Also, as I’ve indicated many times, there are a couple general approaches one can pursue along the path of climate change and simultaneous collapses of the industrial economy and the living planet. You can hit the road, or you can mitigate in place. Either way, you’ll need to secure clean water and healthy food, maintain body temperature, and create and maintain a decent human community.

I recommend a life of travel for most people, although I’ve taken a different route for personal reasons. Either way, an adventure-filled life awaits. On the road, you’ll need quick wits, good interpersonal skills, and astonishing amounts of creativity, compassion, and courage. Ditto for mitigating in place. In this post, I’ll address the primary concerns associated with mitigating in place, with a particular focus on me and the mud hut (my favorite subject and my favorite location, respectively).

If you’re staying put, I suggest you pay attention to the 3 Rs of the future. No, not the educational ones from years gone by. And it’s far too late for the three Rs targeting reduced consumption in a nation build on consumption, two of which we have ignored because there is no financial profit in reducing and reusing. Recycling — the only one of these three relevant actions fascist Amerika promotes — is like an apology after a punch in the face (credit Mike Sliwa). We punch the planet in the face with every cultural act, and then we apologize by sorting plastic and aluminum into separate bins.

The three Rs of interest in this post are relocalization, resilience, and redundancy. We’re headed for a severely constrained future with respect to transport of materials and humans. The days of the 12,000-mile supply chain are nearly behind us. Forget about cheap plastic crap from China, expensive watches from Switzerland, and decent hand tools from the Sears Roebuck catalog: We’re going to have to make do with what we’ve got in the very local area. Before the supply chain breaks, we should work toward building a resilient set of living arrangements steeped in redundancy. After the supply chain breaks, it’ll be a little late to start digging a well and learning how to grow food.

Here at the mud hut, we pay serious attention to multiple sources of water (two solar pumps, hand pump, rainwater harvesting from two rooftops, and the nearby river), food (wildcrafting, orchard, gardens, goats for milk and cheese, eggs from ducks and chickens, and in the future, hunting relatively large-bodied animals), body temperature (well-insulated, passive-solar house, multiple awnings, proper clothing, and abundant water and firewood), and human community (abundance in this category exceeds my patience to explain again, but search the archives for a few hints). I’ve no doubt we’re missing some things that will ease our lives in our post-carbon future. Some of these items will remain unknown, even to us, until it’s too late. I’m already missing a few things, even before the impending big crash leads to “lights out.” (As Dmitry Orlov uncharacteristically suggests, the day draws near. As “Tyler Durden” characteristically suggests, the day is near enough to be seen by a blind man.) And as I’ve mentioned a few hundred times, skyrocketing greenhouse gas emissions, along with wholesale destruction of the living planet, will seal our fate as a species unless we crash this luxury ship, and soon.

I know you’ve read this one before, but I’d love to have a solar ice-maker to cool our drinks and our bodies. But if the industrial economy reaches its overdue end within a few weeks, I won’t. And I suspect we’ll muddle through, until we don’t. I’d love to have more time to convince my human community to climb aboard the collapse train. But if the industrial economy reaches its overdue end within a few weeks, I won’t. And I suspect we’ll muddle through, until we don’t. I’d love to make a few more trips to discuss the dire nature of our predicaments with people who are aware and interested. But if the industrial economy reaches its overdue end within a few weeks, I won’t. And I suspect I’ll muddle through, although I’ll miss trips tentatively scheduled to Australia, New Zealand, Scotland, New England, and various places nearer the mud hut.

Closer to home, and closer to my heart, I’d love to have time for my parents — and the thousands of other winter immigrants descending on this area — to make the return trip to their northern homes. But if the industrial economy reaches its overdue end within a few weeks, or even within a few months, they won’t. And I have no idea how we’ll muddle through.

All things being equal, I’d rather have the solar ice-maker in a community fully on-board with collapse. All things being equal, I’d rather make a multitude of excursions to exotic places. All things being equal, I’d rather my parents experience collapse in their own home. But all things are not equal and, more than all these things, I’d rather have a planet marked by much more abundance and far fewer extinctions than we’re currently witnessing.

_________________

I’m scheduled to speak at several events during the coming week or so; (1) On Wednesday, 9 November at 7:00 p.m., I’ll address the Atlanta Beyond Oil Monthly Meetup, 657 Rosalia Street SE, Atlanta, Georgia; on (2) Saturday, 12 November and Sunday, 13 November I’ll deliver two, 18-minute presentations at the International Conference on Sustainability, Transition & Culture Change in Bellaire, Michigan, and (3) on Tuesday, 15 November at 6:30 p.m. at 5885 M 115 Frankfort Hwy, I’ll speak about developing a durable set of living arrangements in Benzonia, Michigan (sponsored by Grow Benzie). I hope to meet you at one (or more) of these events.
_________________

This post is permalinked at the Refreshment Center and Island Breath.

I was shooting video of this presentation, but my camera failed 15 minutes in. So we’re stuck with multiple audio files and the slides in the usual awkward format. And whereas the audio files are adequate during the presentation, the only microphone in the room was near me, so the question part of the Q & A is poor.

You get the original slides this time, along with the audio file. Plagiarize to your heart’s content. Share widely. Spread the news. But please keep your complaints about the quality of these materials to yourself, unless you have suggestions for improvement.

I was speaking in the capital of the state built, economically at least, by oil. As I was speaking, I could see the Capitol, which convened the following day to deal with the state’s $27 billion deficit. Gee, I’d have never seen that coming.

My presentation was greeted with the usual mix of profound denial and fatalistic acceptance. The very few anarchists in attendance could hardly compete with the majority, who could see absolutely nothing amiss with the industrial economy, western civilization, or American Empire.

Powerpoint

Introduction from Gayle Borst, Design~Build~Live

Presentation part 1

Presentation part 2

Presentation part 3

Presentation part 4

Presentation part 5

Presentation part 6

Presentation part 7

Q & A part 1

Q & A part 2

Q & A part 3

__________________

Special thanks to Ken McKenzie-Grant from Shades of Green Radio for the considerable effort behind the audio files and to Gayle Borst for hosting (and all the associated work).

And then, there’s reality. I’ll go there. You’ve been warned.

We’re irrevocably broke. I’ve made that announcement before. Finally, though, mainstream financial analysts are joining the party of reality.

Perhaps our individual and collective bankruptcy (of every kind) explains why 79.6% of respondents to a Scientific American poll are unwilling to forgo even a single penny to forestall the risk of catastrophic climate change. Scientific American readers undoubtedly are better informed than the general populace. And yet they won’t pay a thing to avoid extinction of our species. Kinda makes you warm and fuzzy all over, doesn’t it?

At the request of corporate CEOs and their minions, high-level politicians, we’ll spend, spend, spend to keep propping up the industrial economy that is making us crazy and killing us. Far be it for me to suggest those CEOs and politicians are killing us directly — I’ll leave that charge to others — but there is no doubt this system is destroying every aspect of the living planet on which we depend for our lives. In return, we’ll throw away fiat currency in the name of infrastructure so we can maintain our non-negotiable, completely disastrous way of life. But we won’t spend a buck a dime a single cent to preclude disaster for our children.

Excuse me, I need to retch into my composting toilet. I encourage you to do the same. I’ll wait.

Mind you, it’s too late to avoid terrifyingly bad climate change, and avoiding catastrophe seems increasingly unlikely, even to the mainstream media. The numbers keep coming at us, too: greenhouse gases are near the all-time peak, at least since the industrial era began. The United Nations concurs: We’re unlikely to avoid runaway greenhouse.

In short, we’re toast. For a brief yet comprehensive overview of recent assessments and projections, take a look at my latest essay at Transition Voice.

The numbers keep pouring in, faster even than we can keep track: 2010 will join 1998 as hottest since 1850. Or maybe it’ll break this most dire of records and become the warmest year ever. In light of this news, emissions are on the rise, and the talks in Cancun are set to fail. As I’ve indicated many times, there are no politically viable solutions to climate change. Politicians who propose cutting back emissions sufficiently to make a minor dent in the predicament will be drawn and quartered. Survivors will be hung. Then shot. If you needed further evidence, and it’s difficult to believe any rationalist would at this point, then consider this: The incoming class of thugs in the U.S. House of Representatives will kill the committee merely studying climate change.

The anticipated response from Homo consumicus: We don’t need no stinkin’ solutions. Overshoot? Not on my planet. Oppression? So what? We’re number one.

As with anthropogenic climate change, I’ve also pointed out the absence of politically viable solutions to peak oil and the attendant economic consequences. A minor example of the economic impacts of expensive oil occurs every time we eclipse $80 oil when, shortly thereafter, sovereign defaults fill the news. Iceland. Greece. Now the Eurozone debt crisis is escalating. Or, to put a finer point on it, the game is up in the Eurozone, with violence is on the rise. And, as it turns out, Japan and the U.S. are circling the same drain as the entire Eurozone, although most Americans haven’t figured it out yet because the fair and balanced pundits at Fox News haven’t told us.

Much to the chagrin and willful ignorance of the mainstream media and also editors at sites that focus on energy, including The Oil Drum and Energy Bulletin, the industrial economy could reach its overdue terminus quite soon. It’s far too late for a fast collapse of the industrial economy: By virtually every economic measure, we’ve experienced a lost decade already. The last superpower didn’t take this long to fall, and few civilizations have hung on as long as this, the worst of them. In the midst of economic turmoil and pathetic models, even economists admit they haven’t a clue.

Evidence for completion of the ongoing collapse of the industrial economy continues to mount. For starters, the smart money is selling out of U.S. stock markets as U.S. banks are hoarding funds instead of loaning. The American love affair with stocks is over. States are imploding one by one (and then, if we’re lucky, all at once). The Federal Reserve is bailing out a surprising array of corporations, foreign banks, and, of course, the big banks in the U.S. (the latter to the tune of $9 trillion). Unemployment compensation benefits just ended for another two million people in the U.S. The U.S. government’s attempts to reflate the housing bubble have been overtaken by economic reality. Meanwhile, we spend money we don’t have on the ongoing, never-ending war in Afghanistan, which — not surprisingly to regular readers here — is not about Afghanistan at all.

If there is any doubt about the moral hypocrisy underlying this empire, consider the governments of the “free world” joining Fox News and Republican presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee in calling for the assassination of Julian Assange because he dares expose the truth about American Empire. In response, Amazon bows to political pressure by pulling the plug on free speech. And no wonder. It’s one thing to mess with Obomber and Chillary, but there’s no way Assange will get away with taking on a big U.S. bank. I’ll excuse you while you take another break to puke.

Increasingly, the blogosphere is filled with people who recognize the increasingly obvious ongoing economic collapse for what it is. Although there is little agreement about the causes, the consensus is growing about where we’re headed. A quick online search of a few of the following names gives a few clues about the breadth and depth of the people and organizations warning about and, in some cases, preparing for near-term collapse of the industrial economy (this list is not comprehensive): Niall Ferguson, Michael Ruppert, Karl Denninger, Rob Viglione, Gerald Celente, Jeff Rubin, Matt Savinar, Catherine Austin Fitts, Charles Munger, Gonzalo Lira, Joe Bageant, Dave Cohen, Jan Lundberg, Matt Simmons (recently deceased), Chris Hedges, Dmitry Orlov, Michael Snyder, Nicole Foss, Paul Craig Roberts, Marc Faber, Bill Bonner, James Wesley Rawles, Tony Robbins, Nouriel Roubini, Max Keiser, Tyler Durden, Chris Martenson, James Kwak, Simon Johnson, Chris Clugston, Kenneth Deffeyes, John Taylor, Samsam Bakhtiari, James Howard Kunstler, Bob Chapman, George Ure, Anthony Fry, Igor Panarin, G. Edward Griffin, Joseph Meyer, Harry Dent, John Williams, Richard Russell, Niño Becerra, Martin Weiss, Eric deCarbonnel, Robin Landry, John P. Hussman, Robert Prechter, Richard Mogey, Peter Schiff, Lindsey Williams, Hugh Hendry, Arthur Laffer, Bob Janjuah, Jeff Gundlach, Société Générale.

I am not suggesting even a slim minority of these fine people understand the good news associated with the ongoing economic collapse, and there is no consensus on the role of peak oil in triggering it. As nearly as I can determine, most of these folks view western civilization as a fine idea and, reflecting society, they prefer extinction of our species to the decline of civilization.

Personally, I don’t care what phenomenon gets the credit for bringing down the industrial economy, as long as it happens quickly. Peak oil? Fine. Overwhelming debt load leading to default? Superb. Hyperinflation? Good idea. Deflation to the point of Dow Zero? Wonderful. Take your pick, somebody’s touting it as the route to the industrial economy’s imminent demise.

As should be clear even to the casual reader, all roads lead to Rome. And Rome is burning.

___________________

This essay is permalinked in the bottom half of this post at Island Breath, and at Vancouver Peak Oil and Counter Currents.

When I discuss mitigation for ecological and economic collapse, I stress the crucial role of human community. And I’m not the only one: A few students with whom I am working this semester are focusing on how to communicate in community, with full awareness where we are and where we’re headed. They have developed a blog, and I encourage your participation as we struggle to find our way in a world turned inside out.

Louisville, Kentucky public library Tuesday, 28 September 2010

Audio file (special thanks to Nate Pederson for recording and archiving the presentation — may he attract the attention of the government as a result)

Powerpoint (pdf)

International Bioenergy Days 2010 presentation Monday, 27 September 2010

Powerpoint (pdf)

When I present, I divide into bite-sized pieces the slides with considerable text. For example, the first slide below labeled “Climate chaos” is presented in six parts, with a bit of text added to each new slide; herein, I include only the final slide in the series.

I rarely use written notes, much less a transcript, so what you see is what I saw when I was delivering the presentation. I was interrupted by several ovations (some standing, but only because I begged) and abundant laughter. When I’m nervous, I go straight to spontaneous stand-up. Later, I can’t remember a single humorous line, so every presentation is unique. At this point, I couldn’t tell you what I said, but apparently some of it was funny. I’m pretty sure they were laughing with me instead of at me, but one can never be certain.

I visited with several people after the presentation. They liked it, of course, or they wouldn’t have stayed to visit. Reaction generally (very generally) varied with age. However, all age groups failed to recognize we’re already in the midst of economic collapse, that we’ve been here for at least a decade, or that the collapse would be complete soon. Similarly, all age groups failed to appreciate the moral imperative with how we live our lives. Many youngsters from the Aldo Leopold High School were present, and they invariably went to the bargaining phase: I can still have my cell phone, right? People older than me typically went to denial: I’m glad I’m old, so none of this will impact my life. People between those groups expressed appreciation for the human community in this area and disdain for politicians, local through national, for failing to deal with either side of the fossil-fuel coin.

_________________________

A pdf version of the Powerpoint file is archived here, courtesy of Keith Farnish. Thanks, Keith!

This is by no means a comprehensive account, and the mail continues to come in. My latest essay was headlined in a website dedicated to renouncing the notion of anthropogenic climate change, where I was called a “warmist prof.” Similar silliness fills the blogosphere, as a simple search reveals. At one website, comments include suggestions to kill me.

I try to be kind and rational as I respond to each piece of email I receive. This sometimes proves too difficult for me, in which case I try to be witty. Often, I fail. Usually people give up, finding me senseless, after one message and my response. But an occasional persistent person never lets go. I have received a couple dozen messages from one guy, the last dozen of which I’ve read with the DELETE key.

Without further ado, here they be. I’ve simply cut and pasted into this space, errors and all. I’ve removed names to protect the guilty.

_______________________

> Before further embarassing yourself you may want to become more familiar
> with the climate issue. For starters, here’s a google document, written by
> your humble correspondent:
>
>
> http://docs.google.com/View?id=ddrj9jjs_0fsv8n9gw
>
> There are also references to a number of websites, and books included.
>
> Most of us have no intention of drinking any of your Kool-Aid !

Thanks, sir, for your concern about my embarrassment. I read as much of your essay as I could tolerate.

I suspect you are responding to my essay on Counter Currents, which first appeared on my blog: guymcpherson.com. Comments are welcome there, where your views would have a wide audience. You might want to read this brief essay to gain an overview of the science I cite there: http://guymcpherson.com/2009/10/apocalypse-or-extinction/

Ultimately, of course, my opinion does not matter. The facts are clear, though: western civilization nears its omnicidal end, and anthropogenic climate change will cause our extinction unless the end of western civilization comes very quickly.

Please join the conversation on my blog.

Best regards,
Guy

_______________________

On Thu, 19 Aug 2010, Bert Klein wrote:

> Its a sham that you still have access to the Internet. The fact that the
> 200year old hypotheses of “greenhouse gas effect” has never been proven by
> creditable scientific experiments means nothing to you or any other AGW
> fanatic.
> Its a waste of time to try to tell you any facts because there is no
> inteligence in you head to do any critical analysis of facts.
> Just one bite of information that you have choosen to ignore and would not
> understand the significanc of is- NOAA has acknowledge that 5 of its
> satallite data sets of temperature reading for the last decade is corrupted-
> many of the readings are from 10-500 degrees high. The faulty numbers have
> been averaged in to acceptable readings thus the temperture trends that they
> report are meaningless.

Thanks for your message, Bert, and for your concern about truth. I welcome your comments on my blog (guymcpherson.com), where your views would generate wide-ranging discussion.

You may want to read thie essay and the science underpinning it: http://guymcpherson.com/2009/10/apocalypse-or-extinction/

I agree with you about your opening statement. It’s a shame I still have access to the Internet. I look forward to the day, in the near future, when none of us have access to the Internet. That’ll be a wonderful day for the living planet, if not for western civilization.

Best regards,
Guy

_______________________

> Sir,
>
> I can only conclude that you think everyone is a fool. Sadly, I have had to
> write you and many like minded thinkers on this issue. WE HAD 7,000PPM OF
> CO2 IN THE ATMOSPHERE billions of years ago, and now….390ppm. The earth’s
> oceans suck up co2. Why do you continue to make the false case that the
> earth cannot and will not do the same thing again, on an even smaller scale.
> Do you realize we are below the average amount of atmospheric co2 based on
> earth’s historical average? And no, we are not adding co2 at an
> unprecedented rate. In fact, it was being added much more rapidly in the
> time of the dinosaurs. I am happy to see you continue to burn coal by using
> a computer. This is my favorite part of the article “Increasingly dire
> forecasts from extremely conservative sources keep stacking up.” Are you
> kidding me? Sir, surely you realize we are now more equipped than ever to
> deal with natural disasters? Here is a fine example. Villagers living on an
> island near Hawaii. They have no warning system and no fast transport.
> Conversely, if a volcano is near a city, we have advanced warning systems
> and the capability of massive transport. Having that said, I encourage you
> to stay on your farm and pretend the world is going to blow up, despite the
> fact that temperature has been higher and we have had co2 amounts massively
> higher than what we experience today.

Dear Name:

Thanks for taking the time to send a message.

I do not believe everyone is a fool, or I would not be trying to awaken people to the converging crises of energy depletion and global climate change (cf. global warming).

I use solar panels to run my laptop. Thanks for bringing that up.

As a global-change scientist, I’m quite familiar with the facts and the usual irrational arguments. Your response does not surprise me, but it does trouble me. Clearly, scientists have failed to inform the public about the dire straits we’re in. We cannot persist long above 350 ppm CO2, but we’re committed to at least 392 ppm for the next thousand years. Toss in methane, and we’re at the equivalent of 460 ppm CO2. Earth will survive with high levels of CO2, but we won’t.

It was such a lovely planet, yet we’re such a short-sighted species. Sadly, evolution does that to every species.

I welcome your comments on my blog, which would give you a much wider forum than just me: guymcpherson.com.

Make it a great day.

–Guy

_______________________

> Monsieur Guy r Mcpherson,
>
> After going through your article, it became clear that you interested
> are too narrowly limited to economics and particularly energy. This does
> not give you right to terminate a civilization.
>
> Humanist

Humanist — I do not have the power to terminate western civilization, or I would. Such an act would free non-industrial cultures and non-human species from centuries of oppression. It might even allow our species to squeeze through the global-change bottleneck, barely. I assume you’d rather we destroy all cultures, then all species, including our own? Please drop by my blog to explain that to us: guymcpherson.com. Best regards, Guy

_______________________

> Dear sir,
>
> Re.: http://www.countercurrents.org/mcpherson180810.htm
>
> Ref.: Quote, “It’s time to terminate western civilization before it
> terminates us.”
>
> Can I assume that, as you are part of western civilization, you will be
> willing to terminate yourself first; as a good example to the rest of us? I
> can assure you that the moment I hear of your demise I will take a razor to
> my own wrists.

If you’ll read my blog (guymcpherson.com), you’ll note that I will gladly give me life to terminate western civilization. You’ll also note I’ve largely abandoned western civilization.

Won’t you join me?

Comments are always welcome at my blog.

All the best,
Guy

_______________________

> Geez, it must suck to be you! Were you abused as a child?

Actually, it’s great to be me. I live in the real world, adjacent to a huge wilderness area where I have built an off-grid property to thrive when the industrial era ends. You can read about the arrangements here: guymcpherson.com. Even better, I had loving parents and relatives, none of whom abused me as a child (or an adult).

And you? What’s your story? Or, are you merely a nameless troll?

_______________________

> Sir,
> I’m not a professor of anything or any kind. I was at one time interested in
> the global warming issue and to be honest I couldn’t get enough of it. I
> read any article or blog I could get my hands or monitor screen on. During
> all of my research I started noticing things that didn’t add up, and by that
> I mean went against the basic science I learned when I was a whelp in high
> school. The more I dug in the more skeptical I became. Seeing AlGore the
> inconvenient movie didn’t help at all, I had to wave the bu@#&*it flag way
> too many times sitting through that. I am firmly in the skeptic’s ranks now
> and my opinion of the organized science community trying to foist this
> ridiculous warming hypothesis on the unclean ignorant public places science
> right in there with Ed Norton and his shovel. My main thought concerning the
> rebadged “climate Change” is why in the hell did ya’ll base your apocalyptic
> vision on runaway global heating, something that in the entire 4 billion
> year history of this planet has NEVER happened, instead of the
> scientifically known proven and I’d imagine even more devastating ice age
> which has happened many times in the planets past. Almost like a cycle the
> ice ages come and go it seems, but never once runaway global warming…

Thanks for your comment, sir. It’s the most civil one I’ve received today.

I’ve conducted research on global change for more than a decade. For a while, I tried to change minds. I’m done with that, and have focused for the last five years on economic collapse. And I’m nearly done with that, simply because I’m tired of the hate mail. If people want to ignore ongoing impacts of burning fossil fuels, fine. I gave plenty of warning.

All the best,
Guy

_______________________

> Sir, You may wish to live a life of seclusion living on eco-produced food
> from your own garden but unfortunately this does not fit in with the rest of
> humanity.
> We have yet to attain peak oil, according to the oil experts. Oil is getting
> more difficult to remove from the crust but there seems to be plenty there.
> It id technically possible to manufacture oil from bio-digesters using
> modified bacteria. There is a plant in your country which is at the moment
> doing such a thing.
> Climate change has existed for 4.6Ba and will continue and there is no data
> that shows changes are any swifter than have existed in the past. Indeed the
> Medieval Warm Period warmed faster than the early 20th century and became
> warmer. No tipping point was reached then nor in the past. Why will any
> slight warming in future produce such a thing?
> This planet has some 8 Bn people who will be fed and provided energy to
> develop, despite thinking like yours, by 21 century technical advances using
> whatever energy source is necessary including fossil fuels.
> I notice that you still have an email address so complete seclusion is out
> then.

Dear Name:

Thanks for your thoughtful comment. We disagree about several items, as you know, so I will elaborate here.

Data clearly demonstrate we passed the world oil peak in May 2005. Even the U.S. Departments of Energy and Defense agree. At current demand, we have a 30-year supply, but we will never use the deep, expensive oil with low EROI. All so-called substitutes have similarly low EROI.

You would be wise to investigate the MWP more closely. It is constantly trotted out as an exercise in denial, but the facts suggest otherwise. I have been a global-change scientist for more than a decade, and I have seen no compelling evidence to suggest the scientific consensus is threatened.

Finally, I have no intention of escaping humanity. Rather, I am embracing humanity — mine and my neighbors’ — as I explain here: http://guymcpherson.com/2009/05/humanity-at-a-crossroads/

Please drop by my blog and leave comments. We have quite a vigorous discussion there, and I welcome learning more about your views.

Best regards,
Guy

_______________________

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Revelation
>
> Religious rants are fun…

I agree, they are

I’m a rationalist and anti-theist, though

_______________________

> I don’t know what you are smoking, but could you get me
> some of it.
> The sky ain’t falling and using Chicken Little for political
> purposes is obscene.
> I saw no heavy emphasis on population reduction, truly
> our #1 problem in good Earth stewardship.
> I may not slit my wrists, but eating my gun sounds pretty
> good.

Thanks for your message, and for taking the time to send it. I agree that the sky is not falling. Indeed, the end of western civilization is very good news for those of us who care about non-industrial cultures, non-human species, and the continued persistence of humans on Earth. I suspect there are about a dozen of us. You’re not one. Many of the 186 essays at guymcpherson.com, the original source of the essay you read, refer to overpopulation. Check ‘em out. Leave comments, please. And make it a great day. –Guy

_______________________

> Dr. McPherson,
>
> You started out your piece mentioning a fossil fuel addiction. I alway know
> when I see that that there will be a call to implement policies that will
> result in misery and death on a grand scale. You ought to be ashamed of
> yourself! I am ashamed of you as an American and as someone who once
> respected American academics. First we are not “addicted” to fossil fuels at
> all. That is a ridiculous anti-intellectual cheap appeal to an emotional and
> illogical response. Fossil fuels are the foundation of modern economic and
> indeed survival activity. Without replacing these very abundant fossil fuels
> with inexpensive alternatives before curbing their use, the result will be
> genocide and misery on an immense scale, and you know it.
>
> You make a claim that we are facing global warming. That is hogwash and most
> people now know that fact. It has been conclusively demonstrated that
> climate is primarily heliocentric and that we are indeed beginning a new ice
> age or at least a mini-ice age following a brief and somewhat subdued period
> of mild warming (which was very mild in comparison to the Holocene Maximum
> and even the medieval warm period) that was completely natural and cyclical,
> and indeed heliocentric in origin. Furthermore, the global warming movement
> has been exposed for the huckster’s scam that it is. Because of the lack of
> a real foundation for your claims (as well as a lack of a real conscience
> and descent character), the global warming advocates have resorted to fraud
> and criminal activity on a grand scale. This has included the fraudulent use
> of the names of non-scientists’, non-climate scientists’ names, and
> dissenting scientists names on lists that are claimed to be lists of
> supporters of the global warming claim. It has included unethical gagging of
> all dissenting voices. It has included too many forms of fraud and coercion
> for me to briefly mention.
>
> In addition to making outdated and discredited claims about global warming
> you make reference, as if it is a proven fact, and it isn’t, to peak oil.
> Peak oil is a scam! In fact, in the years since the claims that the sky is
> falling regarding the peak oil scenario, huge oil fields and reserves have
> been found off of the coast of Brazil, in Canada, Montana, and other
> locations as well as discoveries that the oil reserves in Iraq and other
> current oil fields are twice as big as previously believed. The United
> States has immense coal reserves in addition to other immense fossil fuel
> reserves. Tragically and outrageously, however, the repressive and
> nihilistic “greens” (they are really more akin to “reds”) environmentalist
> militant murderous thugs have prevented the use of most of our immense
> domestic fossil fuel sources. Soviet and later Russian engineers have made a
> very convincing case that oil is constantly renewed through abiotic
> processes, as I am sure that you are aware.
>
> You should really just admit that you have no case but that you hate other
> humans and wish to destroy them and follow in the footsteps of Hitler and
> Stalin who are apparently your role models. At any rate, your nihilistic
> and genocidal plans are coming to an end and the people are becoming aware
> of what you and your ilk really are!
>
> Sincerely,

Dear Name:

Thanks for your message, and for taking the time to pass it along. Unfortunately, I suspect I am correct about global climate change and peak oil. I have studied these issues for the last decade. Abundant evidence, in the form of models and data, support both concepts.

If you’d like to read more, please peruse the 186 essays at guymcpherson.com. While you’re there, please post comments so we can discuss your ideas in a common forum. I like to have all ideas discussed in a public forum, so we can evaluate them rationally.

Make it a great day, and thanks in advance for commenting on my blog.

Best regards,
Guy

_______________________

> Dear Professor Emeritus:
>
> You have convinced me, as well as a great many others, about the current
> dire status of Western Civilization. Your great mind is needed at this
> time. Like Einstein, you will have an everlasting imprint on mankind for
> your contributions.
>
> As the average man feels hopeless in being disarmed with an ineffective
> intellect compared to your own, we all ask what we’d do without your
> assessment of Western Civilization’s current status?
>
> Best regards,

Thanks for your high praise, Cheryl. Nobody appreciates tongue in cheek assessment as I do.

Unlike Einstein, however, the end of western civilization ensures my voice will be scattered by the winds of time. So, there really is nothing to be done. We’ve fucked the planet, and now it’s our turn to bend over. As my blog is titled, Nature Bats Last.

Best regards,
Guy

_______________________

> Mr. McPherson, You would benefit by getting out more or
> maybe getting some kind of professional help. As you should
> know, the earth has been cooling since 2000. Recent events
> have shown that the high global temps reported by NOAA are
> incorrect because of satellite problems. Sorry to disappoint you
> but the sky is not falling, the seas are not rising abnormally, the ice
> isn’t melting at the poles, the polar bears are fine. I hope you can get
> some help. There are a lot of great doctors.
>
> Yours truly

Name — Thanks for your kind concern. As a global-change scientist, I DO know Earth has been warming, despite the babble you’ve been led to believe. We have experienced the warmest decade in history within the last 10 years. The facts are clear. You might want to check them. Best regards, and make it a great day. –Guy

As should be clear by now, we cannot grow the industrial economy while reducing use of energy. As a result, we cannot grow the economy while reducing greenhouse-gas emissions. Thus, we’re stuck in a politically untenable situation: To save the living planet, including habitat for our own species, we need to shrink the industrial economy. But the industrial economy requires growth. Recent research indicates we need to shrink the industrial economy to oblivion to save our species. In other words, what we really need is to kill the industrial economy before it kills us. And by us, I mean all of us: the entire collection of wise apes. As a society, clearly we have made our choice. But as an individual, you can choose to the contrary, with benefits for your psyche and quite possibly your survival.

Crude oil is the master material, the energy source that provides access to all others. Economic growth requires ever-increasing supplies of crude oil. As availability of oil declines the price goes up (with considerable variability, as we have observed during five years since we passed the world oil peak) and the industrial economy starts to sputter. When the price gets high enough, long enough, the economy simply, finally, expires. The world has been on an undulating plateau of oil availability for several years, but that plateau leads to a cliff. According to the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. military’s Joint Forces Command, the cliff comes in 8 months or so.

I know no energy-literate person who thinks we’ll be able to avoid the post-industrial Stone Age by 2025. Assuming a conservative 4% annual decline rate of crude oil between now and then indicates we will have access to the same amount of oil in 2025 as we did in 1970, when the planet held half as many people as it now does and the world was considerably less industrialized than it now is. And that’s merely the gross rate of decline, whereas the net rate of decline will be much more rapid because it takes so much energy to extract and deliver energy. Oil priced a $147.27 per barrel nearly brought down the industrial economy five times I know about, and we’re hardly out of the woods yet. There is little hope for the industrial era to persist more than a few years, and the next spike in the price of oil could very well be the trigger that brings the industrial era to a sudden close in an unprepared nation.

I suspect we’ll pass through a new Dark Age en route to the post-industrial Stone Age. Indeed, many countries in the world are already there because they lack the world’s reserve currency and the world’s largest military. Bully for us: We have both, thus ensuring a steady supply of fossil-fuel-driven energy into every city and town in the United States. Well, so far.

As an aside, how long do you think we can maintain a military and a functioning industrial economy if we keep spending 58% of our budget on the former? We could stop our involvement in wars, but that would be quite un-American, wouldn’t it?

The costs of maintaining the non-negotiable American way of life are huge, even beyond simple economics. The American suburbs are the antithesis of durable living, as they require us to live far from work, far from play, and far from the places we shop for disposable items in our throw-away culture. They require obedience at home and oppression abroad. American Empire is city living (i.e., civilized), writ large.

The relatively few people paying attention to the undercurrents of the industrial economy know the ship is taking on water faster than the governments can run the printing presses. As the industrial economy continues to lurch and stumble, the vaunted American consumer loses the ability to consume (in part because inflation is rampant on items that actually matter, notably including food). Because ours is a consumer culture, with personal consumption accounting for 70% of the industrial economy, the ship is listing. The next financial crisis is already unfolding — notwithstanding absurd reports from politicians, media, and the irrational exuberance, again, in the stock markets — and governments have nearly exhausted their supply of tools to deal with economic issues. We hit the iceberg of peak oil and, as government administrators busily rearrange the deck chairs, it’s time to launch the lifeboats, even if you believe consumption is a good thing. Personally, I think it’s not, in part based on the definition:

Consume:

1. To do away with completely; destroy

2a. To spend wastefully; squander
2b. Use up

3. To waste or burn away; perish

Consuming gives most people a temporary emotional “high.” We’re addicted to shopping. But I trust it’s clear why rational people want no part of the consumer economy. If we cannot terminate the industrial economy, and soon, we’ll exhaust all habitat for humans on Earth by the end of this century (and, if the models are to be believed, much sooner). Along the way, if we have our way, we’ll destroy every non-industrial culture and every non-human species.

In the face of a contracting industrial economy and the knowledge we’re headed for a situation with extremely limited access to fossil fuels, a quote from Peter Drucker comes to mind: “You can either take action, or you can hang back and hope for a miracle. Miracles are great, but they are so unpredictable.”

What’s an individual to do, in light of the imminent collapse of western civilization? In addition to hastening the collapse, some tools for which I’ve listed before, I describe four points along a continuum for your own, individual, post-carbon future: (1) transition towns, (2) agricultural anarchy, (3) hunting and gathering, and (4) traveling. I will describe each approach, briefly, as a means of generating thought, action, and perhaps even discussion.

Transition towns allow us the fantasy of keeping the current omnicidal culture going, albeit in slightly different form. This model assumes a long descent that allows time for cities to develop alternative energy sources. Think solar on every rooftop, for starters, and gardens in every suburban lot. For this approach to work, though, the food shed must be sufficiently nearby and sufficiently productive to support all the people in the transition town. This seems hugely problematic in sprawling western cities, especially those with more than a few thousand people. And for areas with limited supplies of water, or water that is several hundred feet below the surface of the ground, it’s difficult to imagine a scenario that doesn’t include massive suffering along the way to a huge die-off. The inability to store energy in the absence of fossil fuels beyond a few years in expensive, transient, and toxic batteries is a microscopic problem relative to the absence of ready access to water and food. And there’s an additional problem with the transition-town notion: I seriously doubt we have access to the fossil fuels needed to create the needed infrastructure for the 250 million city-living Americans, much less the 3.5 billion people who occupy the world’s cities. Solar panels and batteries simply won’t make the grade — there’s not enough oil left to pull this one off.

When the lights go out in the city, chaos often erupts. Is your city different? If so, will that difference persist when the lights don’t come back on, ever? I’ve often said and written that I would give my life to terminate the industrial economy, if only to alleviate the burden of oppression on the living world. I’ve no doubt, in fact, that I will make this sacrifice. And that’s okay: My insignificant life pales in contrast to the living planet and the persistence of our species. On the other hand, although I loved city life, my city was not worth dying for. So I left to prepare, recognizing that fortune favors the prepared. In contrast, Michael Ruppert moved to his home city of Los Angeles with full knowledge L.A. would be among the first cities to go up in flames. Ruppert is willing to die for the privilege of comforting the afflicted there.

Agricultural anarchy was offered as a model by Thomas Jefferson, and Monticello was the prime example before it became a museum. Contemporary examples are found in nearly every “third-world” country. A large proportion of the towns and cities in Central America and South America never have had ready access to abundant fossil fuels. As a result, communities have communal water sources and people dig shallow wells and harvest rain from rooftops. On a daily basis, local markets are filled with fresh food brought from nearby gardens and farms. The power goes out frequently, and nobody seems to mind because the towns and cities are actually located in livable areas in the absence of fossil fuels to heat or cool every building (cf. Tucson, Arizona). In short, agriculture has always been, and still is, at the center of everyday life.

Hunting and gathering will doubtless make a comeback for a very few hardy, quick-witted folks. This model resembles the prior Stone Age, and clearly is the most durable approach. It worked for the first 2 million years of the human experience, and we fled from it as recently as a few thousand years ago. But if you can’t find a tribe to go along, you’ll be as lonely as a Saguaro cactus on an ice floe.

Finally, individuals can largely avoid the ravages of collapse by traveling from spot to spot. History has been kind to travelers because people rooted in a particular place hunger for knowledge. If you’re to pursue this route, you’ll need to be quick-witted, good-humored, and willing to lend a hand when needed. Also, you’ll need to recognize and avoid danger. Traveling will be terrifying, but no worse than staying in one location. And you’ll get to see the world and live an adventure-filled life, just as promised by U.S. military recruiters.

None of these options offer a life similar to the one you’ve known. But a different life doesn’t mean a worse life, especially if you give a rat’s backside about anybody besides yourself. There will be plenty of opportunities to serve your community, as there has always been, in the months and years ahead. We’ll be living closer to our neighbors and closer to the living planet that sustains us all. For those courageous, compassionate, and creative souls willing to live in the world rather than in a cubicle, life’s about to get even more interesting. For the vast majority of industrial Americans, though, life is about to become miserable and surprisingly short.

_______________

This essay was inspired by a comment from Danielle Charbonneau. It is permalinked at Counter Currents, Island Breath, and A Climate for Change.

How does one know what to believe, and who to trust? We’re surrounded by lies. During our finest moments, we don’t believe the media, the politicians we elect (from the very small slate of candidates selected for us), or the CEOs and NGOs to whom we give our money. Awash in misinformation yet surrounded by culture’s unrepentant, never-ending message, we vacillate between cynicism and swimming in the powerful current of culture.

Although the happy-talk Obama administration — and its proxy and partner in crime, the mainstream media — would have you believe the industrial economy has recovered, many signs indicate the impacts of the last oil price spike haven’t been fully worked out. The U.S. national debt rises every day, and it already exceeds the value of all currency ever produced and all gold ever mined. It cannot be paid off. Ever. If the notion of a Soviet-style default doesn’t give you pause, consider still-rising foreclosure rates, still-falling home prices, massive unemployment, financial bankruptcy at all levels of government, ballooning entitlement programs, and collapsing pension programs. This is merely the short list of economic issues we face. Needless to say, every single one of them is a profound surprise to the vast majority of neoclassical economists, few of whom saw this economic recession coming (as if passing the world oil peak didn’t provide sufficient warning, well in advance).

Knowing culture will lead us astray, we nonetheless invite scorn when we seek the truth beneath the cultural current of the main stream. Culture does not have answers to meaningful questions. But skepticism for the sake of skepticism is no virtue, either.

Applying reason as a path to knowledge (as I’ve suggested here and here, for example) is easy enough in theory. But in practice, it’s difficult to extract the facts and then synthesize them into a coherent message that guides the way. Much less the Way. And yet, we muddle along, individually and societally, relying on some inexplicable combination of faith and rational thought. For me, the guides include data (recognizing they are undoubtedly massaged before general release), historical anecdotes (ditto), my own dubious moral compass (shaped, necessarily, by culture), and an informed set of predictions from a variety of scholars. As with any gestalt, mine is formed from parts that don’t quite add up to the whole.

So how do we go from this list of economic issues to the notion of economic collapse? I’ve moved from imperialist city educator to economic doomer rural sharecropper in one (damned difficult) step. This move was driven by many factors, including the profound (and profoundly late) realization that we live immorally, buying and selling nature’s bounty at an imperialist whim. Another contributing factor was my strongly held suspicion that we’re headed for a collapse of the industrial economy by the end of 2012. If the industrial age does not end soon, we’re headed for the complete absence of habitat for humans on Earth. Obviously, there is plenty of disagreement with me on both points, and I’ve been asked to make my case. What tea leaves do I read?

I restrict this essay to economic collapse, thus leaving the issue of environmental collapse to previous posts (and perhaps future ones). The data on collapse are clearer than the rest of my guides, so I’ll start with them.

The data interact with other elements: History indicates 10 of 11 recessions since World War II and all 6 recessions since 1972 were preceded by a spike in the price of oil. The lifeblood of civilization, and its price, dictates the direction of the industrial economy. At some point, the price of oil becomes too great to maintain the industrial economy. In fact, a per-barrel price of $147.27 nearly brought the industrial economy grinding to a halt. Only massive, and massively illegal, intervention by the executive branch of the U.S. government kept the lights on in your grid-tied house, the trucks coming to the grocery store, and water coming out the taps. These actions have been written about widely. A quick search on “plunge protection team” is a nice starting point, although the issue is far broader than even omniscient Google reveals.

For information about oil supplies, I rely on Hubbert’s model and data from the U.S. Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration (EIA). Hubbert’s model indicates we passed the world peak for crude oil in December 2005. Data from the EIA indicate peak month was May 2005. Because the industrial economy is barely limping along today, in far direr condition than when the price of oil exceeded $140, I doubt it will take a second round of $140 oil to bring the industrial age to its overdue close. Several forecasters suggest we’re headed beyond that mark with a year or so.

A little more from history: Empires fall. All of ‘em, so far. Some fall slowly, others rapidly. Some fall with a modicum of grace, others with extreme violence. American Empire is so complex, so dependent on finite materials, and intricately connected with the entire global economy that it’s difficult for me to foresee a long, peaceful decline.

The industrial economy relies heavily on crude oil, and particularly inexpensive oil. We’re perfectly willing to spend $400/gallon for gasoline to support our imperial ambitions in Afghanistan if that’s what it takes to keep the price of oil at a reasonable level for us exceptional Americans. (How exceptional? Check the charts in this essay.) But when the price of gasoline exceeds $4/gallon in the heartland, there’s trouble brewing for our all-important economic growth.

In addition to the near-term price of oil, our empire is threatened by the ever-tightening grip of globalization, which ensures that economic collapse in any of the world’s large economies will lead, domino-like, to economic collapse throughout the industrialized world. This grip was allowed and facilitated by cheap oil, and it’s no coincidence that the end of the cheap-oil era resulted in financial crises throughout the civilized world. Today, Greece is the word. But Portugal, Spain, and Japan hover on the brink (Japan is the world’s second-largest economy). So does the U.S. and the remainder of the industrialized world, though you’d never know it based on mainstream media reports from this country. We have the advantages of the world’s reserve currency and the largest killing force in the history of the world (and the willingness to use it, everywhere, all the time). But when China stops buying U.S. Treasury notes, a process already under way, the de facto rate of interest will rise, taking us inexorably and likely quickly into the land of hyper-inflation. At this late juncture in the industrial era, the only questions of great significance are whether our bubble will pop before China’s, and which of myriad potential events will serve as the proximate cause to the end of American Empire. The price of oil was a trigger event, and it might be again. But it might not, too.

As far as my moral compass is concerned, I’ve written plenty about that. There’s no need to pummel the deceased equine yet again. Check the archives, if you’re interested. Or, for a different take on the situation, read this.

So much for the models, data, history, and my sense of morality. What about those voices I hear words I read?

When I open my browser to start the day, several tabs reveal themselves. Some of these websites give the facts, as accurately as they can be determined: Bloomberg energy prices, American stock markets, and the U.S. national debt clock. Others are information clearing houses with occasional original essays, notably including the sites of Matt Savinar, Mike Ruppert, Rice Farmer, and Chris Martenson, along with Energy Bulletin, Counter Currents, and The Oil Drum. Others provide synthesis and analysis: Business Insider, Baseline Scenario, Dmitry Orlov’s blog, Speak Truth to Power, Economic Collapse Blog, The Automatic Earth, and Zero Hedge. Finally, one tells me what people are thinking out there in the culture of make believe: MSNBC. Needless to say, that’s the scary one.

I’m not foolish enough to read every article, much less read every article linked from these pages. But there is plenty of fodder here, much of it informed by biophysical economics. Biophysical economists, unlike neoclassical economists, know about finite materials. As a result, the former know starvation can kill people. Any self-respecting neoclassical economist assumes the rumbling of his stomach will cause food to appear.

Now let’s pause for a quick story about neoclassical economists.

Four shipwrecked economists wash ashore on a deserted tropical island. The first Asian economist says, “I’ll gather wood and start a fire to keep us warm and cook our food.” The second Asian economists says, “I’ll find water.” The third Asian economist says, “I’ll find food.” The American economist sits down, smiles, and says, “When you’ve got that all taken care of, I’ll consume whatever you produce. You’re darned lucky I’m here: Without me, the entire system falls apart in a hurry.”

Note that confidence among U.S. consumers fell in April. Unexpectedly, of course.

We now return to our regularly scheduled essay.

Among the places these links lead are the following. This summer’s hurricane season likely will contribute to high oil prices. And we might not need the hurricanes: According to the International Energy Agency, world oil demand will set an all-time record this year, exceeding the amount actually being sucked out of the ground by 2.4 million barrels per day. The global financial system is primed and ready to implode. The Fed admits to breaking the law in the name of transferring wealth (and not to me or you). And the Fed, like the U.S., is bankrupt. That alone will cause hyperinflation. “Real estate built America, and it’s going to take it down. Foreclosures will be the wrecking ball for the American economy.” The economic crisis in Greece is just getting started. Recent reports of economic growth are mere mirages from the smoke-and-mirrors cabal behind the curtain (duh). More than half your tax dollars support the military (yeah, that’s sustainable; even an increasing percentage of military personnel is questioning whether they will accomplish their amorphous mission in Afghanistan). Warren Buffett bought the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad, calling it an “all-in bet” on the U.S. economy, as if he’d been reading the work of James Howard Kunstler. Buffett’s partner Charles Munger wrote a parable transparently about the U.S. economy titled, “Basically, it’s over.” A large European bank warned its clients about completion of the ongoing collapse by the end of 2011. The U.S. dollar will collapse, causing world economic collapse, by 2012. Catherine Austin Fitts moved from New York City to rural Tennessee to build a doomstead. As should be obvious, “from now on the risk of entering a collapse must be considered significant and rising” (pdf file). And so on. The evidence mounts daily, and it all points in the same direction.

My interpretation and synthesis of these many essays and the data on which they rely suggests the industrial age is near its terminus. How near? Recognizing the difficulty of predictions, and the animus they elicit, I’ll go out on the often-wrong limb of forecast and give us a 99% chance of “lights out in the empire” by 21 December 2012. And I didn’t even look at my Mayan calendar.

Reinhart and Rogoff’s 2009 book, This Time is Different, describes financial crises in 66 nations dating to the 13th century. For a change, I agree with the rallying cry of people subject to previous collapses: This time is different. This time it’s not one of 66 nations. It’s every country in the entire industrial world. Indeed, this time is different.

In short, civilization is only a few days removed from chaos or, if you’re an optimist like me, from anarchy. This has always been the case, for every failed civilization as well as the one left standing. With every passing day, we move further into ecological overshoot and also closer to the end of western civilization and its apex, the industrial economy. For most individual industrial humans, the end will not be welcome. But for the living planet on which we depend, and therefore our very species, the end of industry will bring a welcome relief from decades of oppression. It might even give us back our humanity while granting our species a few more decades of planetary existence.
___________

This essay was inspired by a comment from Marguerite Daisy. It is permalinked at Counter Currents, Bluegrass reVisions, and Island Breath.

I’m reminded of this quote from Lily Tomlin: “No matter how cynical you become, it’s never enough to keep up.” And lest you think cynicism is a bad thing, here’s a reminder from George Carlin that closely corresponds to my own view: “Scratch any cynic, and you’ll find a disappointed idealist.”

Knowing how badly we’re destroying the living planet on which we depend is bad enough to make me a little cranky. But I’ve been there for years. Consider, for example, this line from a book I wrote in the autumn of 2003: “Americans often initiate military conflict in foreign lands with no apparent role except to secure natural resources or further political careers, and the United States government continues to sell these acts of aggression to a willing public that desperately wants to deny its own role in mass murder.” What’s really elevated my crankiness during the last couple years is the degree to which we are willing to stoke the planet’s fossil-fuel furnace, even to the point of destroying habitat for our own species. Add to that the astonishing number of people who just don’t give a damn what we’re doing to the planet, and ourselves, and who present no alternatives to bringing the industrial machine of death grinding to a halt, and I’m a little surprised I haven’t (1) gone postal or (2) been placed in confinement by the government. I don’t doubt, though, that every dissident will soon be considered a terrorist.

I thought we were too self-centered to destroy habitat for human beings on this most wondrous of rocks. But apparently the nature of our self-absorption is entirely too personal. We are perfectly willing to destroy our species, and every other one on Earth, if the few of us in the industrialized world can have the latest piece of technology.

I passed cranky a year ago. At this point I’m outraged, along with anybody who’s actually paying attention. If I could only believe in political solutions, I’d be back at cranky. If I could foolishly believe we have 300 years of long descent into a technologically poorer but biologically richer world, I’d be a happy man. But instead, I see what we’re doing and how we’re doing it. I see no chance of a decent uprising from the masses, hence no chance to prune the tree of liberty in my time (much less every generation, as Thomas Jefferson suggested). I see us stuck in our proverbial, planet-raping ruts, too content with the bread and circuses of the Technomessiah to bring about change through action.

The failure of leadership in light of peak oil and global climate change is comprehensive. At this late juncture, there is no politically viable solution for either phenomenon. Once, perhaps, there was. But we let the solutions slip away.

Actually, we didn’t so much let them slip away as we drove them away with the biggest whip we could muster. We banished Jimmy Carter from office, and from the political conversation, the moment he uttered a series of solutions to our fossil-fuel addiction. We never stood a chance with respect to runaway greenhouse: As soon as we committed ourselves to infinite growth on a finite planet by selecting fossil fuels instead of rational behavior, we destroyed any reasonable chance of dealing with our fossil-fuel addiction and therefore destined ourselves and the living planet to a leap from the political frying pan to the fires of hell.

We’re left with two politically unviable choices: economic meltdown or extinction of our species (and many others). To the maximum possible extent, we are choosing both heinous outcomes. But at some point, the ongoing economic meltdown reaches its inevitable completion at the hand of peak oil. Regardless of the specific timing, the Renaissance will need leaders, and those leaders are with us today. Among the relevant questions: Who are they, and how will they lead?

It’s too late for leadership from my generation, which failed miserably. We created the twin disasters now unfolding. We brought you Ronald Reagan and all the selfish bastards who followed in his shoes, right up to the current Warmonger-in-Chief. We brought you abysmal leadership beyond the Oval Office as well, including Congress, state and local governments, entrepreneurs, heads of corporations and non-profit organizations, and pathetic, growth-addicted “educational” institutions. I’ve no doubt I missed many of the parties responsible for the crises we face, but there’s plenty of blame to go around, and the failure of leadership is overwhelmingly comprehensive and comprehensively pathetic.

As I’ve indicated previously, evolution clearly dealt us a bad hand. It pushes us to the “flight-or-fight” response of survival. The survivors are driven to procreate. Those who survive and procreate then are driven to accumulate material possessions. Is it any wonder the financial elite run the industrialized world? Or that they are leading us to disaster?

Where has this evolutionary play led us? And, equally importantly, where do we turn from here? Who will lead, and how?

During the last few years, I have interacted closely with about a hundred individuals between the ages of 18 and 34, including many students and a passel of nieces and nephews. These young people represent the pool from which post-carbon leaders must come. It is their future, and they are now reaching the age of leadership. Somehow, people must emerge from this pool to lead us to a brighter tomorrow, sans electricity.

Although I’m typically unremitting in my optimism about economic collapse and therefore dodging the bullet of human extinction, my optimism wanes when I think about leadership in the post-carbon era. Of those hundred or so individuals I’ve come to know reasonably well, fewer than a handful give me cause for hope. Fewer than a handful possess the necessary traits to survive economic collapse, much less assume a leadership role on the other side.

Survival alone requires the proper psychological outlook, physical stamina, and a decent dose of intelligence. The first criterion alone eliminates at least eight of ten potential candidates. Almost nobody under the age of thirty is willing to deal with a low-energy, poverty-infused personal reality if it means forgoing his cell phone. Despite plenty of opportunities to observe non-industrial cultures in the world — arguably, more opportunities than any people in the history of the planet — a vast majority of today’s youngsters cannot envision economic collapse even when it surrounds them. A life without electricity, cheap food at the grocery store, and water coming out the taps is as foreign as a day without i-Pods and online porn. The hyper-indulgence of the generations has ratcheted up nearly beyond belief, and certainly beyond the point of comfortably returning to a life where a walk in the woods is viewed as a privilege instead of a burden.

While the ability to deal with the real world was plummeting to its current near-zero nadir, the notion that physical stamina is meritorious has largely disappeared from American life. Somewhere along the way, bicycling came to require a spandex uniform, and walking was relegated to losers who could not afford a new car. Meanwhile, living close to the land became a quaint notion mutually exclusive from a culturally important position in life (cf. texting and playing video games). For the vanishingly small proportion of individuals who are physically fit and willing to deal with an unfamiliar set of circumstances in the years ahead, the ability to exert intelligent leadership represents a daunting challenge. The challenge appears far too great for most of the people I know, nearly all of whom are wondering how they can scam the current system instead of wondering how they can help build a new one. The idea that the new one should be based on service to Earth and impoverished humans hasn’t yet entered the collective consciousness of the new “me” generation.

Obviously, I don’t know who will fill the leadership gap, or how they will do it. But I’m pretty sure the answers won’t come from over-indulgent children who are unwilling to grow up. I’m pretty sure the answers won’t come from youngsters who think the placement of their tattoos is more important than the placement of their gardens. I’m pretty sure the answers won’t come from ill-mannered children who dress for dinner in clownish clothes, untied shoes, and sideways baseball caps. I’m pretty sure the answers won’t come from people who think cars of the future will save us, instead of further destroying the living planet and our chances of survival. I’m pretty sure the answers won’t come from thoughtless automatons who irrationally believe technology will solve all our problems, instead of recognizing that technology is self-defeating. I’m pretty sure the answers won’t come from people who believe cities to be the apex of life on Earth, and who believe rural living is for bumpkins.

It’s not that I blame these overgrown children for whom maturity is a mirage. They are products of culture, and culture has led them into the misguided belief that the fossil-fuel fiesta is just getting started.

Instead, the best party on Earth is about to begin. Personally, I couldn’t be happier about it. But I’m guessing the children won’t be pleased.

My latest two entries established the moral case for terminating the industrial economy. The initial entry drew no arguments in favor of sustaining the industrial economy, but it did raise a few questions. The subsequent entry reiterated and clarified my arguments, and again brought no resistance to the notion of accelerating the ongoing collapse of the world’s industrial economy. I conclude that terminating the industrial economy is a moral act.

In fact, I believe that any attempt to terminate the industrial economy places one on the moral high ground. But agreeing to the morality of economic collapse is the easy part. The hard part is, as usual, taking action. Actually taking effective steps to bring down the massive, murderous machine of death is a daunting task. How to begin, with this seemingly overwhelming task? And where? Is there any chance we could actually be successful if we tried?

I’m certain only that we will fail if we do not try. Terminating the industrial economy is the most important job in the history of humanity. Our lives depend on it, in the same way our lives depend on the living planet. Allowing the industrial age to continue another day is utterly unconscionable (to say nothing of another week, another month, another year, or — and I am truly shuddering at this thought — another decade). But I take heart in knowing that a dedicated 15% of Americans brought the Vietnam War to a close, and stimulated environmental legislation that briefly made this country the safest, cleanest industrialized nation in the world. If we can 15% of Americans on board this time, we might accomplish something far more important than ending a war and passing legislation. We might ensure habitat for ourselves in the world we save.

First, the usual caveats apply. I don’t provide financial advice and you shouldn’t be taking my advice if I did. And I don’t tell people how to live. Following this 10-step plan is almost certain to cost you money. It also might cost you time behind bars, or worse. If you’re up for an all-expenses paid trip to Guantanamo Bay, keep reading. When you’re done reading, start acting.

1. Opt out of the industrial economy. Your continued immersion in the world of make believe depends to a great extent on how willing you are to live in that world, as opposed to the real world. After spending my entire adult life in the so-called ivory tower of academia, I’ve developed new skills to mitigate for a totally new set of circumstances in the years ahead. When I started, I could hardly distinguish a screwdriver from a hammer, and I certainly did not have sufficient money to simply opt out and go it alone, which I think is a bad idea, regardless. My specific, personal example notwithstanding, just about anybody can break the bonds of empire.

2. Get active. Start taking steps, large and small, to bring down the omnicidal system. The steps are many, varied, large, and small. An excellent list of actions, in two essays, can be found here and here. Some are even legal. Some aren’t. If you’re taking heroic actions to save the living planet from the culture of death, prepare to pay dearly. I don’t know if it’s possible to buy insurance on earnings to mitigate against time in prison. But it seems like a good idea, at least for revolutionaries with children.

3. Convince others to join you in getting active. Show them the data. Buy them books. We need a revolution. Therefore, we need revolutionaries. Think about the 15% solution: one in seven. Then 15% more. Rinse and repeat, until we’re an insurmountable force. And hurry: Time is not on our side.

4. Stop paying your debts. The banks cannot afford to come after you, even if you stop making gihugic mortgage payments. They’d have to admit to their shareholders exactly how much toxic debt they have on their books. And if they did that, their shares would drop in value to approximately zero. Furthermore, the current system is designed to indenture you. Whereas American culture formerly demanded you buy a house that required you to work for a few decades, college is the new house. By the time most people complete an undergraduate degree, they are indentured for life, even without shelter. It’s time to stop throwing our money at the people who created this mess, and continue to profit from it. If it makes you feel better, request a hardship deferment on your student loan. If, on the other hand, this entire system makes sense to you, and if you’re in favor of it and the associated destruction of the living planet (including planetary loss of habitat for Homo sapiens by mid-century), please take a deep breath, tune out the rational voices in your head, and go back to your television.

5. Practice the first of the three Rs: Reduce your consumption. Stop going to the stores. Personal consumption accounts for nearly 70% of the industrial economy in the U.S. Just say no, recognizing that the federal government will continue to claim economic growth is occurring, even if they have to account for all that growth by fudging numbers and taxing your future. (When the feds announced third-quarter economic growth, I wrote they were making it up. We now have the data to support my accusation.) At some point, reducing personal spending brings it all down because the government cannot fool all the sheeple, all the time. If you live in a city, you can obtain most of the stuff you need from the dumpsters in the alleys of your neighborhood. For years I’ve been living, at least in part, off the detritus of empire.

6. Practice the second of the three Rs: Reuse everything you can. Investing in durability and simply refusing to play along with our throw-away culture will go a long way toward bringing down the system. Combined with the preceding step, you’ll be able to save money while saving the living planet.

7. Practice the third of the 3 Rs, with a caveat: Recycle renewables such as paper and cardboard, because doing so requires a lot of energy. There’s an added benefit: All your friends will think you’re “green.” But don’t recycle disposable containers made from non-renewable resources such as plastics and metals. In particular, every plastic bottle in the trash generates demand for a few more drops of oil.

8. Increase your consumption of oil or electricity, both of which are nearly too cheap to meter in the United States. Use as much of both as you can afford, then use some more. The future of the world is at stake, along with the future of humankind. Leave the lights on in every room. Turn on the lights in every public building. Use the doors that rely on motion sensors every time to enter and leave a building. Exceed the posted speed limit. And so on. Waste energy until it becomes a habit. According to Jevon’s paradox, somebody else will use it, if you don’t. Burn those fossil fuels while you can.

9. The strong link between water delivery and energy consumption indicates every gallon through the taps requires a few drops of crude oil. As with oil and electricity, water is so heavily subsidized it is essentially free, so let’s keep the water running. So keep the water flowing when you leave a public restroom and, if you live in a rental where water is paid by the owner, don’t fix that leaky faucet. And, as we say in the desert, flush twice for Tucson.

10. Read and apply Derrick Jensen’s (2006) Endgame, especially volume 2, Resistance. Also read and apply Dave Foreman’s (1993) Ecodefense: A Field Guide to Monkeywrenching. These are compelling, how-to guides for terminating the industrial economy, in fewer than 800 combined pages.

Finally, a personal appeal from the billboard-toppling desert anarchist Edward Abbey: “Do not burn yourself out. Be as I am — a reluctant enthusiast — a part time crusader, a half-hearted fanatic. Save the other half of yourselves and your lives for pleasure and adventure. It is not enough to fight for the land; it is even more important to enjoy it. While you can. While it is still there. So get out there and mess around with your friends, ramble out yonder and explore the forests, encounter the grizz, climb the mountains. Run the rivers, breathe deep of that yet sweet and lucid air, sit quietly for a while and contemplate the precious stillness, that lovely, mysterious and awesome space. Enjoy yourselves, keep your brain in your head and your head firmly attached to your body, the body active and alive, and I promise you this much: I promise you this one sweet victory over our enemies, over those deskbound people with their hearts in a safe deposit box and their eyes hypnotized by desk calculators. I promise you this: you will outlive the bastards.”

To which I would add only this thought: Especially — and probably only — if you abandon your addiction to empire, and then change your life accordingly.