[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Ecological Economics and Entropy
Jay Hanson (jhanson@ilhawaii.net) wrote:
: Here is my working definition of carrying capacity:
: "Carrying capacity is the maximum load that can be exerted
: on a life support system by a population of animals without
: damaging the system itself. When a population exceeds
: carrying capacity it is known as 'overshoot'."
So if somebody, somwhere burns a single gallon of gasoline,
the system has been damaged? You certainly imply this
below when you talk about "all technology."
It follows that you've defined carrying capacity to be zero.
: It follows that carrying capacity can not be raised by a
: technology that either results in a net draw-down of
: non-renewable resources or pollutes sinks faster than they
: can be naturally cleansed. (I think this includes nearly
: all technology.)
: Instead of actually raising carrying capacity, technology
: "temporarily" allows more animals to survive. At some
: point, populations MUST fall to (or below) carrying
: capacity. (Populations MUST fall because of the way
: carrying capacity is defined.)
: Here is a particularly important point to remember --
: it gets right to the heart of your question:
:
: CARRYING CAPACITY IS CALCULATED IN A SPECIFIC REGION
: USING ACTUAL ANIMALS ACTING AS THEY NATURALLY DO --
: NOT SOME HYPOTHETICAL SET OF ANIMALS THAT MIGHT BE
: SUBSTITUTED FOR THE ACTUAL ONES.
: In other words, if humans are greedy, stupid and violent
: now, then science must assume that they will remain so.
: Conversely, if humans actually DO manage to somehow
: change their behavior for the better, then carrying
: capacity goes up. For example, Earth might be able
: to support 6 billion Amish.
: Jay
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Scott Susin "Time makes more converts than
Department of Economics Reason"
U.C. Berkeley Thomas Paine, _Common_Sense_
References: