Premises of One Vision of PC Industry

From CFI

These are some of the premises on which the "One Vision" of P(ost)C(arbon) industry is based.

- The usual sustainability concerns: our present level of industrialization and fossil

  energy consumption is in danger of killing us and many of our fellow life-forms, 
  so major changes are in order, and the sooner the better.

- It seems likely that as the system tries to adapt to Peak Oil we will all become

   poorer one way or the other (hyper-inflation, no jobs, etc.  This is probably 
   true even most of the currently rich, although depending on what they're invested 
   in their poverty may rather relative.)  We have more options now to make changes, 
   buy tools and books, stock up on materials, etc. than we will later when we may 
   need them more urgently.  A word to the wise.

- We need to look beyond the current hot-button issues of food, water, and energy.

   Those basics are clearly of paramount importance, but others are hard at work 
   on these areas and, not to minimize the scale of the problems, to a considerable 
   extent the answers are somewhat obvious.  Many more of us will have to be involved 
   in a much more muscle-powered kind of agriculture, even if it means digging 
   up the lawn to put in a garden.  We'll simply have live with much less energy and 
   transportation.

- Although there is a lot to be said for a late mesolithic / early neolithic, hunter/

  gatherer lifestyle (healthy, high degree of individual freedom, considerable 
  free time and cultural potential), there are also considerable drawbacks:
    -- It is probably only practical for a population density (historically) of 5-10% of 
       what we have now in the USA, even less in more crowded parts of the 
       world, and, from a practical standpoint even that . . . 
    -- . . . depends on a relatively unspoiled natural environment (e.g., it helps if 
       there are some fish left to catch), which could take centuries to reestablish.
    -- We are spoiled on the fruits of civilization, and while much of the material 
       excesses are grossly unsustainable (we'll obviously be forced to drive autos 
       MUCH less than we do now ; ), still there are aspects of our social, cultural, 
       and scientific achievements which would be considerably less costly to 
       maintain, but which would clearly be more than could be retained (much 
       less pushed forward) in a strictly oral culture.  In particular we (many of us, 
       that is) still have an attachment to some kind of idea of progress of our 
       species, or of a destiny, which may not be manifest, but which may 
       transcend any particular civilization or age, and which still seems to need 
       to be played out.

- We may have waited too long to start the shift to sustainability and be destined

  to suffer massive depopulation and a dark age, but, for the sake of the rest of 
  this discussion, it is assumed that the following ideas are still possible. 

- The technology and industries of the period before roughly the mid-19th century

  (when the original fossil fuel, coal, began to be exploited on a large scale) were 
  reasonably sustainable, and can serve as a baseline for our planning.  Think 
  of (a perhaps less elitist version of) Colonial Williamsburg.

- In general human agricultural and land- and resource-management practices have

  had serious problems (potentially, as a threat to humanity, comparable to or more 
  serious than petroleum depletion), particularly in terms of deforestation and 
  soil erosion, and we now know quite a bit about how to do better, if we have 
  the collective will to do so.  This is the backdrop, however, rather than the 
  immediate concern of this discussion.

- We have learned quite a bit about science and technology since 1850, much of

   which may be of value and supportable into the future.  This goes not only for 
   relatively hi-tech things, e.g., electronic (or at least electrical) communications, 
   but also for various later (mostly light) industries like textile mills, sewing 
   machines, and bicycles.

- Regional trade will continue on some level, based at a minimum on horse drawn

   wagons and river boats, and possibly even up to a continental scale based on 
   sustainably-powered railroads.  This may be quite relevant to a graceful, yet 
   sustainable local lifestyle, for a number of reasons.  For example not every 
   village will be able to support, for example, a bicycle factory (as opposed
   to a repair shop), especially when production of all the required parts and 
   components (tubing, bearings, chains, tires) are considered.
      Even industries which are possible on a local basis, such as a blacksmith 
   hand forging basic agricultural tools, can be accomplished more efficiently 
   in larger, more automated factories, saving energy as well as labor.  
   Still, given the uncertainities of the transition to a post-carbon economy, local 
   communities and regions would do well to develop the basic skills and 
   infrastructure as far as possible.  

- World trade will probably continue at some level, perhaps based on wind-powered

   shipping.  All of the significant sources of caffein are tropical, so, if at 
   all possible there will probably continue to be limited trade in commodities like 
   tea and coffee.  Other tropical commodities which represent highly efficient 
   sources of materials in particular niches, such as rubber and cane sugar, may 
   continue to be viable trade items.  It seems unlikely, however, that long-distance 
   trade can be counted on to be very relevant to the major goals of sustainability
   and local survival, at least until a new economy is well established.