Monday 27 August 2012

Accepting the Decline: Paradigm shift


Paradigms (from wikipedia) describe distinct concepts or though patterns in any scientific discipline or other epistemological (and yes, I did look that word up) context. Overshoot demands that we change, at the very least, our worldview paradigm to account for the changes that will sweep throughout our world. While peak oil means oil production will decline, the changes that that shift brings will not be a reversal of those born of oil productions rise, but it will share elements of a reverse. Climate change is effectively, the other main component of overshoot, a global experiment to find out what reverting our planets biosphere back into standard hothouse conditions looks like from the inside. As we accept the decline, we will have to change ourselves in response.

Economic assumptions will change drastically as both the net and absolute energy available to humanity declines. Since peak oil will hit transport first (60% of oil is used for transport) and most renewables supply electricity not fuel, we can start there. The gradual erosion of global trade will reduce the importance of imports/exports over a national, then regional, scale and act as a pseudo tariff which will both allow actual tariffs or trade barriers (due to the reduced influence of traders) to be implemented and rise over time until new sustainable (sailing ships) transport has been introduced. Localization, caused by this, of the economy will also revitalise the household economy, which functions differently to the market economy, such as being more resilient but also being less efficient, necessitating a new operative procedure. As energy becomes more expensive the equations that govern current industry practice change e.g. Hand labour for a smaller (high quality) output becomes more economical than mass production. These are only some of the changes that will occur.

Ideology and culture will also be forced to fragment and relocalise. As the infrastructure necessary to maintain the mass culture (a national culture with many regional cultures is certainly possible) degrades, it will dissolve into an environment filled with now resurgent local/regional cultures that will now have greater staying power. This will fragment nation-states into smaller, more homogenous units, effectively smaller national units, although many states could still survive where no strong nation exists today, other large identity groups will also fragment. Here I expect the Australia to remain; the man from snowy river type of nation building is possible in a post-overshoot world, but the states to become more autonomous and powerful than they are now. Ideologies will also change, even “think globally, act locally” will out of necessity change to “think locally, act locally” as the world gets big again. As communication systems decline we will know far less of what’s going on in the world and as energy availability declines we will less and less be able to affect other parts of the world (acid rain, global warming etc) while those parts can’t affect us as easily. While ideologies can function within a larger framework, like medieval Christianity, these frameworks can only form above a grassroots level after a decline and even then they take a long time to form, paganism was rampant in large parts of Europe (Vikings, Lithuania, Russia etc) well into the 12-14th centuries. Focusing on global problems at the expense of local ones is slowly, but at an accelerating pace, becoming non-viable.


These are only some of the realms that the paradigm shift will affect. The effects will be spread over a long-time but we can begin preparing now and start shifting our worldviews to match what our world is becoming.

Sunday 19 August 2012

Australia's Population - 22.7 million


 

State/Territory
Population
% in capital of state/territory
Australian Capital Territory
344,200
99.6%
New South Wales
6967200
63%
Victoria
5297600
71%
Queensland
4279400
46%
South Australia
1601800
73.5%
Western Australia
2163200
73.4%
Tasmania
498200
41%
Northern territory
219900
54%

As can be seen (in the map) the majority of Australia’s population is along the coast (83% is within 50km of the coast) and in the State capital cities, total urbanity is 83%. Is this surprising? Not really, Australia, since white settlement, has always been an urban country (initial urbanises was 50%) and the grand internal desert has, and will as long as it survives, keep people close to the coast, mostly the Eastern seaboard.

What is malleable is the incredibly high concentration of people in the big capital cities. I expect the first decomplexification of Australian society to be a move away from the big cities to the Country, one way would be by going into Small cities regional centres and small towns instead of farmland or villages. This actually offers several advantages over a population moving directly into rural areas.

A transition from the big city to the country is quite a leap and, while individuals and small groups can certainly succeed, the shock caused by large numbers of people migrating at once would likely cripple or damage our economy and society. However, if most people move into the regional cities and towns (spread out to minimise stress) then manufacturing can be revitalised, markets and infrastructure can be built to service the new population distribution while benefiting from a now larger labour pool. Some people would also move into the rural areas, but at a more manageable pace (and also those more suited and motivated to the tasks required). This approach also has the advantage of moving people to available resources in enough numbers to access those resources.

Faith and Ancestry:
Ancestry
Percentage of overall
English
36.1%
Australia
35.4%
Irish
10.4%
Scottish
8.9%
German
4.5%
Chinese
4.3%
Indian
2%
Greek
1.9%
Dutch
1.7%
Lebanese
.92%

The major ancestry of Australia is English but growing proportions are Australian born and bred. While the European proportion is falling to an Asian rise this is not a quick or even substantive change (Chinese only account for 4.3% ancestry), especially compared to the British settlement and the destruction of the Aborigines (now only 2.3% of the population).The fear and concern is probably more of what I call the “Box Hill” effect than facts. Boxhill is a suburb/town centre near where I live and is a highly Asian (Korean, Chinese, Japanese but not Indian) area with lots of stores focused on Asian foodstuffs. This concentration of immigrants (highly diverse, especially the food), which is at times more of an illusion, gives the impression that there are lot’s of Asians when statistically it is not a big deal.

The major variable that could substantially change Australia’s demographics is another mass migration, potentially from Indonesia but to full explore that possibility will take another post.
                       
Faith
Percentage of Pop
 Roman Catholic
25.8%
 Anglican
18.7%
Total Christian
63.9%
Others
19.4%

Faith is an important aspect of Identity, but, functionally, what is Australia’s faith? You might say Christian, at 63.9%, but that statistic hides the fact that only 7.5% of the population attends church, or only 11.7% of people who answer Christian on the census form.

Australia is a deeply secular society and the strongest religion, Christianity is a spent force that has very little influence on Australian culture or politics and is only used symbolically. Only two of our Prime ministers since 1950 have actually been observant Christians (John Howard and Kevin Rudd) and the current Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, is an atheist. The attitude, from my experiences, is that religion does not matter much and it actually harms a politician’s election campaign more than it helps. For clarity, I’m agnostic, my family is agnostic (only one grandmother was religious and only for a time), I’ve only met 1 person to whom religion was important, 2 others who go to church (one hates it and only goes because her mom forces her, the other’s family immigrated here from Malaysia) and most people I meet are functionally agnostic.

Our faith will probably change as Overshoot’s downside begins as there is no strong core of religion (spirituality is existent) to oppose the changes. But the religions that succeed here will not be Christianity or Islam, since they’re both too alien and organised (in the religious sense) to penetrate mainstream Australian society. My bets are on paganism or some form of earth worship, since an unorganized religion will be better able to penetrate Australian society and not carry the stigma of previous religions. Nevertheless, it is a very good possibility that Christianity will stay; it just will not have any great significance.   

Monday 13 August 2012

Technology as community


As a highly developed tool-using animal, almost all aspects of our lives id linked to technology. Unfortunately, most of our current tech base is linked to fossil fuel usage, fossil fuels that are running finite, necessitating a massive change, which will require an understanding of what our tech base actually looks like and how it functions. To illustrate I’ll use some basic ecology concepts, with technology being the community (living component of an ecosystem) alongside the human population that makes it function.

Just for clarity, Technology is defined here as both the physical artefacts and behaviours necessary to both create and use the artefacts. E.g., a shovel is an artefact a labourer uses it and a blacksmith forging it are all forms of technology.  

Food chains: The most basic ecological relationship is that of predator and prey, it works in a community as the flow of energy + matter from one organism to another. 

Food webs: A step up from food chains. Food webs are created by linking food chains together and allow far more relationships to be seen. While detritivores and decomposers can be shown in food chains, in food webs their influence can be seen fully. Since technology is more circular in nature, (e.g. a farmer needs tools from a blacksmith who needs food from the farmer, this forms a short loop) this should probably be the starting point. 



Humans; a parallel community: However, technology is a human adaptation and cannot be independent from humanity. Therefore, how do we place humans in this conceptual model? Simple, we have humans as a parallel community that functions both alongside and with the technology community. As the major tool-wielding animal these two communities require each other to survive, almost everything we do requires tools, artefacts and/or machines.


Trophic levels: a pyramid structure, trophic levels show the amount of energy/matter in each level. Each trophic level feeds upon the ones below and only gains a portion (typically 10%) of the energy of the level below it. for technology we can simplify each level into its basic self sufficient levels e.g. the bottom levels contain the basic extractive techs (logging, agriculture, mining) and the manufacturing techs to make the tools/machines necessary for the extraction and manufacturing techs, the second level has the next layer of manufacturing plus basic culture techs (paper or papyrus, ink, paint etc).   


Purpose, a difference: there is one major difference between a naturally occurring community and the artificial one of technology. Individual technologies have a purpose behind them, designed by a sapient mind with a specific goal in mind. Nature on the other hand has no purpose behind it and is shaped by the emergence of patterns or structures dictated by the fundamental rules of the universe. This gives technology several different characteristics, far more looping with a circular nature at the bottom (as opposed to a circle overall and linear at the bottom) and a prevalence of amplifiers that are higher in the trophic level but enhance the lower levels (typically high level manufacturing, sensor or control tech.)

The Emergence of technology: The modern technology base didn’t emerge fully formed but, like an ecosystem, was built up over time. To give an example of one way this happens (there are multiple ways); the total war team (creators of the total war games) follow a revolution then evolution cycle. They ‘revolutionise’ (create something new e.g. sea battles) then they evolve the concept. Why have I used this example? Because the changes overshoot brings will likely follow this progression, (John Michael Greer’s not mine)

·        Abundance Industrialism: The current state of Australia, runs entirely on non –renewables and is the current stock that future technology will be derived from. Counts as our baseline

·        Scarcity Industrialism: When the downsides of overshoot happen this will be the state Australia finds itself in. It is the mirror of abundance industrialism and will be powered by the remaining fossil fuels and renewables. Tech here be a direct offspring of abundance industrialism.

·        Salvage Society: No/extremely limited use of non-renewables and most materials will be salvaged instead of freshly harvested, providing the only direct link to abundance industrialism. Tech will be either legacy or what scarcity industrial society can put together.

·        Ecotechnic: here eco means only renewables are used and technic refers to the fact that the majority of energy use s non-food. This stage will have no direct link to either industrialism and represents the first stable stage. All technology can be created by other ecotechs indefinitely.

Each stage will cause its own demise by exhausting the resources necessary for its own survival until the ecotechnic stage is reached. Nevertheless, the previous stages tech base will also build the next stages tech base forming a continuity between the Beginning of Abundance industrialism to the end of the Ecotechnic stage.    

Monday 6 August 2012

The Three Basic Renewables


Hydro: Easier to use and more reliable than wind, hydropower is the use of naturally occurring running water, big dams alter the environment to increase this factor, to spin something, either a water-wheel or a turbine to generate mechanical/electrical energy or in the roman case to supply water to aqueducts. It has the advantage of being reliable but most of the planets capacity for hydro, especially big dams, is already in use and climate change could severely disrupt the use of hydropower.
Comes in three scales.
  • Big dams being what most people think of, these disrupt local environments and offer little room for expansion. The main versions of this in Australia are the snowy mountain scheme and hydropower in Tasmania
  • Macro being the powering of towns or villages by hydropower
  • Micro for single houses/buildings
The last two offer a good source of power for individuals or communities if the locality supports it and would be especially beneficial as the national grid declines. Currently the majority is used for electricity production but as the power grid fails declines and the energy available for industry declines a return to direct mechanical energy should occur.

Wind: Similar to hydropower in that naturally occurring air currents (wind) is used to spin something. Together with hydropower the foundations of the industrial revolution was built and they could easily sustain a low (relative to ours) consumption industrial complex (the evidence is that we have already done so once). While small scale is possible and it would certainly help (especially during salvage industrialism, see Arch druid report), wind power is best done n at least a community basis (think windmills). While current use is mainly electricity, like hydropower direct mechanical energy use should return, luckily advances in this mode have been made since the industrial revolution.

Both of these technologies will be utilised for electricity production, most likely for communication (radios, telegraph etc), lights and sensor (soil, air monitors) tech.

Sun: The energy source that the above ultimately descend from, the hydrosphere and atmosphere are powered by sunlight. Sunlight is also the main ingredient of agriculture and biofuels but they are separate topics so here I’ll look at direct solar use (think solar panels, solar hot water or solar furnaces). As experience has shown, which admittedly compared to wind or hydro is miniscule for solar but low-tech magazine has an article on heating/cooling cities with it. its main use is the production of thermal energy, something that wind and hydro can only provide indirectly and would otherwise have to be provided by biomass. It can produce electricity , however the current method of using solar panels is unlikely to survive, alternatives such as dye based solar panels or solar thermoelectric are possible. Solar furnaces, first used as scientific tools (it doesn’t interfere with the reactions), offer a way to replace fossil fuels in the important techs that require high heat (think metallurgy) while others other forms can provide low to medium heat quite well. This means a return to charcoal (which causes deforestation), in full scale, might not be necessary. In daily life it could easily combine with biomass to form the chief means of thermal energy for operations such as cooking, space heating etc while human muscle power provides the majority of the mechanical energy needs.

These three energy sources could easily support a low-energy industrial complex and agricultural sector. But a large amount of power will come from human muscles and any tech that can amplify this (bicycles are one) would also provide a significant energy resource.      

Friday 3 August 2012

Community or one component of an ecosystem


When talking about the survival of societies an important concept is community since local communities are the basic socially self-sufficient unit of a society, families are a further division and they are the building blocks of communities. But the concept itself and as used in common speech is quite vague and imprecise, often used confusingly or without an exact meaning. So here I’ll do a basic examination of the word from a its scientific meaning and relate it to human societies.

One of the classes I took for VCE is environmental science and there was a specific term for what a community was. It was the living components of an ecosystem, or biotic, with the environment forming the non-living, abiotic, component. From this point we can get several conclusions; first that the community of an urban environment also includes the vermin, pets and various plants or microbes that live there as well as humans, second that it is only one part of a greater whole and must work with the non-living components of the ecosystem its embedded in, thirdly that a human community in its most basic definition just accounts for who lives in a set area wether or not they interact much. When we talk about community we normally only mean relationships between humans and often restrict them to personal/social relationships but this ignores the vast amount of life living there, domesticated plants and animals are only some of them, that humans have formed intricate bonds with over the time we have been on the earth and the vast variation of inter-human relationships that exist. The communities we live in are far more than the people who live in them.        

Submarines

An important area of warfare i missed out was submarines, its not seperate from naval warfare but it does have a different area and is a gamechanger in both naval warfare and empire building. To understand submarines role the two main goals of naval warfare must be known; the first is the allowance of your shipping to pass across the seas, theses can be transports, merchants or even troops and supplies, the second goal is the denial of the use of the seas to enemy shipping. Before submarines the acheivment of sea dominance meant both of these goals was accomplished, this was the basis behind the British empires massive navy (had to be able to fight the next two biggest fleets at the same time). Submarines changed this, think both world wars and the wolfpacks, because while you could acheive sea dominance and deny the enemy use of the seas the enemy could still threaten and deny effective use of the seas to shipping, while they can't easily destroy warships it dosen't matter if your supplies can't get through. while there are effective countermeasures to submarines they require certain tactics, such as escorts or convoys, to be effective and are greatly enhanced by knowing where the subs are or are going to. This makes them a great defensive weapon, especially for a weaker power, and if submarine colliers or enhanced ranges are built in they become potent offensive weapons. Australia could do worse than get a defensive (low range in exchange for cheapness, for numbers, and weapons) sub fleet to ward off other powers. Submarines are mainly diesel or nuclear powered now, so biodiesel will be neccesary for current designs to be used which certainly acheivable to some extent and if the fuel usage is reduced across the whole fleet (say by using wind) would be easier, or alternate power sources. But an important lesson is the first military submarine, it was hand powered by a single man and was supposed to attach explosive charges to british warships during the war of independence. It completly failed to destroy any warships but it was a good first try. As we can see low tech submarines are possible but warships themselves are hard to kill (the new russian torpedoes may change that) and the best historic success has been in the denial of safe shipping to the enemy.

Wednesday 1 August 2012

Just what is technology?



The abstract concept of technology covers quite a lot of ground, Agriculture-industrial or organic, industrial arts- blacksmithing, factories and modern high tech, energy collection to energy use and every form of transport except walking. A useful phrase is ‘technology only uses energy and matter, it cannot create them’. While this is entirely accurate, another phrase has to be added, “Technology is also the primary means by which humans make energy and matter usable’. For oil to be usable, it first must be dug up, even if by shovels powered by workers feed by small-scale farming, and then refined. All but the most primitive hunting techniques, like utilizing our natural endurance to run down animals, require tools and while gathering can be done without them it is greatly improved by baskets. So technology can be divided into collectors (agriculture, mining etc) and utilizers. But there is also another dividing line, that between human driven (tools, bikes, etc) and non-human driven (sailing ships, computers etc). Both of these form a spectrum since no action can be done without energy and matter but large parts of our tech base is simply making energy or matter usable, metal refining is both a collector (refined metals) but also a utilizer (ores, heat energy). Moreover, to a certain extent, human driven technology can be swapped for non-human technology and vice-versa e.g. pumping can be done by both windmills and human effort.

So when we speak about it, just what is technology?     

Parochialism – or a return to small-scale thinking


E.F Schumacher wrote ‘for his different purposes man needs many structures, both small ones and large ones, some exclusive and some comprehensive.’ He was mainly talking in the realm of economics, business and politics but after reading Lewis Munford’s technics and civilisation, I have begun to think that we should begin listening to his advice in the realm of thought and ideology.

I have noticed that people more often than not think of solutions or values in a large thought, say a global scale (we can save the world) or national level, instead of the smaller scale of regional, local or personal level. However, a lot of effective action comes from the smaller level and the changes in peak oil will affect us at every scale. The good news is that parochialism, regionalism and localism are already returning into the realm of thought and a lot of writers on overshoot (Dimitri Orlov, John Michael Greer, Sharon Astyk etc) are already ahead of the curve with responses for individuals or communities and ways of thinking.

an old project


this is a school project i did last year that is relavent, this was before i was peak oil aware, was written a day or two (i fixed some of the writing errors) before it was due and a lot of the data comes from wikipedia. it is not my current views or what i would write now but is what i picked up by just living in the mainstream.
Ecological Issue                                                  Leo Santilli
                                           Competing Agricultural Systems
Two major changes to humanity happened in the last five hundred years. The first of them, the scientific revolution fundamentally changed the way humans both thought of the world and interactions with it. The adjustment to a theory and experiment based knowledge system instead of a religious and superstitious one allowed major advancements to occur, such as Andreas Vesalius's De humani corporis fabrica (on the fabric of the human body) or Carl Linnaeus classification system, in rapid succession and with an understanding of the reasons behind them in an objective and testable way.
One of the biggest effects of this earlier revolution was the later industrial revolution, which allowed the changes of the scientific revolution to begin affecting the majority of humankind on a large scale due to the application of scientific analysis and knowledge on mechanics (steam engines, ships, looms etc). The addition of machines that didn’t rely on human muscle power alone greatly increased the productivity of workers in both the extraction (farming, forestry, etc) and manufacturing industry.
The change to agriculture due to both the scientific and industrial revolution is not complete as two main systems are currently competing. The industrial based Green Revolution (or industrial agriculture) and the reactionary organic movement in an attempt to provide the world’s population with a stable secure and balanced (non-nutrient deficient) food supply.

The Green revolution came out of the industrialisation of agriculture for example. Monocultures, a staple of the conventional modern farm, where large areas are used to grow only a single variety of crop due to standardizations efficiency. Potatoes, for example, in use outside of their point of origin, South America, tend to be chemically similar and similarly shaped to make machine processing as efficient as possible. This has the unfortunate side effect of increased disease prevalence due to the lack of diversity that species use as a natural defence (community immunity). This problem is solved via the application of pesticides, herbicides and fungicides, normally chemicals produced industrially for use across large areas.
One of the biggest innovations is the development of High Yield Varieties. HYV can easily outcompete traditional crops when given proper irrigation, nutrients and protection from harmful organisms. All of these things can easily be provided by the associated system of the Green Revolution. Nutrients can be artificially obtained, like nitrogen from the Haber - Bosch process, and applied to crops, one-half of nitrogen in humans is now artificially supplied. Various new types of irrigation such as drip feed or improvements on old techniques, enclosed plastic pipes and pumps, allow easy access to water. Without this additional infrastructure HYVs perform poorly however. 
Unfortunately, this type of agriculture results in a complete change to the biosphere it’s located in and the simplistic corrections made to the crops soil (adding fertilizer in bulk, mass spraying pesticides) favoured by a industrial approach, mass application of simple solutions is efficient with mass production and centralised control systems, can have undesirable consequences on other parts of the biosphere and it relies on the whole system being intact and functioning.

The organic movement on the other hand is the changing of the traditional farming methods practiced for thousands of years to use modern knowledge and understanding to provide an independent system, generally bottom up in structure, using natural and organic processes as opposed to inorganic methods to solve problems within the system.
For example, instead of using nitrogen fertilizer made by the Haber - Bosch process rotate legumes intro the field next growing season or increasing disease resistance by practicing crop rotation to stop build up of soil pathogens. Organic farming is also built more on producing systems to maintain the environment necessary for farming rather than relying on external solutions e.g. providing a habitat for a predatory insect species to keep harmful pests down instead of applying pesticides when a problem occurs.
The main benefits of organic farming is the reduction of environmental damage that has come about by industrial farming and the use of scientific knowledge to build efficient systems using natural occurring processes in a way previously impossible in any reasonable time frame (it took the new guineas until recent times to adopt the silviculture of Casuarina oligodon over the entire island after its cultivation began in 1200). And an understanding of the consequences of their practices in the future to avoid later problems.
The downside of organic farming is the intensive labor requirements needed and that it is only practicable in already fertile regions, e.g. the Western Australian wheat belt must have all nutrients added artificially due to the complete lack of soil fertility of the region. The knowledge base also needs to be quite high since simplistic solutions cannot be used as they are in industrial farming.
The amount of land used can be lower than in industrial farming, especially in the first world, for the same output, which in itself is the most destructive use of farming.

The main consideration when choosing the different agricultural methods is the long-term food security they provide for expected population levels. I.e. slash and burn is fine at low densities but suicidal at high densities.
The main problem regarding the industrial method is that it requires a supporting infrastructure, technology and scientific infrastructure unavailable to the majority of the world without being imported. Also, its best success has been in Eurasia and America which have very different geographic structures (central continental axis is east to west) and thus climates than Africa and South America. While in Africa and New Guinea organic farming methods have had great success in increasing yields.
Organic farming is the most sustainable in the long run for both soil fertility and surrounding ecosystems that support farming in various ways. However, the use of artificial fertilizers and pesticides can be beneficial while avoiding the majority of side effects if used in correct quantities and at the right time, simply dumping it on creates the majority of problems. The scientific method would provide the best solution for finding the right mix of techniques but to solve the problem a change in how farming is done needs to be implemented. All aspects need to be considered instead of the single ones people normally choose e.g. only yields, costs or environmental damage and no single approach should be used to provide redundancy and account for regional variations in infrastructure and climate. Where industrial farming works well needs to be kept since the higher yields will allow continued food supply once the third and second worlds population explosion starts big time, especially with aquaculture due to the majority of fish stocks having crashed or likely to in the near future.

Bibliography:
BBC: Discovery - Can Chemistry Save The World? (Not sure what episode)
Igbozurike, U.M. (1978). "Polyculture and monoculture: contrast and analysis". GeoJournal 2 (5): 443–49.
http://www.cropscience.org.au/icsc2004/symposia/2/1/1128_cookrj.htm
http://www.ifoam.org/growing_organic/definitions/doa/index.html
Wikipedia
Collapse by Jared Diamond
 Germs guns and steel by Jared Diamond
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=1091304
http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works/2006/12/11/borlaug/
http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/ditcted200715_en.pdf

Overshoot




The concept of overshoot is an important one if one wishes to understand the changes that started 300 years ago at the beginning of the industrial revolution and are now entering a turning point that will take us to the next stage of overshoot.
So what is Overshoot?
http://www.paulchefurka.ca/Overshoot.JPGOvershoot is a simple concept that is described easily by visuals. See the graph on the right, that is what overshoot looks like, except that the variable is normally population not consumption, and it has two sides one of an expanding and the other contracting but both are the same process. Overshoot is just when consumption goes above the long-term carrying capacity of the ecosystem and it normally keeps on climbing but at the expense of a diminishing carrying capacity. This is okay until the point that carrying capacity can no longer support the population and in response population drops until it reaches carrying capacity that is now only a fraction of what it was before. The upside may look rosy but from the perspective of an individual in the population but once the decline happens, which is inevitable once overshoot has appeared, the previous growth phase is a hindrance that prolongs the length of time until sustainability is reached and reduces the end carrying capacity.

What happens next depends on the exact nature of the carrying capacity in question, the species place in its ecosystem and the ecosystem itself. In the case of the snowshoe hare and lynx, their populations continually cycle up and down. This is characteristic of simpler ecosystems with a small amount of controls on population. In the case of the snowshoe hare there is only the crude mechanism of predator-prey to keep their populations in check and as the graph shows this is not enough. But the north Atlantic Cod decline (due to overfishing), which has permanently reduced the long-term carrying capacity of fishing in that region, is permanent. This was caused by a shift in the Cods ecosystem, the predator prey part, that has lowered the reproductive ability of Cod. The shift was driven by the low cod numbers which allowed their prey to have a population boom, the prey eat cod eggs and young (this is quite common) and now they stop the Cod population from regaining its former levels. The north Atlantic cod fisheries will now never regain their previous level of consumption without another major ecosystem shift, one which would probably do massive harm somewhere else.  
The difference in these cases is a function of the different complexity levels and its effects in their respective ecosystems. In a complex ecosystem, overshoot is less common since more controls are in place and step in more frequently when one or more fail. But as the north Atlantic cod shows these complexities can also enable shifts in an ecosystem to occur when overshoot does happen, such as when allowed by the use of fossil fuels and advanced technology. The world we live in, as befits an entire planet, is incredibly complex and the shifts that will occur will dramatically change humanities position, power and abilities as the multitude of ecosystems we live in change drastically in response to our decline.

We are at or close to the peak in population or consumption levels and it is unlikely that we can hold of the plunge much longer. The way down will be a long, slow and ragged process until we reach our carrying capacity dictated by the planets biosphere and subject to the changes induced by climate change.   

Overview of Australia’s situation



http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/201003/r528358_2985793.jpgAustralia the continent is a vast desert surrounded by fertile land next to the southern and eastern coasts. I’ve travelled to all the capital cities and done the North-South journey so I have a clue about the broad biomes and areas of Australia. The other important fact is the vast distances between points of interest and the isolation this causes. Perth is the most isolated city in the world and the only reason it I part of Australia is our extensive transport system, which is highly dependent on fossil fuels, and our centralized government. The large distances also characterise the position of Australia to other countries, yes, Indonesia and New Guinea are close but only to the relatively unpopulated and sparse northern coast. This forms Australia’s greatest defence, similar to Russia’s winter (think Napoleons invasion), and any invasion or mass migration will have to first overcome this obstacle.

Australia’s resource situation is fairly good on non-agricultural or biological resources (wood, fish etc) with a large amount of natural gas, coal reserves, iron and rare earths such as samarium, cerium or lanthanum. We have good wind power and lots of sun. this puts a theoretical eco-technic (based on renewable) industrial complex based on windmills and solar furnaces that could be worked into a sustainable economy, hydropower is also available in some spots for either electricty or mechanical energy generation at various scales. Coupling with a sustainable agriculture, possibly based on Permaculture, would allow a fairly stable and relatively high tech society to exist. We also contain a world class education system, that’s main deficit is the current slashing of TAFE (vocational education), and Permaculture was started here, so the necessary human skills could be created and maintained.

Our current governmental system is built around three levels; local, state and federal. Each state is centred on the capital cities of; Brisbane, Sydney, Hobart, Melbourne, Adelaide, Darwin and Perth. Canberra fills more of a federal role as the ACT isn’t very big. Regions have their own centres as well but the main centralisation is around the capital cities. The coastal cities have the best access to transport since most of Australian society is based close to the coast, since the interior is a desert, and as coastal country our dock cities are vital. In the future dividing along city state lines based on the current capital cities would be quite easy and if the situation demands it quite an adaptable choice.

Australia is a vast continent with plenty of mineral, energy and the human skills necessary for an economic restructuring, voluntarily or not. Agricultural resources are adequate and despite the wishes of our government and major agro businesses we won’t be able to become the ‘bread basket of Asia’, this is probably for the best. And our governmental system’s are fairly resilient with the next step down into city states already set up and prepared to go. Our isolation will affect everything and will both help, in the case of invasions or mass migrations, and hinder, in the case of trade. These are the basics of Australia’s situation    

a potential future


A Potential Future
The effects of Catabolic Collapse on Australia and how Australian policies can affect the outcome.
        History has cycles; an important one is the rise and falls of the civilizations such as the Romans, Mayans or Easter Islanders. Today’s Global Industrial Civilisation (Global civilisation) which had its beginnings in the industrial revolution of Europe, spread to the rest of the world during European colonization of Australia, Africa, Asia and the Americas. With the advance of globalization into all aspects of trade, culture and communication, it has reached the zenith of its power. For every rise, there is a fall. History’s wheel is now turning and Australia’s society will revolve with it. The collapse of a complex civilisation, such as ours is not a simple process. Many thinkers have tried to model collapse, defined here as a large drop in resource usage and social complexity, eg. Joseph Tainter proposed a model that said that a society collapses when it becomes too complex and is no longer able to support itself with a diminishing resource base. Jared Diamond’s model for the collapse of a society is based on the accumulating degradation of the society’s environment to such a point that the resource base is exhausted. These are not mutually exclusive models and I believe that John Michael Greer’s theory of Catabolic collapse, which shares many similarities with the models of Jared Diamond and Joseph Tainter will provide a more accurate model of the collapse of the Global Industrial civilization.

An overview of Catabolic Collapse      
       
      Catabolic collapse is a stair-step down process as periods of collapse are interspersed with periods of recovery and stability until a much lower, stable, equilibrium point is reached. the four variables of the catabolic collapse model are: resources, capital, production and waste. Resources are the naturally occuring factors of the enviroment available to a society. they include such diverse things as unused labour, undiscovered scientific advances, metal ores, trees or soil fertility. Capital is all the factors incorporated into a society's flow of energy, matter and information; this includes tools, skilled labour, market systems or technical skills. Waste is all the factors that have been rendered useless by time or use, this includes ; pollution, retired workers, garbled information or excessive bureaucracy and drains capital. Production is the creation of new capital from resources and capital to either maintain or grow levels of capital. Production depends on both resources and capital, which are interchangeable but at diminishing rates. For the global civilisation, the major forms of Waste are global warming and destruction of the environment (during the extraction of resources) while depletion of resources includes loss of soil fertility, rare earth shortages, depletion of fossil fuels and, fitting with Joseph Tainter’s model, the diminishing returns of scientific research. In creating his theory of evolution-one of the most important discoveries of man- Darwin’s major tool was observation. Today, however, major scientific advances rely on expensive equipment like the Large Hadron Collider. This shows that science has begun to run into the law of diminishing returns. Catabolic collapse is calculated to occur when maintenance can no longer keep existing capital levels and in response, capital levels drop in society. Simply put, once production levels drop due to lack of resources, capital levels drop also reducing production levels until responses by the affected society solve the short-term crisis. The dividing of the Roman Empire into the Eastern and Western Roman Empires in CE 395 is a good example of this collapse and response model. The Eastern half of the empire produced most of the wealth but had only 1/3 of the border of the whole Roman Empire. Splitting allowed the Eastern Empire to stabilize; however, the collapse continued, creating a pattern of crises punctuated by periods of stability and recovery because the underlining problem of unsustainability was not resolved. 

     Barring an unpredictable event the Global civilisation will go through catabolic collapse as a result of the exhaustion of vital non-renewable resources e.g. oil, coal, gas etc and the overusage of renewable resources such as fish stocks (North atlantic cod), forests, soil fertility and others

How will catabolic collapse affect Australia?

        Australia is not a single entity, but is made up of various states and territories who themselves are made up of many cities, towns and communities. Australia is not isolated; it is a part of the global civilisation. The Global Civilisation is not a coherent entity, but a collection of highly complex systems, ideologies and at least four core cultures (European, American, Chinese and Indian) that are themselves made up of complex systems and factors. In the Global Civilisation the flow of energy, matter and information is on a global scale, e.g. a pipeline moves oil across continents according to market demand.

       Australia is dependent on the global system for both resources and capital. Catabolic collapse in other areas of the world will affect Australia. When Australia suffers catabolic collapse other countries that are dependent on us for resources suffer, sending waves of damage through the global system that can rebound back on us. Due to the interlinkedness of global society only a small disruption is necessary to start a positive feedback loop that resonates throughout the global civilisation leaving only wreckage in its wake until a response by the global system restore equilibrium.

     One of the most important commodities we derive from the Global civilisation is crude oil, which we then refine into petroleum, and various products. Most of our transport infrastructure is directly dependent on oil and so is the growing, processing and transport of food. Our ability to access electricity is also dependent on oil supplies, since coal-mining equipment is normally oil driven. A prime target for collapse is the global oil markets, which could easily be jeopardised by instability in the Middle East, say by an American war with Iran, or the eventual decline in availability, predicted by the theory of peak oil. Oil is non-renewable so a decline in availability is a certainty. Our access to oil would drop quite rapidly if either scenario occurred. If unprepared, the effects would leave us noticeably poorer than before the collapse, even if we have adapted to a shortage of oil.

     However, Australia also supplies commodities, such as food and minerals, to the rest of the World, so problems here can be magnified. Let us say due to global warming or loss of soil fertility our agriculture’s productivity fell. While it is unlikely that we would starve, we would lose the resources (such as oil) and capital we exchange the food we grow. Currently we export wheat to many countries. If the world supply of wheat were disrupted as the result of our lost agricultural productivity, this would lead to social unrest in some of these countries, some of whom produce oil. This would then cycle back to cause further problems for Australia.

    These are only two components of the many forms collapse could take, the scenario that happen will be far more complex and mixed with other factors, Joseph Tainters diminishing returns of social complexity will almost certainly appear, but the basic shape and effects can be seen. People and nations, such as Australia, are not passive actors in the world, though it can feel like they are passive actors, who are at the mercy of History and Nature’s power but active players who have their own powers, will and desires. While we have to work within the constraints of nature, we have to ability to plan and act for the future.

What can be done to minimise the effects of catabolic collapse?
 
     One of the most powerful tools available to governments is policy. Before we consider what policies would benefit Australia an important point must be stressed, Collapse is a reduction in resources availability and our collapse due to lowered resource levels is inevitable. What matters is how the collapse affects our society. The spectrum of policies that can help Australia prepare for catabolic collapse and allow it to thrive during the collapse include; food policy, trade, taxation, industry, subsidies and energy. As such the most useful polices are those that reduce energy and material usage
  • Primarily energy conservation.
  • Decreasing reliance on oil in transport and food production.
  • Shift to a cradle-to-cradle manufacturing system.
  •  Stabilising population levels.

    Changing the context in which everything else functions will also aid the situation immeasurably. An example is taxation. As the economist, Herman Daly (CASSE) said ‘we want to tax what we don’t want or wish to minimise’, the idea behind the Mining and Carbon tax is a good example of this approach. We want to minimise pollution and resource extraction, but this policy needs to be expanded to include more tariffs and trade barriers to compensate for the increased price of resources and manufacturing while still achieving the goals of self-sufficiency. This approach, coupled with a reduction in income tax among the lower income earners, increased grants to help business and industry adapt to the changes caused by this policy, would help Australia prepare for catabolic collapse. Added benefits would be increased wealth equality and increased independence from the global political and economic system.

    As the Global Financial Crisis shows, the financial system needs to be reformed. This vital system has been allowed to grow brittle and too pervasive in our civilisation. Various reforms have been expounded on by Centre for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy (CASSE) and include;
  • A gradual increase to 100% in the reserve requirement of banks to increase stability.
  • Definancialization of core systems such as basic infrastructure and agriculture to reduce the likelihood of systematic shock.
  • Change our financial system from a growth dependent to a steady state model.
  • Implement mechanisms to reduce build up of wealth in the richest portion of Australian society since this takes resources away from the poorer sections.

     If the constraints of catabolic collapse are acknowledged then the challenges catabolic collapse poses are not insurmountable. Today we have a clear sense of history and its cycles and if we decide to listen to history, it will tell us what to expect. The knowledge and scientific advances we have made could allow us to successfully retreat from unsustainability to sustainability without going through major disruptions providing the collective will allow society to use these advances. We could then allow the intellectual and cultural legacy of the last 300 years to survive the coming Dark Age and enrich the societies that will emerge from the wreckage of the collapse of the Global civilisation. As history has shown, the death of a civilisation is also the birth of new one, which shall begin the cycles again. Australians should aim to be survivors of the current cycle and use the changes that will occur to evolve our society instead of revolutionising it. Evolution is a less destructive process and takes into account that human societies are akin to organic entities, they grow and evolve rather than being built and designed and all we can do is direct it and steer it down certain paths.