Dear L2 Indeed I do not see what I do not see. Moreover, I see that no one
else sees the correct answer but me, which looks damn suspicious.
However I am encouraged by the fact that no one else seems to agree with
me and most everyone continues to add incomplete or incorrect answers
to the list of unnecessary conclusions; therefore I may be right after
all. You can see why I worry about democracy although I continue to
support it. Just imagine what education could do if it were free of
propaganda.
But,
your elegant prose sounds more like religion than does my simple
straight-forward engineering solution. We have just experienced a
little of the type of grid collapse that will wipe out civilization
although in spite of a much different category of preparation. We will
understand in what way our community is unsustainable when the energy
stops flowing. Someone show me in what way I have not characterized
sustainability correctly. By the way, many of the clauses in my current
definition of ERoEI* are due to people finding fault with what I had
written previously. That's the kind of criticism I can really use.
Don't just say something will go wrong; tell me what it is.
I repeat the three aspects of the sustainable steady state: energy, energy, and energy.
L2
The
various descriptions of social relations embedded in socialism,
syndicalism, communism, and dematerialism do not set bounds upon
society's relation to nature. But, that is what makes them amenable to
sustainability. They can accommodate any sort of economy consistent
with their tenets. Tell us more and explain the details of your
profound observation.
No comments :
Post a Comment