Wither Human Population?

(This is a repost of an original essay here.)

Tue, 02/09/2010 - 06:15 — Greyzone

From the February 6, 2010 discussion at TAE, people were asking about timelines and population targets. This post is an attempt to answer that question in slightly more detail. An in-depth look at this topic could cover multiple volumes.

Ecologically, when you see an overshoot situation, the lower end of dieoff tends to be over 70% of total population. But homo sapiens is in extreme overshoot. Where we are on the curve is like a test tube full of yeast right before the crash. Extreme overshoots very typically see dieoffs in the range of 90%-99%.

Because of weapon systems, resource scarcity, arable land issues, water issues, etc., I expect the world in aggregate will experience something close to a 96% dieoff. That would leave about 300 million living worldwide, which is still pretty far over the average population of homo sapiens for most of out 200,000 years of history. Prior to agriculture global hunter-gatherer population was probably between 10-20 million.

I expect this dieoff to occur in steps over the next 100 to 120 years. If the Greater Depression persists as long as a decade, we may finally see human population stabilize and then begin to drop as early as 2020. If the Greater Depression ends sooner, we may still see total population push towards the 8 billion mark by 2040 and then begin its turn.

But population does not exist in a vacuum. This population was made possible by industrial civilization, which itself was made possible by massive resource extraction and destruction of biosphere all around the world. As infrastructure becomes too expensive to maintain, population that is dependent on that infrastructure is likely to begin dieing off.

At TAE Zander asked specifically about Scotland. Scotland historically had a population under 1 million for centuries because that is all that the land there could sustain. Sustaining 5 million is going to be hard. On the plus side, rising rates of infant mortality plus deaths of older people over the next 40 years is likely to reduce Scotland's population to under 3 million and perhaps under 2.5, which means the subsequent downturn to 1 million over the following 80-90 years should not be nearly so harsh as in the rest of the world.

In the US, for example, population is likely to continue rising even in the face of the Greater Depression, just more slowly than before. Yet the US is far more dependent on its technological systems than, say, Mexico. A large part of the US west of the Mississippi is only habitable at current densities due to a multitude of technologically based water systems. Los Angeles, for example, housed only a few thousand residents in a harsh desert landscape prior to redirecting water flows from the mountains to LA. When the systems supporting those water flows begin to fail, place like Los Angeles will become deathtraps for millions.

In fact, early migration in the US during the infrastructure collapse phase is likely to be towards the Great Lakes, one of the largest collections of freshwater in the world. Ironically, that migration is likely to result in the ecological death of those same lakes, ultimately killing even more people.

Barring climate change, some parts of the US west of the Mississippi should be able to sustain agricultural communities but population densities in those places is also still too high for the current population. Western Washington and Oregon could do better than much of the rest of the western US, but the same reasons that give those areas an advantage are likely to attract excess population, resulting in worse overshoot locally. Eastern Texas and Arkansas are not bad but in such close proximity to high population urban centers that they are likely to be destroyed as a side effect of the collapse of those same urban centers.

Regarding Africa, I expect Africa will see massive dieoff as well. Much of Africa's population density is enabled by industrial civilization, even if it's not as nice as North America or Europe. Hominid hunter-gatherer populations in central Africa over the last few million years have never amounted to more than a few million at the very best and mostly in the few hundred thousand typically. Africa's population may not fall quite that far, but it will make a good run at it.

The ecological disaster around you is an artifact of "modern" capitalist, growth-oriented, debt-centric civilization. I place that word "modern" in quotes because I tend to favor free markets myself, but on a far more local level and without resorting to debt based infinite growth systems. Historically humans have avoided debt based systems and instead financed any growth when needed from savings. And growth was not always the primary goal either.

But now we come to the crossroads where debt-based civilization can no longer sustain itself. And in reaching this crossroads, we find that not only is the financial system going down, but the effects from the financial system are going to take down large segments of the biosphere with it.

The future for human survivors is going to largely be a scavenger's future, possibly for several centuries. We will lack the infrastructure to deploy technologies to recover the last of the oil, underneath 15,000 feet of water and another 10,000-20,000 feet of undersea salt dome. Instead, survivors will be forced to get along on what they can create within their local communities and much of that will be driven by what can successfully be scavenged from the wreckage of industrial civilization.

The most typical dieoff I've seen given population curves that look as ridiculous as our own is in the 98-99% range. In choosing a 96% dieoff I admit to holding some small hope that a few humans will manage to adapt to changing circumstances faster than expected. The time frame is the same as for any dieoff within a population that is in extreme overshoot, from 1 to 4 generations total.

To put this in context, during WWII, when global population was under 2 billion and we killed over 200 million human beings, global population still rose. Now think about what a shrinking population means and the kind of world that means around you. Any single one of you who believes that you have no duty to defend your own lives by whatever means possible may as well just line up to be slaughtered when it begins. There will be no government to protect you. You will find yourselves once again in the same situation that mankind has been in for most of its entire existence - dependent on self, family, and tribe for survival. And nothing you can do is going to stop this from happening to you, your children, and/or your grandchildren.

* Peak Oil and the IEA (What they don’t want you to know…)

Must read:
“We are facing a serious threat”

Dr. Fatih Birol, Chief-Economist of the International Energy Agency (the agency which advices OECD countries on oil, including the US) and “one of the most powerful men on earth” according to the British newspaper, The Guardian[1] has lately attracted extensive media attention.

Indeed, in a recent interview to the British newspaper, The Independent[2], Dr. Birol was reported of saying that the world was heading for a catastrophic energy crunch that could cripple a global economic recovery.

Full article:
http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/281185-lionel-badal/26307-peak-oil-and-the-iea-what-they-dont-want-you-to-know

We debt serfs must plan - but what about the kings?

A good friend of mine - and the only close friend who is a fellow prepper , sent me this email today. It's short and sweet and to the point:

So the serfs will plan. But so will the kings. I have an idea that somehow at the end of this exponent function, there must be a plan for the kings to take everything from the serfs.

Maybe there is a plan from the kings and maybe it started a long time ago.

For example, perhaps home equity loans are part of this plan: Extract ownership which makes it easier to take everything. I think you can still get plastic that takes equity from your home in trade for coffee and a scone at Starbucks. 401K? Sure. Your money in a bank is guaranteed. Having liquid assets gives you a bit more power. Put it in the 401K. Then you can jostle the money out by pouring from the stock cup to the bond cup until the 401K "owner" thinks it all spilled onto the floor.

The other option would be to create an enormous calamity in order to drive people out of their homes and away from their other assets. Maybe that was on the table too. But since the kings aren't as into brutality out in the open as they used to be, they chose financial instruments of extraction.

Of course calamity is still an option if/when too many people suspect they've been had. In this scenario, you make serfs blame serfs for the result which leaves no serf with anything. This leg of the operation depends on years of chipping away at a sense of unity. You need the serfs not seeing each other as humans but as labels. Liberals hate conservatives. Conservatives hate liberals. Protesters are never legitimate whether it's a bunch of gun nuts protesting illegal immigration or a bunch of stinky hippies demanding peace. Any strong communities outside of government corporation are watched closely and in some cases dispatched (Waco). When all is said and done and people have nothing, serfs will blame each other and will not join together to go after the kings.

Then we start to pick up the pieces but only after enough people are dead (insurrection, famine, and wars) and enough assets have been freed up to be resold. Prosperity returns as the hamster wheels start turning again and we race off to the next calamity while convincing ourselves another like the last one will never again be possible.

FKN news - we're f*&*$d!

I hope this video doesn't offend anybody. It's extreme, entertaining at times, and, well.. disturbing!

Counterpoint to Mad Max type doom

Here is an excerpt from an article on the ArchDruid blog, entitled "No Different This time." Click first paragraph to go to full article.

This writer, John Michael Greer, is quite good and worth reading. He's written a book entitled, "The Long Descent: A User's Guide to the End of the Industrial Age" (New Society, 2008)

I realize this kind of writing, which is a bit abstract and philosophical, is not completely pertinent to prepping. However, Greer doesn't believe that the "Mad Max" type scenarios painted by the Survival Acres writer are very likely. He believes that a decline and contraction is underway, but that we will adapt and form new types of social and economic arrangements, with few big "die-offs."

Who is right? Time will tell. Let's discuss it below. And then the next articles will be more practical, I promise.


My argument, basically, is that the narrative of total collapse is another example of the same kind. Since the late 19th century, when religious apocalyptic began to lose its grip on the Western imagination, a narrative as stereotyped and dysfunctional as the narrative that drives speculative bubbles has circulated in the industrial world. That narrative claims that the world faces collapse of a historically unprecedented kind: sudden, complete, and final. Like the bubble narrative, the collapse narrative brings its own rhetoric with it, and applies that rhetoric to currently favored catastrophes – peak oil, global warming, the Y2K crisis, nuclear war, race conflict, every major comet of the last century and a half, you name it – in the same way that the bubble narrative applies its rhetoric to the asset class du jour. Like the bubble narrative, in turn, the collapse narrative always insists that the failures of the past don’t matter, because it’s different this time.

The narrative of collapse shares another feature with the bubble narrative: it produces consistently inaccurate predictions about the future. Again, people have been predicting collapse in the terms of the narrative for around a century and a half, using arguments identical in form to the ones now being used to justify the same predictions today, and the results have not exactly been good. This isn’t simply a function of the future’s obscurity, for other approaches – based on other, more nuanced narratives – have yielded better results. Arnold Toynbee and Oswald Spengler both made predictions about the cultural evolution of the modern West, for example, that have proved quite prescient. For that matter, the central argument of The Limits to Growth – that unlimited economic expansion would bring industrial civilization up against hard planetary limits in the first half of the 21st century, leading to an age of crisis and contraction – seems far more plausible now than it did when first published.

This reasoning undergirds my suggestion that it’s crucial to recognize the collapse narrative for what it is, and set it aside as a guide to the future, just as anyone hoping to make sense of economics in the real world would be well advised to start by setting aside the bubble narrative. Insisting that it’s different this time, and a way of thinking about collapse that has consistently produced false predictions for a century and a half is going to turn out accurate this once, just doesn’t seem plausible to me.

I suspect Dmitry Orlov is right that America is facing a collapse along the same lines as the Russian experience. If that happens, though, it’s just as likely that twenty years on, something like the rest of the Russian experience will have replicated itself as well, and an approximation of today’s United States will have undergone some degree of recovery from collapse. Equally, other regions of the world will likely be experiencing their own trajectories through the twilight of the petroleum age, and some of those trajectories will include sudden downward jolts of varying severity. Over the long term, as I’ve suggested, all those trajectories will trace out a broad pattern of decline, but history shows that the decline of a civilization is a complex thing, and there’s no reason to think that it will be different this time.

Prepping and paranoia, Big Brother and collapse

This little essay is going to discuss a subject that has slowly started to concern me more as the collapse intensifies (I'm not claiming that all-out collapse and Mad Max is imminent, just that things are progressing).

Some of the bloggers and preppers out there are extremely paranoid about what is coming. A great example is the guy who runs and blogs at www.survivalacres.com . Here's a link to a sample essay of his (click on long excerpt below):

Survival is personal warfare, not in the sense of ‘attack and destroy’, but in the sense that all the rules are thrown out. All of them. We saw this with 500 law enforcement officers quitting during the Katrina disaster. It just didn’t matter anymore when their world was totally destroyed. We saw looters, assassinations, rapes, murders and probably much more. And that was in a regional disaster, actually fairly localized compared to what could occur on a global scale now.

Loyalties got thrown out with the dirty flood waters and people reverted to self-preservation mode very quickly. Of course, not everyone did (or will), but many did, bearing in mind that they all expected rescue. What about when there is no more rescue? No more larger society to come tooling along and fix the problems? This is when things will really reveal themselves, the will to live, struggle, survive and go on will be the daily challenge, hour by hour, minute by minute.

It’s when the food runs out (or runs low) that people will start getting really afraid (and really wierd). Food is comfort, safety and security. Food is life itself, few really seem to consider it’s critical importance or fragile nature. Civilizations and tribes throughout history have risen and fallen according to the food supply (duh!). I emphasize this because that is the very issue at risk. Humans can live without power, and humans can even cope with climate change (to an extent), but 6.8 billion humans cannot live without food that was raised with cheap power, cheap petroleum, vast distribution systems and predictable climates. When these go away, and they will, cheap energy, vast crop lands, affordable transportation, distribution systems and stocked shelves disappear, desperation will set in. And then violence will set in, with a vengeance.

I thought a fairly long excerpt was warranted, and I suggest that you read the whole thing, and check out some of his other essays.

This blogger really thinks that it is very dangerous, perhaps suicidal, to stick your neck out and be a public "prepper," or try to get involved in politics, etc. He did it, obviously, but he has taken steps to remain anonymous.

According to this line of reasoning, when collapse sets in, the government, or even local gangs and bad guys, will seek out preppers to take their stores, or to prevent them from forming any kind of coherent opposition to the fascist-type government that is coming.

Other thinkers, like the wonderfully witty Dmitri Orlov, do not think that there is really any great danger in standing up and blogging, writing, and getting involved in your local community in a political way. There will be dangers and challenges, but it will be caused mainly by human stupidity and the economic and social challenges posed by a collapsing economy and political system. I recommend the following link for a look into Dmitri Orlov's thinking:

http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dtxqwqr_19gjjvp8

But I highly recommend his other essays, and his book, Reinventing Collapse.

So... what is the truth here? Do preppers have much to fear from our increasingly (it's true) Orwellian government, with its thought-police and computerized spying systems? Are we at risk of being targeted?

In a fast collapse, what is the best way to avoid becoming the victims of local gangs or warlords? If the collapse is slow, how do we avoid becoming the victims of government confiscation? Did you know that the government has, in the distant past, outlawed "hoarding," and still has the power to do so?

At the very least, I believe it is prudent to hide the extent of your preparations from neighbors, and all but the most trustworthy friends. If a friend is not a prepper, he should not know about your preps. It's time to start blending in.

But how paranoid should we really be?

Peak oil - what do we do now?

by Robert Hirsch

The history of world peak oil production has been truly remarkable. Modern day concerns were rekindled in 1998 when Campbell and Laherrere published their peak oil thinking in Scientific American. Not surprisingly, they were largely ignored. Some in the establishment took the time to utter “Bah-humbug,” but a few independent souls decided to seriously consider the problem.

ASPO was formed soon thereafter and began annual meetings, fostering communication and helping to create increasing interest in the subject. Peak oil concernists began to form a community and momentum increased. Counter arguments buttressing the no-problem point of view came from OPEC, CERA, EIA, IEA, and some of the major oil companies. The denier proclamations grew in intensity, indicating that the serious consideration of peak oil was beginning to trouble parts of the establishment. Various new studies supporting the peak oil threat emanated from independent individuals and groups. Forecasts for the onset of peak oil went from being up to 20 years into the future, to roughly 15 years and then to less. The establishment continued to argue that the problem was so distant that people need not worry.

There were a number of significant milestones along the way - one of special note being Matt Simmons’ book, Twilight in the Desert. As time went on, IEA and some of the major oil companies began to join the list of those who were openly concerned. Momentum grew, influenced in large part by the remarkable increase in oil prices.

In mid-2008 the economic crisis struck. As world economies slowed, oil demand declined. To the surprise of almost everyone, oil prices dropped from near $150 per barrel to less than $40. With gasoline prices in the U.S. retreating to what was considered generally tolerable levels and economic threats avalanching, it’s no wonder that peak oil slid to the back burner of public consciousness.

The world is now in a period of epic economic chaos. People are disoriented and unsure of what it will take to restore their economies. Many serious economists, financiers, and executives are loath to even forecast when an economic recovery might begin. It’s easier for me now to understand how my parents and grandparents must have felt during the 1930s.

But the peak oil problem has not gone away. World liquid fuels production reached a plateau in mid-2004 and has fluctuated within a relatively narrow range in spite of mighty efforts to increase world production. In mid-2008, benefitting from the work of Campbell, Laherrere, Skrebowski, Aleklett, Simmons, Robelius, Gilbert, Bentley, Al Husseini, Deffeyes, Koppelaar, Birol, and others, I came to believe that world liquids production might stay on the existing plateau for the next 2-5 years and then go into a 3-5% per year decline

Recently, OPEC cut back oil production in an attempt to stem the oil price decline. How much might their cutbacks delay the onset of world liquid fuels production decline? Assuming the plateau model and five years to the onset of decline, each million barrels per day of oil production withholding buys roughly three weeks delay, so a steady, continuing reduction of say four million barrels per day over five years might result in a delay in the onset of world oil production decline by maybe three months. That’s not very much.

We’ve now in a period of major human disorientation, but geology does not become disoriented on the human timescale. The impending peak oil problem may now be generally absent from the media and the public consciousness, but it has not gone away. We would do well to continue meaningful studies of peak oil production and mitigation during this period of peak oil quiet. More studies of practical physical and administrative mitigation options are needed. Totally remaking our cities and transportation systems are wonderful goals but will require an extremely long time. In the meantime, we have relatively little in-depth thinking about what we can do when the will-to-act suddenly appears. We need better analyses on such options as rationing (how to do it), carpooling (how to force and police it), telecommuting (how to make it happen), rapidly switching to more fuel efficient vehicles during a deepening recession, rapidly implementing EOR, CTL, shale oil, etc (business-as-usual won’t do), etc. Between now and the wakeup, we can develop carefully thought-out mitigation options for when people are ready to begin to seriously mitigate peak oil. Working on practical solutions represents a high calling.


Robert L. Hirsch is Senior Energy Advisor at MISI. Previously he was Assistant Administrator of U.S. ERDA; EPRI VP; ARCO VP; and Chairman of the Board on Energy and Environmental Systems at the National Academies. He was lead author of “Peaking of World Oil Production: Impacts, Mitigation and Risk Management” (Feb 2005).

Why can't we believe in Doom?

It's kind of funny - even as a so-called "Doomer" (at least according to my wife), even I can't really believe in the reality of what is happening.

My reason tells me we are going downhill fast, but my emotions tell me that everything will be just fine.

Is it just human nature to not be able to fully comprehend reality until it is too late? I don't think so. We modern humans are all here because our ancestors were very good at predicting the future and adapting. They had to be paranoid and watchful to survive in a world of enemies and dangers, without the benefit of a police force or a central government.

Why, then, are most of our fellow citizens what some preppers and survivalists refer to contemptuously as "sheeple"?

I would wager that most Western World citizens have been brainwashed by the ideology of Progress. The Enlightenment gave birth to the idea that using reason and science, humanity would be able to take control of its own fate, a very different view of history than existed in the Ancient world, where history and fate were seen as cyclical. The idea of the Wheel of Fortune of the goddess Fortuna are examples of that world view.

Descartes and his ilk thought that by reducing the material world to atoms and equations, we could predict and control it. Well, it's worked out pretty good for a long run. The element left out by Descartes and the Enlightenment optimists, though, was the limited nature of the physical world. The Earth has limited resources. Darwin explained that all species tend to overpopulate to the point where there is a crash in the population. The crash tends to overshoot in the other direction, due to a depleted environment.

Peak Oil is a reality, and despite the currently low gas prices, the reality of Peak Oil is a rabid bitch that's going to soon bite humanity in the ass. Another reason to prep. Those who are prepared do not guarantee their survival, but they certainly increase their chances.

City and Country Partnerships

A lot of preppers either already live in the country, or they wish to escape there. I understand that - if necessary, I will relocate my family to the family spread up north.

Unless things become quite degenerate, however, cities are going to remain centers of commerce and sources of resources. Just think of how many junkyards and surplus stuff is lying around in the city. I was just in a store named Ax Man on University Avenue in St. Paul yesterday. I hadn't been there in years, and it was still a great place to go to find... well, just about anything. Old surplus electric motors, electronics parts, storage cases... even a Swedish stomach pump, whatever that is.

Those of you living in the countryside - do you REALLY think you will be able to get along without any help from the city? What if something in your country dwelling wears out? What if you need a solar cell, or you need your generator fixed?

The fact is that cities came about in human history, because when humans live together in a concentrated population center, synergy is possible. Synergy is the idea that the whole is more than the sum of its parts. Change encounters and ideas discussed at the coffee shop or bar can turn into life-saving ideas or inventions. Something about just hanging out with other people and talking leads to a higher level of commerce and invention.

Thus, even in a TEOTWAWKI scenario, we might expect human commerce and markets to survive in some form, even if it requires barter or a new currency.

With that in mind, why not start to form the commercial alliances and marketplaces of the future NOW? Why not form a network of like-minded people in the city and the country who can trade with each other, even if it involves travel by horseback, canoe, or bicycle?

If you are at all interested in discussing this idea, or forming a future trade relationship with someone in Minneapolis, just leave a comment.

The time to start talking about these ideas is now, because our government seems hell-bent on destroying our currency and therefore the economy. We need to reinvent the meaning of "economy" now.

Prep now, save later.

Optimism and "hope" may be an important part of prepping.

I say this, because as someone who thinks the system as it is has entered the terminal stage of systemic collapse, I often have gloomy thoughts. How will I support my family? Will there be civil unrest in my city? What about the danger of disease, or government repression?

If you start on a chain of collapse reasoning, you can easily find yourself in a Mad Max world. I doubt it will come to that. Minnesota Nice may take a hit, but I do believe that a good portion of society will find ways to adapt and cooperate.

However, the portion that does not adapt is certainly a worry. Crime is a problem in Minneapolis in the best of times. I am sure it is set to skyrocket. That means securing your home - metal bars should cover glass doors, basement windows should be secured with something more solid than the old-fashioned paned windows. An alarm system is not unwarranted.

Getting too gloomy, however, is bad for your state of preparedness. It can lead to a lack of energy, hopelessness, or even depression. That is certainly not going to help you get prepared.

If you have a religion, start going to church again. Join a community group. Start a new neighborhood group on preparedness. (With that in mind, if anyone living in South Minneapolis would like to start such a group, place a comment under this posting with your email address).

Furthermore, even after a systemic collapse, there will still be an economy of sorts, even if it uses the barter system or some kind of alternative currency. The barter system has recently seen a resurgence in Russia, due to the economic troubles there. Thus, it is important to learn skills that will be valuable in the coming economic environment. Skills and products that people need, as opposed to just want (luxuries), will be in high demand. The fact that the local governments will be far too overwhelmed by budget woes means that you will be able to get away with working as an unlicensed tradesman. Just learn the skill, and forget about the government's roadblocks.

However bad it gets, have faith in the good half of humanity's nature, while being vigilant to avoid being victimized by the evil half that is sure to manifest itself as times get tough.

Death Rattle of our current economic order

First, thanks for inviting me to join this endeavor, Shy Wolf.

My first entry will explain why we must start preparing now for what's to come.

Most people, my in-laws and many friends and family included, believe that Obama's fiscal "stimulus" plan will save us.

They think that a crisis caused by too much debt and credit can be solved by moving the bad debts onto the public's balance sheet (the bailouts), along with a jolt of government spending (the stimulus).

That's like trying to cure an alcoholic by giving him more booze. The government boondoggles will risk making the US government insolvent, and at the very least, put a crushing tax burden and inflationary environment onto our children's shoulders. A good web site with primers on this mess can be found here:
http://theautomaticearth.blogspot.com/

I also recommend: http://ashizashiz.blogspot.com/

The nail in the coffin is the proven fact that the world's oil output has peaked. That does NOT mean we are out of oil... Peak Oil theorists have never made that claim. There will always be more oil in the ground. The important question, though, is at what point the remaining oil becomes too difficult or energy-intensive to extract. There is a concept called ROEI, return on energy investment. If it takes more energy to drill, pump, extract and refine the oil than you get out of it, then it doesn't make economic sense to produce it. We've hit the point where energy production at most of the biggest, oldest oil fields around the world (Saudi Arabia, Mexico, etc.) has started to decline at startling rates.

Once the economy starts its pseudo-recovery due to the stimulus program, oil prices will shoot through the roof, snapping the American consumer in the ass like a wet gym towel.

The DEATH RATTLE of our economic system has come. In one last, futile effort that costs trillions of dollars, the powers that be are going to make the system breathe one last horrid shuddering breath, before it all comes crashing down.

Please see Dmitri Orlov's site for details on what to expect:
http://cluborlov.blogspot.com/

The conclusion: it's getting close to too late to start a serious prep (maybe). Or maybe we have another year or two as the stimulus package jolts the terminally ill economy one last time.

Start prepping now.

For those interested, I am started a new blog to document the the "death rattle" - maybe it's wasted effort, but at the least, I will post links to the latest data and best articles I can find on the subject. My new blog is here:
http://economicdeathrattle.blogspot.com

On that subject, everyone in my company just got an email saying that one of our biggest suppliers is going out of business suddenly, today, with 3 hours notice to their employees.