[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: Ecological Economics and Entropy



In article <328688bd.5674673@news.midtown.net>, alnev@midtown.net (A.J.) writes:
>
>ZPG does not necessarily mean fewer numbers (that's NPG).  Zero growth
>proponents are merely saying enough is enough!  And we've been saying
>this for decades as we watch the population grow and grow and grow.
>Each year that passes is another compromise, another chunk taken out
>of wilderness and another burden on finite resources.  What is the

Actually, I'm not convinced that population growth is the primary
problem facing us, with respect to resource usage (although I agree
with the sentiment behind wanting to limit it). However, I think the
unsustainable modes of resource exloitation today are so efficient and
devastating, and the rate at which such exploitation takes place is
increasing over time without a particularly strong relation to the
underlying population base. I suspect that the consumer demands of a
population fixed numerically, but not in terms of affluence expectation
(& therefore consumer power) would still lead to major ecological
impacts.

In summary, there are a number of time-dependent factors, not just
population, which drive the machines of resource exploitation. We should try to
keep them in perspective.


- thomas



Follow-Ups: References: