limits will force us to re-evaluate cherished economic theories and to reinvent money and commerce.
The End of Growth describes what policy makers, communities, and families can do to build a new economy that operates within Earth’s budget of energy and resources. We can thrive during the transition if we set goals that promote human and environmental well-being, rather than continuing to pursue the now-unattainable prize of ever-expanding GDP.
Richard Heinberg is the author of nine previous books, including The Party's Over, Peak Everything, and Blackout. A senior fellow of the Post Carbon Institute, Heinberg is one of the world's foremost peak oil educators and an effective communicator of the urgent need to transition away from fossil fuels. (less)
Richard Heinberg’s latest landmark work goes to the heart of the ongoing financial crisis, explaining how and why it occurred, and what we must do to avert the worst potential outcomes. Written in an engaging, highly readable style, it shows why growth is being blocked by three factors:
Resource depletion Environmental impacts Crushing levels of debt
These converging limits will force us to re-evaluate cherished economic theories and to reinvent money and commerce.
The End of Growth describes what policy makers, communities, and families can do to build a new economy that operates within Earth’s budget of energy and resources. We can thrive during the transition if we set goals that promote human and environmental well-being, rather than continuing to pursue the now-unattainable prize of ever-expanding GDP.
Richard Heinberg is the author of nine previous books, including The Party's Over, Peak Everything, and Blackout. A senior fellow of the Post Carbon Institute, Heinberg is one of the world's foremost peak oil educators and an effective communicator of the urgent need to transition away from fossil fuels. (less)
Nov 18, 2011Keith Akers rated it really liked it
This is a tough book to review because basically, it depends on the audience. Generally, though, I like the book and agree with the thesis. Heinberg's book is right in all major respects, well-written, and important.
Please consider this a five-star review if you are asking yourself, "what's all this talk about 'peak oil'?" or if your last encounter with the idea of limits to the economy is dim memories of reading "The Limits to Growth" in the 1970's. On the other hand, if you regularly peruse the Peak Oil News (from ASPO-USA), the Energy Bulletin, the Oil Drum, the "The Crash Course," or Gail Tverberg's blog (http://ourfiniteworld.com/), you will find very little that you don't already know: two or three stars. Since I don't know who's going to read this review, I'm arbitrarily calling it four stars. I generally praise the book but have two specific criticisms over which I want to go into quite a bit of detail.
I fall in the category of a fairly knowledgeable reader and have pretty much heard this already. Economic growth is over. Heinberg argues that the "Limits to Growth" theories are essentially correct after all and looks at alternatives. There are two questions of detail, but important details, which are lacking in the book: how the post-growth economy will work, and how and what we will eat in this economy. I also have problems with Heinberg's research methods and and his rebuttal of his opponents (more about this below). But first, here's the two specific problems I see:
(1) A clear picture of how the post-growth economy is going to work is missing; we see themes, but it is not worked out in detail or even fully in outline. The last two chapters, chapters 6 and 7, do throw out some good ideas but this is not a comprehensive overview of the needed approaches. On the other hand, no one has really done this and it would be difficult; we really need a kind of popularization of the whole discipline of ecological economics. This book could have been that popularization, but Heinberg has focused his work just on the problem, more than the solution.
(LATE BREAKING FLASH: "Plenitude" by Juliet B. Schor may be this book. I haven't read it, but it's in our house and I'll get to it as soon as Kate finishes it. Here's the link: Plenitude: The New Economics of True Wealth)
(UPDATE 1/17/2012: "Plenitude" is quite interesting and adds some insights, but is not a popularization of how a post-growth economy would work. She is not entirely clear that we have hit the limits to growth.)
(2) Also missing is any serious mention of diet. Heinberg has told me personally that he has been a vegetarian for decades, but you can't tell it from his writings. There are only cursory references to diet, usually along the lines of brief platitudes like "we need to cut back on our meat consumption also." This is too bad; a critical change that we will need to make in our lifestyles as a result of the end of growth is a drastic reduction in meat consumption in the West.
I wish Heinberg would be more aggressive in his research. I've read a number of Richard Heinberg's books and I think I know how he researches and writes his books. They're all good: "The Party's Over," "Blackout," "Peak Everything," and "Powerdown" stand out. They tend to be a bit repetitive in their themes, but the themes are important and there aren't a lot of people putting stuff in print (as opposed to blogs) about this. Heinberg, I believe, finds a thesis, and looks at how others are defending it. "This is a defensible thesis," he says to himself, and investigates further. He looks at alternative points of view. He reaches a conclusion: "this is not just defensible, this is right, and important, too." And then he explains it to others.
This is good, but I think before one popularizes an idea we need to make sure it is really intellectually all there. Ecological economics, as a discipline, is not fully developed. So we both want to work out the key concepts in this discipline and simultaneously popularize them. Heinberg is not interested in coming up with his own ideas; as far as I can tell, he is fully occupied with defending other people's ideas. I think Heinberg is smarter than that and I'd like to see (in his blog or in a book or elsewhere) some of his thinking about things he doesn't understand. Sometimes things you don't understand turn out to be things that, well, you just don't understand that well. But other times, the reason YOU don't understand something is because NOBODY understands it.
Doesn't he see a vegetarian diet as an obvious answer to the whole problem of resource shortages? He should at least address the question of diet and tell us. I don't find the answers to questions of diet in "The Food and Farming Transition" (http://www.compassionatespirit.com/wp...). There is generally a bias -- covert, or sometimes blatant -- against veganism in the energy descent community. From the other side, the vegan community has also largely ignored environmental questions, with a few exceptions such as Robert Goodland and Jeff Anhang of "Livestock and Climate Change" fame and Dawn Moncrieffe of "A Well-Fed World." Heinberg is ideally positioned to lead the way here, but alas, he isn't. I'm doing a lot of work on these issues myself, so if anyone is interested, let me know (keith "at" compassionatespirit "dot" com).
Another question of detail is how he answers objections to his thesis. There are six chapters, and chapters 4 and 5 stand out as the rebuttal. In the case of Chapter 4, it isn't clear that there are actual opponents within the economic community to which he is responding. Chapter 4 asks, won't substitution, efficiency, and innovation come to the rescue? Good question. But, are there any economists kaking these positions? I know that there are people like Julian Simon, and philosophers like Mark Sagoff ("Price, Principle, and the Environment"). But who are Heinberg's opponents here? Just a question. I get the impression that this holy Trinity of "substitution, efficiency, and innovation" is just an unexamined prejudice on the part of economists, rather than any coherent attempt to refute the idea of the limits to growth.
Chapter 5 tries to refute, in advance, any attempts to say that growth has returned just on the basis of one country or other experiencing growth, or describing the slight recovery from the Great Recession as "growth." That growth is increasing in one part of the world doesn't mean that growth has returned -- just that some economy is growing locally at someone else's expense, while the world as a whole goes downhill. And that a huge collapse followed by a slight uptake of indicators is not "growth" is also true. But to my mind it this deserves a paragraph or two at most. Isn't this obvious? Well, maybe not.
In conclusion, this is a great book and you should ignore all my critical comments and read it anyway. If you're a vegan you should read it because then you might have a clue why I am so concerned about the prospect of peak oil. If you're already well familiar with the limits to growth thesis and regularly attend ASPO-USA conventions, you should read it because you'll know what is being done to popularize and extend the whole thesis of an end to growth soon. And if you're clueless, after reading this book you'll have a clue. (less)
Please consider this a five-star review if you are asking yourself, "what's all this talk about 'peak oil'?" or if your last encounter with the idea of limits to the economy is dim memories of reading "The Limits to Growth" in the 1970's. On the other hand, if you regularly peruse the Peak Oil News (from ASPO-USA), the Energy Bulletin, the Oil Drum, the "The Crash Course," or Gail Tverberg's blog (http://ourfiniteworld.com/), you will find very little that you don't already know: two or three stars. Since I don't know who's going to read this review, I'm arbitrarily calling it four stars. I generally praise the book but have two specific criticisms over which I want to go into quite a bit of detail.
I fall in the category of a fairly knowledgeable reader and have pretty much heard this already. Economic growth is over. Heinberg argues that the "Limits to Growth" theories are essentially correct after all and looks at alternatives. There are two questions of detail, but important details, which are lacking in the book: how the post-growth economy will work, and how and what we will eat in this economy. I also have problems with Heinberg's research methods and and his rebuttal of his opponents (more about this below). But first, here's the two specific problems I see:
(1) A clear picture of how the post-growth economy is going to work is missing; we see themes, but it is not worked out in detail or even fully in outline. The last two chapters, chapters 6 and 7, do throw out some good ideas but this is not a comprehensive overview of the needed approaches. On the other hand, no one has really done this and it would be difficult; we really need a kind of popularization of the whole discipline of ecological economics. This book could have been that popularization, but Heinberg has focused his work just on the problem, more than the solution.
(LATE BREAKING FLASH: "Plenitude" by Juliet B. Schor may be this book. I haven't read it, but it's in our house and I'll get to it as soon as Kate finishes it. Here's the link: Plenitude: The New Economics of True Wealth)
(UPDATE 1/17/2012: "Plenitude" is quite interesting and adds some insights, but is not a popularization of how a post-growth economy would work. She is not entirely clear that we have hit the limits to growth.)
(2) Also missing is any serious mention of diet. Heinberg has told me personally that he has been a vegetarian for decades, but you can't tell it from his writings. There are only cursory references to diet, usually along the lines of brief platitudes like "we need to cut back on our meat consumption also." This is too bad; a critical change that we will need to make in our lifestyles as a result of the end of growth is a drastic reduction in meat consumption in the West.
I wish Heinberg would be more aggressive in his research. I've read a number of Richard Heinberg's books and I think I know how he researches and writes his books. They're all good: "The Party's Over," "Blackout," "Peak Everything," and "Powerdown" stand out. They tend to be a bit repetitive in their themes, but the themes are important and there aren't a lot of people putting stuff in print (as opposed to blogs) about this. Heinberg, I believe, finds a thesis, and looks at how others are defending it. "This is a defensible thesis," he says to himself, and investigates further. He looks at alternative points of view. He reaches a conclusion: "this is not just defensible, this is right, and important, too." And then he explains it to others.
This is good, but I think before one popularizes an idea we need to make sure it is really intellectually all there. Ecological economics, as a discipline, is not fully developed. So we both want to work out the key concepts in this discipline and simultaneously popularize them. Heinberg is not interested in coming up with his own ideas; as far as I can tell, he is fully occupied with defending other people's ideas. I think Heinberg is smarter than that and I'd like to see (in his blog or in a book or elsewhere) some of his thinking about things he doesn't understand. Sometimes things you don't understand turn out to be things that, well, you just don't understand that well. But other times, the reason YOU don't understand something is because NOBODY understands it.
Doesn't he see a vegetarian diet as an obvious answer to the whole problem of resource shortages? He should at least address the question of diet and tell us. I don't find the answers to questions of diet in "The Food and Farming Transition" (http://www.compassionatespirit.com/wp...). There is generally a bias -- covert, or sometimes blatant -- against veganism in the energy descent community. From the other side, the vegan community has also largely ignored environmental questions, with a few exceptions such as Robert Goodland and Jeff Anhang of "Livestock and Climate Change" fame and Dawn Moncrieffe of "A Well-Fed World." Heinberg is ideally positioned to lead the way here, but alas, he isn't. I'm doing a lot of work on these issues myself, so if anyone is interested, let me know (keith "at" compassionatespirit "dot" com).
Another question of detail is how he answers objections to his thesis. There are six chapters, and chapters 4 and 5 stand out as the rebuttal. In the case of Chapter 4, it isn't clear that there are actual opponents within the economic community to which he is responding. Chapter 4 asks, won't substitution, efficiency, and innovation come to the rescue? Good question. But, are there any economists kaking these positions? I know that there are people like Julian Simon, and philosophers like Mark Sagoff ("Price, Principle, and the Environment"). But who are Heinberg's opponents here? Just a question. I get the impression that this holy Trinity of "substitution, efficiency, and innovation" is just an unexamined prejudice on the part of economists, rather than any coherent attempt to refute the idea of the limits to growth.
Chapter 5 tries to refute, in advance, any attempts to say that growth has returned just on the basis of one country or other experiencing growth, or describing the slight recovery from the Great Recession as "growth." That growth is increasing in one part of the world doesn't mean that growth has returned -- just that some economy is growing locally at someone else's expense, while the world as a whole goes downhill. And that a huge collapse followed by a slight uptake of indicators is not "growth" is also true. But to my mind it this deserves a paragraph or two at most. Isn't this obvious? Well, maybe not.
In conclusion, this is a great book and you should ignore all my critical comments and read it anyway. If you're a vegan you should read it because then you might have a clue why I am so concerned about the prospect of peak oil. If you're already well familiar with the limits to growth thesis and regularly attend ASPO-USA conventions, you should read it because you'll know what is being done to popularize and extend the whole thesis of an end to growth soon. And if you're clueless, after reading this book you'll have a clue. (less)
Oct 01, 2015Diane rated it really liked it
Not my usual genre but I enjoyed the history of economics and the fact that the author did try to put a positive spin on the future of humanity at the end. For the most part, this book provided an honest look at our situation as it is and what we are headed for. I would love to bury my head in the sand right now.
The book effectively uses representative and systematic data to argue we are in ecological overshoot and economic overshoot. Either one is alarming; together they sound a critical alarm; if only it can be heard!
The author distinguishes between economies—the exchange of goods and services—and economics—a money-based model of an economy. Fractional reserve banking, debt-based currencies, and displacing externalities allow the two to diverge significantly. As a result, our financial accounting systems are giving us false signals.
We live in a world with ever-increasing levels of financial debt—public and private. We are also depleting the earth’s natural resources, including fresh water, fertile soil, forests, marine ecosystems, biodiversity, fossil fuels, minerals, and pollution sinks. Since debt represents a promise of future repayment of labor and resources the book argues it is inevitable that the aggregate promises to repay will eventually exceed the available resources for repayment. In fact, that may have already have happened.
He argues convincingly that “we have created an economic machine that needs debt like a car needs gas,” and that “the existing market economy has no ‘stable’ or ‘neutral’ setting: there is only growth or contraction.”
Economics relies on several premises which are clearly false:
1) Growth can continue indefinitely,
2) Externalities can be safely ignored,
3) Natural resources represent income that increases as they are extracted rather than capital which depreciates as it is depleted, and
4) Resources can be substituted for one another with infinite flexibility.
He concludes “…the world economic system is held together largely by the belief and faith that it will continue to grow. It’s a confidence scheme, in the purest sense.”
Limits to ecological growth are well documented in the book: global marine seafood capture peaked in 1994, global oil production is probably past its peak, and we are approaching peak coal, peak water, and peaks for several key minerals. Unfortunately efficiency, substitution, innovation, and other technological magic are insufficient to close the gap between our present consumption and earth’s limits.
As these limits are recognized more broadly, competition to retain a large slice of a shrinking pie will intensify. This is likely to unfold as increased struggles between nations, competition among world currencies, old vs. young, rich vs. poor, consumption and opulence vs. conservation and flourishing, short term opportunists against long-term thinkers, and along other lines of conflict. Planning can reduce the chaos while denial, delay, and panic will aggravate the disputes.
He concludes: “We have accumulated too many financial-monetary claims on real assets—consisting of energy, food, labor, manufactured products, built infrastructures, and natural resources” to ever be repaid. This leads to his rather bleak default scenario—his prediction of what will happen if leadership remains absent. It features various forms of debt-jubilees—schemes to discharge debt—with various big-time winners and losers.
Compared to other literature on limits to growth, I find these scenarios grimmer. I hope this is only his hyperbole, but I fear it is his expertise and candidness.
Our post-growth world needs to meet several criteria:
1) The economy must be steady-state and not one that relies on growth,
2) Renewable resources will be harvested at a rate slower than they are replenished,
3) Non-renewable resources will be extracted at declining rates, supported by increased rates of recycling,
4) Human population will stabilize at a level supported by these sustainable practices.
To help us imagine life after growth the last chapters describe several communities experimenting with sustainable economies designed to increase well-being and happiness rather than GDP.
The transition will be difficult, but the sooner we start, the better options we have. “All of the solutions to our growth-based problems involve some form of self-restraint,” he states before asking, “The crucial question is, how serious will that crisis have to be to get our collective attention and force us to change our behavior?”
Unfortunately deniers addicted to unsustainable growth are unmoved by facts. I am concerned the well-presented facts and well-drawn conclusions of this important book will do nothing to influence those invested in preserving their obsolete and dangerous world views.(less)
The author distinguishes between economies—the exchange of goods and services—and economics—a money-based model of an economy. Fractional reserve banking, debt-based currencies, and displacing externalities allow the two to diverge significantly. As a result, our financial accounting systems are giving us false signals.
We live in a world with ever-increasing levels of financial debt—public and private. We are also depleting the earth’s natural resources, including fresh water, fertile soil, forests, marine ecosystems, biodiversity, fossil fuels, minerals, and pollution sinks. Since debt represents a promise of future repayment of labor and resources the book argues it is inevitable that the aggregate promises to repay will eventually exceed the available resources for repayment. In fact, that may have already have happened.
He argues convincingly that “we have created an economic machine that needs debt like a car needs gas,” and that “the existing market economy has no ‘stable’ or ‘neutral’ setting: there is only growth or contraction.”
Economics relies on several premises which are clearly false:
1) Growth can continue indefinitely,
2) Externalities can be safely ignored,
3) Natural resources represent income that increases as they are extracted rather than capital which depreciates as it is depleted, and
4) Resources can be substituted for one another with infinite flexibility.
He concludes “…the world economic system is held together largely by the belief and faith that it will continue to grow. It’s a confidence scheme, in the purest sense.”
Limits to ecological growth are well documented in the book: global marine seafood capture peaked in 1994, global oil production is probably past its peak, and we are approaching peak coal, peak water, and peaks for several key minerals. Unfortunately efficiency, substitution, innovation, and other technological magic are insufficient to close the gap between our present consumption and earth’s limits.
As these limits are recognized more broadly, competition to retain a large slice of a shrinking pie will intensify. This is likely to unfold as increased struggles between nations, competition among world currencies, old vs. young, rich vs. poor, consumption and opulence vs. conservation and flourishing, short term opportunists against long-term thinkers, and along other lines of conflict. Planning can reduce the chaos while denial, delay, and panic will aggravate the disputes.
He concludes: “We have accumulated too many financial-monetary claims on real assets—consisting of energy, food, labor, manufactured products, built infrastructures, and natural resources” to ever be repaid. This leads to his rather bleak default scenario—his prediction of what will happen if leadership remains absent. It features various forms of debt-jubilees—schemes to discharge debt—with various big-time winners and losers.
Compared to other literature on limits to growth, I find these scenarios grimmer. I hope this is only his hyperbole, but I fear it is his expertise and candidness.
Our post-growth world needs to meet several criteria:
1) The economy must be steady-state and not one that relies on growth,
2) Renewable resources will be harvested at a rate slower than they are replenished,
3) Non-renewable resources will be extracted at declining rates, supported by increased rates of recycling,
4) Human population will stabilize at a level supported by these sustainable practices.
To help us imagine life after growth the last chapters describe several communities experimenting with sustainable economies designed to increase well-being and happiness rather than GDP.
The transition will be difficult, but the sooner we start, the better options we have. “All of the solutions to our growth-based problems involve some form of self-restraint,” he states before asking, “The crucial question is, how serious will that crisis have to be to get our collective attention and force us to change our behavior?”
Unfortunately deniers addicted to unsustainable growth are unmoved by facts. I am concerned the well-presented facts and well-drawn conclusions of this important book will do nothing to influence those invested in preserving their obsolete and dangerous world views.(less)
Apr 23, 2013Mark rated it did not like it
I was extremely disappointed with this book. It fails to persuade at all. I'm a massive proponent of sustainability and I also believe that GDP is an inappropriate measure for tracking the development of a sophisticated society.
The peak everything sections are OK but as with many of these writers the implication is that disaster starts now. It doesn't. Things will get worse, in terms of availability and price, with different resources at different times. The responses to each will be different and impacts will be different depending in the country and even the region within a country you happen to live in.
The simplistic assumption that the price of oil (and other things nearing peak) will spike then fall creating recession followed by growth and that in turn means no long term investment in alternatives is possible is silly. While the spiking is true the underlying trend is consistently upward. Plus the cost of all the alternatives is consistently downward. At some point the market will simply drive the change.
Then the issue is do we have time? Of course we do because there is a massively energy dense fuel already available. Nuclear. Yes Uranium is also peaking but Thorium isn't and that avoids some of the pitfalls of Uranium. Uranium (plus natural gas as the author also acknowledges) can act as a bridge until all the engineering issues are resolved with building Thorium plants (although they already have one in India). Yes the waste fuel is a problem that means the building of these plants has mostly stopped due to negative public opinion. But if the crises with oil gets as extreme as supposed in this book then society will change its mind. And the waste is so much less than the massive environmental impact created by oil refineries - anyone seen the Mississippi delta? Thousands dead and dying of cancer, huge areas of land destroyed through contamination.
And if the Chinese can build a hotel in six days and the Americans can send a man to the moon and the Danish and British stimulate a massive boom in wind turbines then of course a country can rebuild a nuclear capacity much quicker than people like this author always assume. Twenty years to rebuild that capacity? In a crises? It'll be done in less than five.
But again that's only if the crises is too extreme. If the transition has to happen fast. If all the alternatives, like solar, biofuels, algae, tidal, do not pan out economically in time. And yes I know people then point to peak everything but again and again we have moved on from one material to another. Again and again we have massively increased our efficiency in energy and material use. With water we already know how to be massively more efficient with things like drip irrigation. We simply haven't reached the economic tipping point that'll force us to do it.
The sections of the book on debt are certainly worrying. But they are so poorly written that they simply don't explain clearly enough how and why we are all going to crash and burn! There are other far better books that give much deeper analyses of the system the the risks and the possible ways out. This book just aims to scare and do so mostly with rhetoric rather than cogent fact based argument.
One part towards the end does start to get interesting. That is effectively around the cognitive dissonance that humans seem to be hard wired for when it comes to long term planning and thought. And I'm sure I'll be accused of sticking my head in the sand and "assuming" we will fix everything. But it felt like there was a little teaser here and not much depth. There is plenty of research that could have been assessed and disseminated in an easy to consume way. But no.
The end two chapters of the book, which I was actually most looking forward too, are the worst. They just list other texts or web sites or randomly give brief insights into what a few groups of people are doing. These chapters felt like the author was just shrugging and saying "I gave no idea but here's a few things that might interest you". They do, but this is a book I paid for. I can surf the web on my own dime and do my own research. I expect an author whose book I paid for to do some of that for me. And to have an opinion. It felt lazy and sloppy in the extreme.
Rarely have I been so angry about paying for a book. (less)
The peak everything sections are OK but as with many of these writers the implication is that disaster starts now. It doesn't. Things will get worse, in terms of availability and price, with different resources at different times. The responses to each will be different and impacts will be different depending in the country and even the region within a country you happen to live in.
The simplistic assumption that the price of oil (and other things nearing peak) will spike then fall creating recession followed by growth and that in turn means no long term investment in alternatives is possible is silly. While the spiking is true the underlying trend is consistently upward. Plus the cost of all the alternatives is consistently downward. At some point the market will simply drive the change.
Then the issue is do we have time? Of course we do because there is a massively energy dense fuel already available. Nuclear. Yes Uranium is also peaking but Thorium isn't and that avoids some of the pitfalls of Uranium. Uranium (plus natural gas as the author also acknowledges) can act as a bridge until all the engineering issues are resolved with building Thorium plants (although they already have one in India). Yes the waste fuel is a problem that means the building of these plants has mostly stopped due to negative public opinion. But if the crises with oil gets as extreme as supposed in this book then society will change its mind. And the waste is so much less than the massive environmental impact created by oil refineries - anyone seen the Mississippi delta? Thousands dead and dying of cancer, huge areas of land destroyed through contamination.
And if the Chinese can build a hotel in six days and the Americans can send a man to the moon and the Danish and British stimulate a massive boom in wind turbines then of course a country can rebuild a nuclear capacity much quicker than people like this author always assume. Twenty years to rebuild that capacity? In a crises? It'll be done in less than five.
But again that's only if the crises is too extreme. If the transition has to happen fast. If all the alternatives, like solar, biofuels, algae, tidal, do not pan out economically in time. And yes I know people then point to peak everything but again and again we have moved on from one material to another. Again and again we have massively increased our efficiency in energy and material use. With water we already know how to be massively more efficient with things like drip irrigation. We simply haven't reached the economic tipping point that'll force us to do it.
The sections of the book on debt are certainly worrying. But they are so poorly written that they simply don't explain clearly enough how and why we are all going to crash and burn! There are other far better books that give much deeper analyses of the system the the risks and the possible ways out. This book just aims to scare and do so mostly with rhetoric rather than cogent fact based argument.
One part towards the end does start to get interesting. That is effectively around the cognitive dissonance that humans seem to be hard wired for when it comes to long term planning and thought. And I'm sure I'll be accused of sticking my head in the sand and "assuming" we will fix everything. But it felt like there was a little teaser here and not much depth. There is plenty of research that could have been assessed and disseminated in an easy to consume way. But no.
The end two chapters of the book, which I was actually most looking forward too, are the worst. They just list other texts or web sites or randomly give brief insights into what a few groups of people are doing. These chapters felt like the author was just shrugging and saying "I gave no idea but here's a few things that might interest you". They do, but this is a book I paid for. I can surf the web on my own dime and do my own research. I expect an author whose book I paid for to do some of that for me. And to have an opinion. It felt lazy and sloppy in the extreme.
Rarely have I been so angry about paying for a book. (less)
Nov 16, 2012Curtis rated it really liked it
While reading this book I couldn't help but continually reflect back on my reading of "Abundance", by Peter Diamandis. Both are really good books with powerfully contrasting arguments and outlooks for humanity in the not so far off future. I think the two books should be read in tandem. Abundance is so overly optimistic in its views that even I was momentarily beguiled into its slipstream of persuasive perspectives on the infinite ability of technological innovation to fuel man's ambition to expand and survive abundantly. It is a great read, full of amazing examples and arguments on why the innovative human mind somehow finds a way, but its arguments are constructed within a framework that is deeply flawed - a scaffolding that has come up about 100 stories short on the ziggurat that megalomaniacal mankind would like to continue building on this earth.
Man's infinite ambitions and voracious appetites for more can not be sustained in a world that is constrained to finite resources, in a universe governed by physical laws that will only allow for so much growth. Heinberg's book is factual and very informative. It does not paint a bleak, gloom and doom type picture of our future as a species. Conversely it provides ideas and actions that we can take as individuals, as communities and as nations that will allow us to continue existing peaceably in our environment after the realization sets in that growth is no longer an option. The actions that he prescribes are not radical, but they would require mass cooperation, living with less, drastic financial/economic reforms, and basically people coming to the realization that we were not created to rule over and rape this planet of all it has while we can, but rather we exist on this planet as its most intellectually advanced creature and with that intellect we do have the capacity for a sustainable and happy existence in a world we must learn to share. (less)
Man's infinite ambitions and voracious appetites for more can not be sustained in a world that is constrained to finite resources, in a universe governed by physical laws that will only allow for so much growth. Heinberg's book is factual and very informative. It does not paint a bleak, gloom and doom type picture of our future as a species. Conversely it provides ideas and actions that we can take as individuals, as communities and as nations that will allow us to continue existing peaceably in our environment after the realization sets in that growth is no longer an option. The actions that he prescribes are not radical, but they would require mass cooperation, living with less, drastic financial/economic reforms, and basically people coming to the realization that we were not created to rule over and rape this planet of all it has while we can, but rather we exist on this planet as its most intellectually advanced creature and with that intellect we do have the capacity for a sustainable and happy existence in a world we must learn to share. (less)
This is by far the most comprehensive and honest analysis of our global economy and where it's headed than anything else I have read. A must read for anyone who is concerned about what the future might be like.
Mar 22, 2015Richard Reese rated it it was amazing
Richard Heinberg has been a pundit on the Peak Oil beat for more than ten years. With each passing year, his awareness of diminishing resources has grown. In 2007 he redefined the problem as Peak Everything. He came to see that industrial civilization was gobbling up non-renewable resources at a rate that spelled serious problems for the generation currently alive, which included himself. Yikes!
This mind-expanding learning process provided a miraculous cure for blissful ignorance, and replaced it with a healthy awareness of an unhealthy reality. Heinberg has been jumping up and down and shouting warnings for a long time, but the world has largely ignored him. The world perceived our incredibly unhealthy reality to be perfectly normal, because we were all born into it, as were our parents and grandparents. Normal means normal. Stop jumping up and down, already! Get a life!
Heinberg avoided suffering from normal thinking because, late at night, he secretly explored the magic and mysteries of history, which gave him special powers of vision. He came to see that the twentieth century was simply a calamitous freak in human history, powered by recklessly binging on cheap and abundant energy, a nightmare that can never again be repeated, thank goodness. Hence, normal was insane. Normal was in big danger. He kept shouting at us.
In July 2008, the price of oil skyrocketed to $150. In September, the financial system went sideways. Was this The Big One? Had the luxurious unsinkable Titanic fatally impaled itself on an invincible iceberg? Was the pleasure cruise about to become a life-threatening struggle for survival? The shadows suddenly became much darker, strong winds howled, thunder rumbled, and the Earth shook.
This big shift inspired Heinberg to write a new book, The End of Growth. His thesis was that time is running out on the era of perpetual economic growth (i.e., “normal” life as we know it). Obviously, never-ending expansion was impossible on a finite planet. Heinberg foresaw that growth might continue for a while in a few places, but growth for the overall global economy was essentially finished. There were three reasons for this.
First, the days of cheap oil were behind us. Global oil production peaked in 2005, and this high level of production could not be indefinitely maintained. Eventually production would shift into its decline phase — less oil for sale, and more expensive. No combination of alternative energy sources could replace the role of oil in industrial society, or even come close. The supply of oil was finite, and the cheap and easy oil had already been reduced to noxious clouds of carbon emissions.
Second, economic growth was getting more resistance from environmental challenges. Fresh water was getting scarce in many places. Climate change was creating costly problems. Food production could barely keep pace with rising population. The health of cropland, range land, and forests was declining. Oceanic fisheries were depleted. The prices for important minerals and metals were rising.
Third, on 15 September 2008, the financial system experienced a terrifying near death experience. Much of what had appeared to be a growing economy was actually a colossal bubble of growing debt, like a Ponzi scheme. Borrowed money had turbocharged the global economy for almost 30 years. It was a merry party of intoxicated gaiety and foolish excess, but now it was time for the dry heaves and roaring hangover. The party was over, and everything was a mess.
Peak cheap energy, by itself, was enough to bring an end to perpetual growth. But combined with a wheezing planet and a terminally ill financial system, the result was like a perfect storm, hastening the inevitable demise of industrial civilization. We had crossed a watershed, moving from a time of growth to a time of contraction. We had begun a long journey back toward traditional normality — a muscle-powered way of life — because muscle power will once again become cheaper than doing work with machines.
Heinberg did an impressive job of describing the crash of ’08 in manner that is thorough and easy to understand. It’s not a pretty picture. Legions of greed-crazed speculators did whatever they could to seize as much wealth as possible, by any means necessary, legal or not. By 2003, banks were giving mortgages to people with no money and no source of income. Then they quickly offloaded these toxic assets onto clueless investors, who believed that they were top quality investments. In this manner, many trillions of dollars were vaporized.
In the absence of a growing economy, it will be impossible to service today’s stratospheric debts. The banking system still holds vast quantities of absolutely worthless “assets,” which maintain a temporary illusion of viability. We can expect to see continued bank failures, corporate bankruptcies, and home foreclosures. “At some point in the next few years, stock and real estate values will plunge, banks will close, and businesses will shutter their doors,” warned Heinberg.
If the objective is “recovery” — returning to the idiocy of unlimited pathological borrowing — there simply is no workable solution available, at any price, no matter how hard we wish. Instead, we would be wise to learn how to adapt to the new conditions, and direct our attention to reducing the turbulence and suffering of the contraction process. We’re not looking at the end of the world here, just an uncomfortable return to stability. The healing process is likely to take generations, but the final result may actually be quite pleasant. A tolerable collapse is theoretically possible. No matter how the drama unfolds, the inevitable bottom line is that our economic system and lifestyles will become far simpler.
For most of the book, Heinberg persuasively discusses why the growth economy is ending. Near the end, he presents “solutions.” Like most folks, he dreams of a future in which the benefits of industrial civilization are preserved, whilst the myriad problems of industrial civilization magically disappear. This is not clear thinking.
He asks, “Can we surrender cars, highways, and supermarkets, but still keep cultural exchange, tolerance, and diversity, along with our hard-won scientific knowledge, advanced healthcare, and instant access to information?” Well, yes we can, for a while, but this would require disregarding long-term sustainability. We can’t have the benefits without the problems. Can’t we live without Facebook and cell phones? Yes.
(less)
This mind-expanding learning process provided a miraculous cure for blissful ignorance, and replaced it with a healthy awareness of an unhealthy reality. Heinberg has been jumping up and down and shouting warnings for a long time, but the world has largely ignored him. The world perceived our incredibly unhealthy reality to be perfectly normal, because we were all born into it, as were our parents and grandparents. Normal means normal. Stop jumping up and down, already! Get a life!
Heinberg avoided suffering from normal thinking because, late at night, he secretly explored the magic and mysteries of history, which gave him special powers of vision. He came to see that the twentieth century was simply a calamitous freak in human history, powered by recklessly binging on cheap and abundant energy, a nightmare that can never again be repeated, thank goodness. Hence, normal was insane. Normal was in big danger. He kept shouting at us.
In July 2008, the price of oil skyrocketed to $150. In September, the financial system went sideways. Was this The Big One? Had the luxurious unsinkable Titanic fatally impaled itself on an invincible iceberg? Was the pleasure cruise about to become a life-threatening struggle for survival? The shadows suddenly became much darker, strong winds howled, thunder rumbled, and the Earth shook.
This big shift inspired Heinberg to write a new book, The End of Growth. His thesis was that time is running out on the era of perpetual economic growth (i.e., “normal” life as we know it). Obviously, never-ending expansion was impossible on a finite planet. Heinberg foresaw that growth might continue for a while in a few places, but growth for the overall global economy was essentially finished. There were three reasons for this.
First, the days of cheap oil were behind us. Global oil production peaked in 2005, and this high level of production could not be indefinitely maintained. Eventually production would shift into its decline phase — less oil for sale, and more expensive. No combination of alternative energy sources could replace the role of oil in industrial society, or even come close. The supply of oil was finite, and the cheap and easy oil had already been reduced to noxious clouds of carbon emissions.
Second, economic growth was getting more resistance from environmental challenges. Fresh water was getting scarce in many places. Climate change was creating costly problems. Food production could barely keep pace with rising population. The health of cropland, range land, and forests was declining. Oceanic fisheries were depleted. The prices for important minerals and metals were rising.
Third, on 15 September 2008, the financial system experienced a terrifying near death experience. Much of what had appeared to be a growing economy was actually a colossal bubble of growing debt, like a Ponzi scheme. Borrowed money had turbocharged the global economy for almost 30 years. It was a merry party of intoxicated gaiety and foolish excess, but now it was time for the dry heaves and roaring hangover. The party was over, and everything was a mess.
Peak cheap energy, by itself, was enough to bring an end to perpetual growth. But combined with a wheezing planet and a terminally ill financial system, the result was like a perfect storm, hastening the inevitable demise of industrial civilization. We had crossed a watershed, moving from a time of growth to a time of contraction. We had begun a long journey back toward traditional normality — a muscle-powered way of life — because muscle power will once again become cheaper than doing work with machines.
Heinberg did an impressive job of describing the crash of ’08 in manner that is thorough and easy to understand. It’s not a pretty picture. Legions of greed-crazed speculators did whatever they could to seize as much wealth as possible, by any means necessary, legal or not. By 2003, banks were giving mortgages to people with no money and no source of income. Then they quickly offloaded these toxic assets onto clueless investors, who believed that they were top quality investments. In this manner, many trillions of dollars were vaporized.
In the absence of a growing economy, it will be impossible to service today’s stratospheric debts. The banking system still holds vast quantities of absolutely worthless “assets,” which maintain a temporary illusion of viability. We can expect to see continued bank failures, corporate bankruptcies, and home foreclosures. “At some point in the next few years, stock and real estate values will plunge, banks will close, and businesses will shutter their doors,” warned Heinberg.
If the objective is “recovery” — returning to the idiocy of unlimited pathological borrowing — there simply is no workable solution available, at any price, no matter how hard we wish. Instead, we would be wise to learn how to adapt to the new conditions, and direct our attention to reducing the turbulence and suffering of the contraction process. We’re not looking at the end of the world here, just an uncomfortable return to stability. The healing process is likely to take generations, but the final result may actually be quite pleasant. A tolerable collapse is theoretically possible. No matter how the drama unfolds, the inevitable bottom line is that our economic system and lifestyles will become far simpler.
For most of the book, Heinberg persuasively discusses why the growth economy is ending. Near the end, he presents “solutions.” Like most folks, he dreams of a future in which the benefits of industrial civilization are preserved, whilst the myriad problems of industrial civilization magically disappear. This is not clear thinking.
He asks, “Can we surrender cars, highways, and supermarkets, but still keep cultural exchange, tolerance, and diversity, along with our hard-won scientific knowledge, advanced healthcare, and instant access to information?” Well, yes we can, for a while, but this would require disregarding long-term sustainability. We can’t have the benefits without the problems. Can’t we live without Facebook and cell phones? Yes.
(less)
Oct 28, 2017Stella rated it it was ok
The first one hundred or so pages can be skipped if one has a basic understanding of economics and what happened during the global financial crisis. This was retelling, a long way to set the scene and provided little insight.
From page 100, the author’s discussion of natural resources, scarcity and depleting natural capital is one of the reasons for end of growth. Has the passage of time served this book well? Not so sure. Commodity price fell (due to lack of demand), oil & coal is now trading around USD 50- from highs. The ‘inevitable result of steeply rising coal prices’, does not look so inevitable.
Author does not fully factor in the demand for oil and coal with availability of alternatives and falling costs of installing these technologies eg wind/solar power; energy efficiency. I agree with the author we can’t move completely to renewable energy in the short term, however solutions with respect to solving for intermittency will result in a larger portion of the energy mix coming from energy.
Author predicts coal production to rise to 8000Mt by 2020, from levels around 5000 Mt but in 2016 coal consumption was flat leaning towards declining.
Later author discusses the end of big loans for unneeded infrastructure projects by multilateral banks in developing countries, but if anything activity is continuing and investment is growing. He doesn’t articulate why investment is not needed.
The ideas raised in this book are of interest but I find the conclusions just seem off the mark. Further, it’s unlikely governments will forgo growth for greater sustainability, given the impact it will have on them politically and on the broader society.
(less)
From page 100, the author’s discussion of natural resources, scarcity and depleting natural capital is one of the reasons for end of growth. Has the passage of time served this book well? Not so sure. Commodity price fell (due to lack of demand), oil & coal is now trading around USD 50- from highs. The ‘inevitable result of steeply rising coal prices’, does not look so inevitable.
Author does not fully factor in the demand for oil and coal with availability of alternatives and falling costs of installing these technologies eg wind/solar power; energy efficiency. I agree with the author we can’t move completely to renewable energy in the short term, however solutions with respect to solving for intermittency will result in a larger portion of the energy mix coming from energy.
Author predicts coal production to rise to 8000Mt by 2020, from levels around 5000 Mt but in 2016 coal consumption was flat leaning towards declining.
Later author discusses the end of big loans for unneeded infrastructure projects by multilateral banks in developing countries, but if anything activity is continuing and investment is growing. He doesn’t articulate why investment is not needed.
The ideas raised in this book are of interest but I find the conclusions just seem off the mark. Further, it’s unlikely governments will forgo growth for greater sustainability, given the impact it will have on them politically and on the broader society.
(less)
Apr 24, 2014Cary Neeper rated it it was amazing
Clearly written without an overload of details-this book makes the case for all of us.
I have never understood why mainstream economic theory ignored the impact of a huge population. Even as that impact has grown, classical economists continue to use outmoded theories of macroeconomics, ignore effects of the flow of capital, and refuse to acknowledge that there could be a limit to the resources so many billions of people use or need—like water. Isn’t that a requirement for life? Like air. Will they be selling clean air next?
Heinberg makes the case that we have seen the end of growth because it is doing us more harm than good. It is not a panacea for jobs and well-being. The nations that now have stable populations have an excellent opportunity to implement policies that will insure quality in living, find relief from the rat race, and enable the growth of knowledge and innovation within Earth’s limits.
I have never understood why mainstream economic theory ignored the impact of a huge population. Even as that impact has grown, classical economists continue to use outmoded theories of macroeconomics, ignore effects of the flow of capital, and refuse to acknowledge that there could be a limit to the resources so many billions of people use or need—like water. Isn’t that a requirement for life? Like air. Will they be selling clean air next?
Heinberg makes the case that we have seen the end of growth because it is doing us more harm than good. It is not a panacea for jobs and well-being. The nations that now have stable populations have an excellent opportunity to implement policies that will insure quality in living, find relief from the rat race, and enable the growth of knowledge and innovation within Earth’s limits.
