The Limits to Growth is a report describing the findings of a computer model, created by a group of scientists led by MIT graduate students, which simulated the possible outcomes of exponential growth with a finite supply of resources. Authors based their research on 5 variables: population, food production, industrialization, pollution and consumption of nonrenewable resources. These variables were following an exponential growth while the technology, which could mitigate the aforementioned risks, grew only linearly.
 |
| Source: https://www.thenation.com/article/limits-growth-book-launched-movement/ (As of 14/01/2018) |
The conclusions the researchers came to were as follows:
- "Given business as usual (BAU), i.e., no changes to historical growth trends, the limits to growth on earth would become evident by 2072, leading to "sudden and uncontrollable decline in both population and industrial capacity.""
- "Growth trends existing in 1972 could be altered so that sustainable ecological and economic stability could be achieved."
- "The sooner the world's people start striving for the second outcome above, the better the chance of achieving it."
As soon as the report was published, it received a lot of negative criticism from every possible source. Attacks were carried from both left and right, even the Catholic church got involved by mocking the idea that overpopulation could be a problem. However, most of the criticism came from entrepreneurs and economists, to whom the given conclusions emerged as threat to their way of life. While some of the criticisms were valid, most of them were poorly constructed and their focus was put on unrelated matters. The report was positively acclaimed by some groups, but I believe that the most accurate critic was time itself.
While many things have changed in the past 46 years, one thing remained constant. We haven't changed the way we live. During this period humanity became more aware of the struggles ahead, we started to invest in renewable energy, The Limits To Growth: The 30-Year Update was released and the Internet was born. Still, we've been increasing the extraction of oil, population is still growing at rates that are unmanageable and it seems like no one has the will or power to stop it. When we compare the scenario of LTG with the real-world data we can clearly see the similarities. I find it amazing that such a simple model could predict the future of such a complex system as planet Earth.
 |
| Solid lines: MIT, with new research in bold. Dotted lines: LTG 'business-as-usual' scenario. Source: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/02/limits-to-growth-was-right-new-research-shows-were-nearing-collapse (As of 14/01/2018) |
To summarize, I would like to emphasize that we will never know what the future will bring. We can only use the available tools to try to mitigate many negative changes that our species brought upon this planet. Unfortunately given the space constraints I couldn't delve further into the topic, but I would like to direct you to my other presentation, which presents finely made animation, that explains a lot of issues related to limits of growth. Feel free to ask any questions!
Questions:
1. Have you heard about LTG before? What is your stance on it?2. Do you think it is possible, knowing the greed of our species, to stop the growth and lead sustainable life?
3.Do you know of any similar scientific papers or works of fiction revolving around the concept of finite systems and struggles that come with them?
Further reading (and watching):
1. The Limits to Growth (1972)
2. 40 years after LTG - YouTube
3. World of the Future
Sources:
1. https://www.thenation.com/article/limits-growth-book-launched-movement/
2. http://www.sustainable.soltechdesigns.com/cassandra.html
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Limits_to_Growth
4. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/02/limits-to-growth-was-right-new-research-shows-were-nearing-collapse
Comments
Firstly you make a good point that the Earth isn't all there is, which is correct. If we ever manage to overcome many of the technological problems with space travel, then outer space could possibly sustain us for a little bit longer. The problem though is that we don't have such technology. You say that we will extract resources from moon and meteorites, but as of now the biggest thing we brought back from space was a 11.7 kg rock named Big Muley and it was back in 1972. That was the whole point of LTG, all of the variables are following an exponential curve, while new technologies are introduced linearly.
The other point you make is also valid, but same as before there is no technology as of now to produce electricity from these sources. Sure, there are some thorium-based nuclear reactors, but I think all of them are used for scientific research. The idea of having thorium and fusion energy have been there for a very long time, even longer than the time there is left according to LTG.
The problem is, that in a growth based society following capitalistic ideas, the only things that matter are the costs. It's much more cheaper and profitable to extract oil from earth than to put money on scientific research. One last thing I would like to state is that even if we manage to extract resources from outer space and have fusion power to fulfill all the current needs we would still be growing and facing the same issues up until a point were we just won't be able to resolve them. That's the beauty of infinite space.
I've never heard about LTG but I'm glad I had a chance to read something about it.
Generally speaking, I think it is possible but it may be quite difficult. The overpopulation problem is mostly caused by the poorest and the least educated. It'd be hard to convince them to stop breeding, especially when their children are the only option to have safe future :)
Unfortunately I don't know any scientific paper about this topic but I'll be glad to find one.
We will not stop growing as a species. We are too ambitious. I don't see anything wrong about it, but we should also think about some more sane usage of the resources. We tend to ignore the fact of how dependent we are to them. We are using more and more reusable resources, but to substitute the most popular ones like oil, we would have to migrate to the whole different areas of our planet. This seems pretty impossible and for the most of people - unreasonable.
For now I think that it is impossible to create a massive trend of stopping the growth. Most people see growth as something positive and desirable and they can see that with the growth their life level is increasing.
I don't know any other scientific works as LTG.
Everyone deserves life on earth (okay, almost everyone).
Talking seriously, of course the future which shows the collapse of our world is sad. Mankind will self-drive itself into the grave faster than there will be a catastrophe from outside. The facts are that the greed of our species does not bode well and it is unlikely that we will change our mind so quickly.
But not everything is so bad: thanks to Ilon Mask, in the nearest future we will be able to create an dystopia on other planets. Except Pluto.
I want to recommend Christopher Priest's book "The Interverted World", it is related to this topic and can be interesting enough for you.
Unfortunately I can't think of any scientific papers revolving around the concept of finite systems.
Well, its not "greed", that makes us grow - it's in fact the point of life. We could ask the same questions to cavemans back in 100000bc - "Why not "quit" everything and GO TO BIESZCZADY?". We started as monkeys, built first weapons and erected first buildings, eventually conquered whole earth, where no other animal could stop us from ruling over even a small heap of dirt. We invented planes that allowed us to fly, boats that can get to the deepest places on this rock and rockets that allowed us to set our foot on moon. All of that because of this "greed", that kept us going during all that time- the need of conquering and acquiring new lands, the need of improving our civilization and allowing it to do new things, which previous generations could only dream about. Denying that would make us work like robots - "Do A and you will get B, so you can do A again. What for? I don't know". We learn, so we can get better jobs, so we can earn more money, and thanks to that buy better stuff. Why not just quit this college and EXIST for 2100PLN brutto in a shack? Isn't that also "sustainable life", which also allows more resources to be used by more people (communism intensifies - everyone is equally poor)?
I don't know other papers about it, but I know that its in our nature to push our limits and expand our civilization...
These countries are ruled by politicians that need masses to vote for them. It's especially easy to see with what pis is doing with Poland. They want more uneducated, stupefied by religion and united against a common, yet non existent enemy, people, so they can collect more votes.