Peak oil: a symptom, not a cause
Posted by Big Gav in peak oil
Jeff Vail has a post on the role peak oil has played in the present day state of the world - Peak oil: a symptom, not a cause.
Is peak oil--the inexorable decline in global oil production--a cause of our troubles, or merely a symptom of a deeper cause? I think it's the latter.
What is the ultimate cause of our troubles? In my opinion, it is the hierarchal nature of our society. As I discussed in my essay, The Problem of Growth, a terrain consisting of competing hierarchal structure requires that these structures continually work to grow and intensify; the resulting symptom of a requirement for perpetual growth drives both our increasing consumption of non-renewable resources and our FIRE-bubble economy (Finance, Investment, and Real Estate); peak oil, in turn, is a symptom of our non-sustainable use of resources.
There is a temptation to say that the financial crisis has debunked peak oil theory, that the financial crisis delayed the peaking of oil production (or is somehow masking it), that the financial crisis was caused by peak oil, etc. In my opinion, it's much more accurate and informative to point out that both the financial crisis and peak oil are symptoms of a deeper cause, and that this cause--the fundamental structure of our society--is really what must be addressed. The corollary, of course, is that we can't solve the financial crisis or peak oil because they are symptoms, not causes. Instead, we must search for ways to address our fundamental mode of organization...
It's worth noting that some people disagree with my assertion that our civilization's drive for perpetual growth is caused by our hierarchal mode of organization. I'm not intending to defend this logical leap here (see The Problem of Growth for an initial explanation, but I fully admit the theory needs more work). Even if I'm wrong, that still doesn't make the financial crisis or peak oil causes in and of themselves--they are still the symptom of our civilization's drive for perpetual growth (whatever it's ultimate cause may be), and therefore they are the wrong level at which to attack the problems they cause.
First principles: we need to identify the cause to our problem before we can effectively address it (I'm avoiding "solve" here because that suggests some singular, univerally-agreed objective). Our civilization's drive to growth is, again, only a symptom. What is its cause? This, I think, is the key question confronting humanity at present. I may be right that it is our overemphasis of hierarchal structure--and I'll make that argument in more depth in the coming weeks. However, if I'm wrong, that doesn't change the principle that we must identify the root cause in order to rationally proceed...
The question of why we strive for growth is an interesting one.
My guess - until everyone has reached a certain level of prosperity (ie. decent housing, transport, clothing, education, entertainment + recreation facilities etc) then society as a whole will strive to produce these things (pretty much regardless of what political system they are living under).
Where this doesn't occur, political instability (or repression) is the likely result - so the endless search by elites for stability means that growth becomes a way of maintaining the existing hierarchy.
Population growth is an additional factor which further prompts the need for growth.
Now - assuming we can eventually supply everyone's material needs (preferably in a sustainable way - which means renewable energy sources and high levels of recycling via acradle-to-cradle manufacturing system) and stabilise the population (which is actually a function of achieving the first goal - prosperous societies where women have economic freedom and access to contraception and education strongly tend to low - or negative - population growth), then the need for growth slowly disappears.
If I'm correct about this, it doesn't really matter if we have a hierarchy in society or not - the driver for growth vanishes.