Bioterra : David Holmgren

Mostrar mensagens com a etiqueta David Holmgren. Mostrar todas as mensagens

segunda-feira, 9 de setembro de 2024

Documentário: História da Permacultura

After compiling a little film about Bill Mollison, there was a large call to expand on it and the origins of permaculture, giving some other pioneers their dues. So, here I have focused on some of the people who influenced me heavily when I first became interested in permaculture. It includes clips from David Holmgren, Masanobu Fukuoka, Sepp Holzer, Robert Hart, Emilia Hazelip, Allan Savory, Vandana Shiva, Dr. Elaine Ingham and Geoff Lawton. I realise that there are many more who could be listed but due to the nature of this being a video, I focused mostly on people who had amassed a large library of footage to choose from.

segunda-feira, 12 de fevereiro de 2024

Permaculture showed us how to farm the land more gently. Can we do the same as we farm the sea?

As wild fish and other marine species get scarcer from overfishing and demand for ‘blue foods’ grows around the world, farming of the ocean is growing rapidly. Fish, kelp, prawns, oysters and more are now widely farmed. The world now eats more farmed seafood than wild-caught.

These farms are springing up along coasts and in offshore waters worldwide. Australians will be familiar with Tasmania’s salmon industry, New South Wales’ oyster farms, and seaweed farms along the southern coastline. Aquaculture is already larger than fishing in Australia. Farming the sea is hailed as a vital source of food and biomass essential to reduce the damage we do to our oceans and help feed a growing population.

But the booming “blue economy” is no panacea. Fish farms can pollute the water. Mangroves are often felled to make way for prawn farms. The solutions of today could turn out to be problems of the future. We cannot simply shift from one form of environmental exploitation to another.

There is an alternative: permaculture. This approach has proven itself on land as a way to blend farming with healthy ecosystems. What if it could do the same on water?

Making aquaculture better

Many of today’s most pressing problems – from climate change to biodiversity loss to pollution – are linked to the way we produce food on land. To make new farmland often involves removing habitat, destroying trees and adding synthetic fertilisers and pesticides.

Since humans began farming about 12,000 years ago, we have expanded to the point where we now actively control about 70% of Earth’s ice-free land to make food, build cities, and many other uses.

On land, we are farmers, tending domesticated species. But at sea, we’ve been hunters, seeking wild populations. Now, the seas are to be farmed. We should farm in ways which do not damage these ecosystems.

We cannot afford to use the same intensive methods of farming in the oceans as we have been on land. Given how sick many of the world’s ocean systems are already from overfishing, algal blooms from nutrient overload, and habitat loss, there’s not much room for error.

What is marine permaculture?

Permaculture as we know it was developed in the 1960s by Australians Bill Mollison and David Holmgren. The latter is a co-author of the research forming the basis of this article.

The goal was simple: create ways of farming which give back to the soil and ecosystems, using tools like no-till farming, companion planting and food forests. Over the last 50 years, it has been adopted by farmers around the world.

Permaculture is framed around three ethics – care of Earth, care of people, and a fair share – aimed at producing benefits and distributing costs equitably between different people and nature.

So what would permaculture of the seas look like? While it hasn’t been fully articulated, many recent developments in ocean production and governance have strong parallels with the work permaculture practitioners have been doing for decades.

Aquaculture systems can, many now believe, not only be low-impact but work to restore lost or damaged ecosystems. Picture oyster farms slowly bringing back the natural oyster reefs which once carpeted shallow coastal waters, or prawn farms surrounded by regrowing mangroves to protect the coast from erosion.

There are strong parallels between the closed-loop approach taken by permaculture on land and an emerging sea farming approach called integrated multi-trophic aquaculture. Here, species with different ecological roles are grown together, producing more food from your farm – and strengthening natural ecosystem services.

In these systems, food waste from consumers is recycled by seaweeds and shellfish, which in turn provide food and habitat to farmed fish species. If well-designed, these benefits flow out from the farm.

Permaculture’s influence is also evident in nature-inspired design and biomimicry, using natural shapes to give nature a boost. Australian work here includes efforts to restore rocky reefs by creating structures with the nooks and crannies small sea creatures need.

From the grassroots

At present, a handful of corporations have disproportionately high levels of control over fisheries and aquaculture. In part, that’s because supertrawlers, motherships, and large blue-water fish farms are expensive.

If we instead took a marine permaculture approach to the blue economy, we would seek to return power back to the people who live and work at the water’s edge – a permaculture equivalent to artisanal fishing.

A localised approach to aquaculture has real benefit. Individuals and communities could develop their own versions of marine permaculture which work in their area, by adopting design solutions used elsewhere or just by tinkering and trialing.

If something isn’t working or it’s creating flow-on consequences, people can see what’s happening and respond quickly.

Small-scale sea farms are less likely to do damage, and should also boost resilience by investing in local social and environmental benefits.

How do we make this a reality?

For their part, governments can help by creating policy frameworks encouraging small-scale producers – especially those able to demonstrate positive social and ecological outcomes.

Governments have an essential role in creating comprehensive spatial plans to guide aquaculture in an area or region. This is important, as it removes uncertainty and avoids conflict between different uses.

Researchers can help by developing measures of success and testing new techniques to help guide the new communities which will form to farm the sea.

Over the past half-century, permaculture on land has grown into a diverse movement challenging conventional wisdom about how to produce food.

We’ll need that same intense creative energy to make marine permaculture a reality. It’s entirely possible to design food-producing seascapes which give back to the sea as well as take from it – while making it possible for smaller sea farmers to flourish.

Fonte

Read more:

quarta-feira, 28 de junho de 2023

Curta-metragem - Um dia em 2030

Este vídeo é baseado em trechos de áudio dos episódios 1 a 9 do podcast 'From What If to What Next' de Rob Hopkins, gravado por Ben Addicott e depois lindamente animado por Temujen Gunawardena e Badj Whipple . O objetivo é dar vida ao 2030 que poderíamos criar se fizéssemos tudo o que poderíamos fazer, para definir e falar de um futuro pelo qual vale a pena desejar. Para assinar o podcast, visite From What If to What Next. Apresenta as vozes de Phil Teer, Kate Raworth, Ariane Conrad, Yannick Beaudoin, Marieke van Doorninck, Marie Godart, David Holmgren, Masum Momaya, Jane Myat, Sam Lee e Christian Jonet.
Entrevista interessante a Rob Hopkins

sábado, 19 de novembro de 2022

Earth Restorer's Guide to Permaculture Release- Rosemary Morrow, David Holmgren & Delvin Solkinson

About the book:
Earth Restorer's Guide to Permaculture is an informative and inspiring guide that shares the methods and mindsets needed for our future planetary health. It teachers us:● The roles of permaculture principles, ethics and design philosophy ● Ecological literacy for the current and future states of water, soil and climate● Global insights in how to design for the (present and future) impacts of climate change● The role of urban settings, and the path to eco-cities and neighbourhoods ● The increasing importance of marine permaculture and social permaculture ● How to move from ‘me’ to ‘we’ as we collectively restore and regenerate our Earth
“This is a vital book for our times of climate catastrophe, biodiversity loss, species extinction, and food and water scarcity…it shines the light on another path.”- Dr Vandana Shiva, Indian scholar, author and environmental activist.

sexta-feira, 30 de abril de 2021

Entrevista a David Holmgren, co-autor da Permacultura

segunda-feira, 7 de agosto de 2017

Agrofloresta X Agricultura Sintrópica X Permacultura X Orgânicos

Agroecologia, Permacultura, Agrofloresta, Agricultura Sintrópica, Orgânicos…

É fácil se perder em meio a tantos conceitos e propostas. Mas e ai, o que é cada um?

Começando pela Agrofloresta. O conceito de agrofloresta já está aqui pelo Brasil desde dos anos 80. O conceito evolui da proposta de Agrossilvicultura, onde espécies lenhosas são cultivadas em consórcio com espécies herbáceas e anuais, então basicamente a idéia surge da possibilidade de consórcio de árvores, plantadas para madeira, e herbáceas para alimentação ou pasto.

Na publicação da Embrapa “Sistemas Agroflorestais: Conceitos e Aplicações” por Vera Lex Engel dá para ter uma idéia, nessa publicação tem uma conceituação legal para quem quiser se aprofundar.

Partindo daí vemos a necessidade de evolução do conceito do Ernst Gostch, quando ele aborda seu método como Agricultura Sintrópica sendo diferente de Agrofloresta, ou seja, qualquer produção de madeira atrelada com herbáceas já estariam englobadas no termo Agrofloresta, sendo assim se eu plantasse Eucalipto consorciado com milho e feijão por exemplo eu já estaria fazendo “Agrofloresta”, muito diferente da Agricultura Sintrópica.

A Agricultura Sintrópica, conceito apresentado pelo Ernst Gotsch, mais do que um simples consórcio entre madeira e herbáceas é baseado na Sintropia,

“O princípio da Sintropia (ao qual a entropia está intimamente ligada, dentro de cada sistema do universo, até mesmo os cibernéticos, vivos ou não) faz com que sua existência seja preservada apesar da entropia nesse mesmo sistema. É um processo que opõe-se à perda de energia, e desorganização através de uma injeção de novas energias geradas a partir deste mesmo processo ou de outros, de fora do sistema, e muitas vezes energia inútil nestes. “-Wikipedia

Sendo assim o sistema Sintrópico já é pensado para ser organizado e estabelecer ganho energético.

Na prática é a busca por um sistema em equilíbrio onde todas as espécies tem seu papel. O Eucalipto não está ali apenas para a produção de madeira, ele irá gerar matéria orgânica que vai adubar o solo, descompactar e buscar nutrientes em outras camadas para devolver ao solo na parte superior, e fazer parte de um sistema de interação entre espécies.

Na Agricultura Sintrópica quem gerencia o sistema está constantemente buscando uma sucessão biodiversa acelerando os processos e buscando uma floresta produtiva. De maneira geral a Agricultura Sintrópica é uma Agrofloresta, mas nem toda Agrofloresta é Sintrópica. A Agrofloresta pode estar pautada em propostas tradicionais de aplicações de venenos, herbicídas sendo apenas uma possibilidade de consorcio agrícola.

A Permacultura é um conceito que nasceu na Austrália desenvolvida por Bill Mollison e David Holmgren. O nome tem origem na união das duas palavras Permanente e Agricultura.

Uma Agricultura Permanente, a Permacultura tem como uma das suas principais bases o design de ambientes sustentáveis como Bill Mollinson descreveu:

“Permacultura é um sistema de design para a criação de ambientes humanos sustentáveis e produtivos em equilíbrio e harmonia com a natureza.”

A Permacultura abrange diversos conceitos, e vai desde a ocupação de um terreno, a criação de lagos artificiais para a fertirrigação.

Orgânicos. Ahh os orgânicos! com selos bonitos e chamando a atenção nas gôndolas de supermercados.

Entre os conceitos aqui apresentados talvez o mais simples, orgânico, apenas aceita a aplicação do que organicamente foi retirado, extraído ou gerado.

Há muitas exigências das certificadoras, e para ter aquele selinho no produto existe uma enorme lista do que tem que ser feito.

Sempre bom lembrar que o orgânico não é sinônimo de sustentável. O orgânico de certo está na minha lista do menos pior. Ele não recebeu agrotóxico nem adubo químico, porém isso não é tudo no meu modo de ver, acredito na Agricultura Sintrópica e na Permacultura onde a idéia e estarmos permanentemente no local, produzindo de forma sadia com o mínimo possível de elementos externos. Mas e o orgânico?

Não acho a simplicidade do orgânico suficiente para uma mudança de consciência e de forma de produção. O orgânico muitas vezes apenas muda o pacote da agricultura tradicional para um pacote tradicional com insumos orgânicos. A lógica de produção, extrativista sem preocupação com o solo continua mas com insumos orgânicos.

quinta-feira, 25 de agosto de 2016

Biblioteca gratuita e completa sobre permacultura, bioconstrução, agricultura ecológica (em Castelhano) e muito mais

Citação de Brecht, cartaz feito por João Soares

sábado, 4 de junho de 2016

Documentário: Uma maneira mais simples : Crise como Oportunidade-- A Simpler Way: Crisis as Opportunity (2016)

A maneira mais simples: Crise como Oportunidade é um documentário livre de longa-metragem que segue uma comunidade na Austrália, que se uniram para explorar e demonstrar uma maneira mais simples de viver em resposta a crises globais. Ao longo do ano o grupo construiu pequenas casas, jardins planta veggie, praticar uma vida simples, e descobrir os desafios de viver em comunidade. Este filme é o produto de horas e horas de filmagem que eu tirei durante esta experiência de um ano na vida simples. O documentário inclui entrevistas com David Holmgren, Helena Norberg-Hodge, Nicole Foss, Ted Trainer, Graham Turner, e muito mais.

Nota: Clicar em definições e surgem as legendas em Português.

Saber mais:

Ted Trainer's website

Simplicity Institute

Samuel Alexander (blogue)

Página Oficial do Filme

A Simpler Way: Crisis as Opportunity

Facebook

Ecoaldeia do filme

Wurruk

terça-feira, 10 de novembro de 2015

Permacultura, a arte de viver em harmonia com a natureza

A permacultura como paradigma de convivência sustentável com a natureza
Num contexto global marcado por crises ambientais, climáticas e socioeconómicas de crescente complexidade, a permacultura emerge como um paradigma alternativo de organização dos sistemas humanos em relação à natureza. Longe de se restringir a uma técnica agrícola, a permacultura constitui uma abordagem integrada que articula princípios ecológicos, éticos e sociais, propondo modelos de desenvolvimento sustentáveis e resilientes.
O conceito de permacultura foi desenvolvido na década de 1970 por Bill Mollison e David Holmgren, inicialmente associado à ideia de agricultura permanente. Posteriormente, o termo evoluiu para cultura permanente, refletindo a ampliação do seu campo de aplicação para além da produção alimentar. A permacultura passou, assim, a abranger dimensões como o planeamento do território, a arquitetura sustentável, a gestão de recursos naturais, a economia local e as dinâmicas comunitárias.
A base ética da permacultura assenta em três princípios fundamentais: o cuidado com a Terra, o cuidado com as pessoas e a partilha justa dos excedentes. Estes princípios traduzem uma crítica ao modelo dominante de exploração intensiva dos recursos naturais e propõem uma redefinição da relação entre o ser humano e os ecossistemas. A natureza deixa de ser concebida como um mero reservatório de recursos e passa a ser entendida como um sistema complexo, interdependente e dotado de limites biofísicos.
Do ponto de vista ecológico, a permacultura inspira-se no funcionamento dos ecossistemas naturais, caracterizados pela diversidade, pela eficiência energética e pela ausência de desperdício. Os sistemas permaculturais procuram integrar múltiplos elementos com funções complementares, promovendo sinergias que aumentam a produtividade e a estabilidade do conjunto. A lógica linear de produção e descarte é substituída por uma lógica circular, na qual resíduos são reintegrados como recursos.
Para além do seu contributo ambiental, a permacultura apresenta implicações relevantes no plano social e cultural. Ao valorizar o conhecimento local, a autonomia das comunidades e a cooperação, desafia modelos económicos baseados na centralização e na maximização do lucro. Neste sentido, pode ser interpretada como uma resposta prática às desigualdades sociais e à vulnerabilidade das populações face às alterações climáticas.
Em síntese, a permacultura configura-se como um modelo teórico-prático que propõe uma nova racionalidade ecológica. Ao articular ciência, ética e prática social, oferece ferramentas para a construção de sistemas humanos mais equilibrados e adaptados às condições do Antropoceno. Enquanto arte de viver com a natureza, a permacultura contribui para a transição rumo a sociedades mais sustentáveis, resilientes e socialmente justas.
Referências bibliográficas
Holmgren, D. (2002). Permaculture: Principles and pathways beyond sustainability. Hepburn: Holmgren Design Services.
Holmgren, D. (2011). Essence of permaculture. Hepburn: Holmgren Design Services.
Mollison, B. (1988). Permaculture: A designer’s manual. Tyalgum: Tagari Publications.
Mollison, B., & Slay, R. M. (1991). Introduction to permaculture. Tyalgum: Tagari Publications.
Odum, E. P., & Barrett, G. W. (2008). Fundamentos de ecologia (5.ª ed.). São Paulo: Cengage Learning.
Altieri, M. A. (2012). Agroecologia: Bases científicas para uma agricultura sustentável. São Paulo: Expressão Popular.
Fukuoka, M. (2010). A revolução de uma palha: Uma introdução à agricultura natural. Lisboa: Antígona.
Pretty, J. (2018). Sustainable intensification of agriculture. London: Routledge.

quarta-feira, 25 de setembro de 2013

Filme- United Natures

United Natures - mother earth rights, wild law, permaculture and environmental philosophy. All inforamtion here United Natures Movie

United Natures é realizado por Peter C Downey com Vandana Shiva (Seed Freedom), David Holmgren (permacultura), Helen Caldicott, Polly Higgins (Ecocide), Prof Stuart Hill (ecologia social) e muitos mais.

David Holmgren (nascido em 1955) é um designer ambiental, educador ecológico e escritor australiano. Ele é mais conhecido como um dos co-criadores do conceito de permacultura com Bill Mollison.

quinta-feira, 7 de abril de 2011

Contracção Económica

Just like peak oil and global warming, economic contraction is a "game changer." As the economy we now know crumbles, the far-reaching repercussions will sculpt every aspect of our future. In my opinion, any long-term plan -- Transition EDAPs included -- must anticipate that it will unfold amidst a world of economic contraction. We have to plan for it, and put alternative financial tools in place to weather it, or it will undermine all of our other efforts.

This post is an excerpt from a longer paper, "Economic Resilience," which is being posted online in serial form. Part I (this post) explains the problems, because we have to understand what we are working with in order to begin to solve it. Part II critiques what several economic theorists see as possible routes forward for the “big picture” economy. But the central question of this document is what we can do at the grassroots level. Part III (approximately 70% of the document) offers a panorama of ideas for building local economic resilience.

SEEING THROUGH THE SMOKESCREENS

"The scale of denial is breathtaking." --Jerry Mander

It might appear that there are very contrasting takes on what is happening in the economy, but remember there are all kinds of commentaries denying peak oil and global warming as well -- and the well-informed can see the gaping holes in the arguments. It takes self-study and work to learn to see through the smokescreens that have been painstakingly erected to obscure the stark realities.

Just as in the field of global warming where there are individuals who are well paid to distribute bad science to "prove" that global warming isn't human caused, just as the companies who stand to profit on oil don't want to admit it has peaked, there is a similarly enormous financial incentive for people to declare that there will be a lasting "recovery" - that growth will resume, and that collapse fears are unpatriotic (so we should all go shopping).

In economics, it takes more than work to see the holes in their arguments -- it takes raw courage. With the economic issue in particular, each one of us is wrapped up in it. It is our bread-and-butter, it is the roof over our heads, and it can be truly horrifying to look deeply. Perhaps four, maybe five years ago, I followed a link from one of Hopkins' pieces to an article by a different author who referred to "the triple crisis" of global warming, peak oil, and economic collapse. That was the first time I'd ever heard it put that way. At that time my stomach turned. I actually felt sick for a few weeks.

At that time I was simultaneously reading the work of Robert Prechter, Warren Buffett and Sy Harding. Prechter taught about the Fibonacci patterns and the effect that the rise and fall of cumulative human emotions builds into every market -- that after the exhilarating crest, there is an inevitable fall. Buffett taught readers to analyze the underlying fundamentals -- yet in company after company that I was testing at the time, his formulas proved out; the companies were already ridiculously overvalued for their underlying worth. At a time when the front pages of the newspapers were celebrating the nosebleed pinnacle of stock gains, Prechter and Harding wrote of preparing for the great bear market.

In my presentations here in Southern California, when I do the part of my talks where I explain the problems we face, I present it as "the triple crisis."

In the Totnes EDAP, Hopkins indicates his acceptance of "the end of economic growth" as part of the triple crisis that affects every aspect of our future course. But what we face goes far beyond “the end of growth.” By the end of this piece, I think you will see that the economy as we know it today is inevitably going to contract, grow smaller, "powerdown."

Whether it will be a full-scale collapse into chaos like Jared Diamond writes about or Stoneleigh forecasts , or whether we will be successful in creating locally-managed "surge breakers" in time, remains to be seen. But either way, we'd better try our best to get something in place.

POSSIBLE WAYS OFF THE MOUNTAIN

“Anyone who believes that exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist.”-Kenneth E. Boulding

I usually begin the economics portion of my talks with an overview: that we're coping with a triple crisis. I follow that with a detailed view of each of the three elements:

(1) Climate change: what the Union of Concerned Scientists forecasts for climate change here in my state of California;

(2) Peak oil: what ASPO, the U.S. Department of Energy, and the International Energy Agency anticipate as the future of petroleum, together with possible repercussions as outlined by Richard Heinberg, James Howard Kunsler and company. Peak oil is really a subset of “peak everything.”

(3) Economic contraction: more on this in a moment.

Over the course of industrialized civilization we have experienced an enormous assent of consumption of raw materials and consumption of energy. In his Energy Descent diagram, David Holmgren depicts this as the climb up the mountain. Right now, at the peak of the mountain, what are our options? What are the possible ways forward?

The first option, the orange line, “Techno-fantasy,” is the business-as-usual, eternal growth scenario. It says We’ll just keep going the way we are now, with more of the same. Keep on shopping! Don’t worry that we don’t have the oil to keep going like this, we’ll just send an army over and conquer the country that has it ... We’ve heard this one before, and you’ll note the word “fantasy” in the name.

The second scenario, the “Green Tech Stability” model, says Okay, we know that eternal growth isn’t possible, so we’ll ditch the growth idea. We’ll just continue along at a reasonable level, kind of steady, right where we are now. So we’re running out of oil: we’ll use wind and solar and biofuels and all that renewable stuff to replace it.

But there are some serious problems with this Green Tech proposal. One is the idea of energy density: oil gives us tremendous power, and no combination of renewables can possibly replace what it does for us. The second is timing: those renewables aren’t in place now, in anywhere near sufficient quantities, to avoid the pain of energy shortages. We will still have to powerdown.

The third problem is that our entire economy is built upon the presumption of everlasting growth. Everything from our stock market to our accounting systems is founded upon the premise that growth is good and lack of growth is failure. Thus even the adjustment from that steeply ascending line to the flat line is a very significant one. We will feel the ouch. The fourth is the “peak everything” issue. There is a serious problem with the level at which we declare that stability (but we’ll get into that in Part II). For those four reasons, we should be calling this a Green Tech fantasy scenario.

The third scenario, the red line, is the Crash scenario, the Mad Max scenario, the collapse of civilization as we know it. This is what happens if we keep on going with the Techno-fantasy and ignore the problem a little longer. Now, I have two children; I say, there’s got to be a better alternative than this.

Holmgren presents another scenario, the Energy Descent scenario. This scenario says we can take the boundless creativity that got us up the mountain and apply it toward actively designing a careful way down. This is the approach that the Transition movement embraces.

It is very important to understand that inherent in the Energy Descent scenario is the downhill slope – the understanding that there must be a descent. There must be a powerdown. There must be a significant decrease in consumption overall. And as you will see in the following discussion, that means there will inevitably be a severe contraction in our economic systems.

A BASIC EXPLANATION: ECONOMICS

We have an economic system that is based entirely upon the presumption that growth will be ongoing, unceasing, and unlimited. This in turn requires ever more extraction from the earth. Thus at the most basic level, our tour of economics begins with biocapacity, a.k.a. global footprint.

Global footprint is how much raw materials we use and how much waste we generate, compared to how fast the planet can make more resources and clean up the mess in the same time period. Humanity as a whole has been using more resources and generating more waste than the planet can make and clean up. It is called ecological overshoot and we have been moving deeper into this state since the 1970s. Humanity is simultaneously experiencing peak oil, peak natural gas, peak coal, peak copper, peak uranium, peak phosphorus, peak fresh water, peak arable land, and more. Richard Heinberg calls it “peak everything.”

It gets even worse when we look at it by continent. Again, if we take all the "stuff" there is on the planet -- all the fresh water, all the arable land, all the fisheries, all the forests, all the energy resources and more -- and we divide it up by the number of people we have here today, we get a figure we can call our "fair share."

Our fair share is 2.1 hecatres (they measure this stuff in an equivalency unit called "bioproductive acres"). Humanity as a whole uses on average 2.23 hecatres. 2.23 world average consumption is bigger than our 2.1 fair share. Right there you can see the ecological overshoot.

Here in North America, we consume at a rate of a whopping 9.4 hecatres. That is nearly five times our fair share. In other words, if everyone on the planet consumed the way we do -- the way we tell each other is "normal" -- it would take FIVE PLANETS to provide for it all.

At this point in my talks, I often throw five earth beach balls out at the audience. It makes a lasting impression.

All this means that we would have to go to six, seven, eight planets-worth-of-consumption in order to "grow" this economy.

It's quite clear we cannot do that.

FIVE-PLANETS-WORTH-OF-CONSUMPTION

There are three ways in which North Americans have managed to live at five-planets-worth-of-consumption. I am indebted to Sophy Banks and Naresh Giangrande for an explanation in the Transition Training here in Los Angeles in 2008, which really broadened my understanding.

“Ghost acres” – taking from others. We have raped and pillaged the raw materials of other continents (leaving the people who live on those continents with far less than their fair share). We’ve consumed those goods here and persuaded each other that they were rightfully ours.

“Draw down” -- taking from the future. As we desecrate ancient forests and deplete fisheries, we are consuming today that which should be our children’s inheritance.

“Ancient sunlight” – taking from the past. Fossil fuels – oil, gas, coal – are captured ancient sunlight. In the space of a mere 150 or so years out of the entire history of humanity, we are gobbling up and consuming the entire planetary supply.

We have an economic system that is entirely dependent upon taking from others, taking from the future, and taking from the ancient past. This economic system is built upon the presumption of everlasting growth. Thus in order to keep it going (keep it growing) we must take more from others, take more from the future, and take more from the ancient past.

Peak oil is the laws of physics telling us it is no longer possible to take more from the ancient past. Biocapacity is the laws of physics telling us it won’t be possible for much longer to take from the future. “War that will not end in our lifetimes” is a sign that taking from others has maxed out.

We are at the end of growth. We're actually beyond the end of growth into the beginning of economic contraction.

THE BEGINNING OF CONTRACTION

"Understandably, everyone wants it to get “back to normal.” But here’s a disturbing thought: What if that is not possible? What if the goalposts have been moved, the rules rewritten, the game changed?"

--Richard Heinberg

Hopkins has written about peak oil that "to argue that within 2 years, peak oil will be an issue of “who lives” is a lazy way to describe it and an unhelpful sweeping generalization. Some places won’t feel much of an impact at all for years."

In similar fashion, biocapacity and the limits to economic growth are already being painfully felt in some places, while in other places people might have the luxury cushion to go on pretending it isn't so for several more years. Right now, people in some of the affluent social circles around me continue to carry on in denial. Discussions of the issues in this document seem absolutely absurd to them. After all, the newspapers say “the economy is recovering.”

Yet we can't pretend away the indicators all around us. The fact that we are severely overextended is showing up not just in our ecological systems, but in our human ones as well. There are no Buffett fundamentals to support the notion of "economic recovery." In fact the very substance that should be there is hollow.

It calls to mind the times when rats get into my grapefruit tree. They bore a small hole in one side of the fruit, then crawl inside and eat all the flesh. You’re left with an empty, hollowed-out rind dangling there on the tree.

Stoneleigh points out how our current economic "growth" figures include tons of transactions which are entirely built upon credit and financial instruments. There isn't any substance to them.

The substance that supports many of our conventional economic transactions is rapidly depleting. Peak oil promises absolutely staggering economic implications. Already we've seen a doubling of retail gasoline prices over the past three or so years, and the ramifications of that are still playing out across the market. Fed Ex costs more, postage costs more, moving everything around the surface of the planet costs more. Food costs a lot more. And we’re just getting started.

Peak oil will mean the end to globalization as we have known it thus far. Right now we call it “normal” to harvest raw materials on one continent, to ship them to another continent for manufacture, and to still another continent for sale. This absurd extravagance -- only possible with plentiful cheap oil – is at its end. So too is the globalized economy that was built around it.

Conventional wisdom says it takes about three years for an oil shock to play out across the financial markets. We’re not yet three years out from $147 a barrel in July 2008, thus we’ve barely seen the full array of impacts, and prices are climbing back over $108 for the second time. Oil industry representatives are now publicly stating that prices will go much higher. As oil (and now potentially coal too) becomes more precious, this volatility will only exacerbate the existing market instabilities.

Further evidence of the empty, hollowed-out rind:

Government: Our government is in dire straights: our California and Los Angeles city budgets are completely upside down, forcing them to slash programs across the board. Our national debt just reached an all-time record high. As I write this, each citizen’s share of the national debt -- YOUR share -- is $45,959. The decreased tax base due to other economic factors will only exacerbate the plight of our government in coming years.

Consumers: Our unemployment rate would display far higher if it weren't for the fact that people's term of unemployment is now exceeding the maximum term over which they can receive benefits, thus they are disappearing from unemployment statistics. (the 99ers) The long-term jobless are no longer counted in the newspaper statistics, but that doesn't mean they now have jobs and their pain is behind them. Many have given up on finding a job. Others who have managed to find work are now underemployed, earning far less than their skills once merited. The number of Americans on food stamps is rising, and so is the demand at food banks. A recent report indicated that 20% of families in California struggled to afford food last year, and 18% of Americans.

Labor: We have an aging population demographic, with increasing numbers of retirement-age individuals, and social security sliding into permanent deficit. We have an obesity epidemic among our youth. These signal increasing hope for oil-intense medical care, which we won’t be able to supply. All this means decreasing numbers of able-bodied adults to perform post-petroleum manual labor. Who will create that "more" for this supposedly growing economy?

Social: The rate of emotional depression in the U.S. has increased more than tenfold in the last fifty years. Some thinkers declare that Western society is in the grip of a “social recession.” Our population has a psychological and spiritual sense of "maxed out.”

James Gustave Speth quotes the United Nations Development Programme’s 1996 report (which, rather than being outdated, indicates how very long our society has been desperately off track). This report lists several ways that economic performance has gone sideways:

Jobless growth – where the overall economy grows but does not expand the opportunities for employment;
Ruthless growth – where the fruits of economic growth mostly benefit the rich;
Voiceless growth – where growth in the economy has not been accompanied by an extension of democracy or empowerment;
Rootless growth – where growth causes people’s cultural identity to wither;
Futureless growth – where the present generation squanders resources needed by future generations.

Our economy is indeed that empty, hollowed-out rind dangling on the tree, without substance, without the materials for “more”.

Every market is an accumulation of human emotions. From the tulip mania of 1637 to the Dow Jones of today, mass human enthusiasm drives market values higher; mass human distrust and fear pulls economic values down. (Robert Prechter has written entire books about this.)

When we look at the emotions of a market, we see where we are. We all heard the "new paradigm" a few years back when media broadcast that it would only get better. That was right before the first plunge. In denial, we now desperately search for signs of "recovery."

To which Stoneleigh declares with bright sarcasm: "Those green shoots of recovery? That would be gangrene!"

I don't know about you, but around me there is lots of fear. In my Pacific Region, the Consumer Confidence index recently hit a record low. We're in a momentary time when people desperately home that we're "returning to normal." It's clear where we are on the emotions-of-a-market chart. And we can see what lies ahead.

Early Transition materials encouraged us to listen to the elders. Around here, members of the generation that experienced the Depression of the 1930s have been telling us "hold on to your cash." It looks just like they saw before.

Transition movement commentary on the economy

• Rob Hopkins, “Economics addition to The Transition Handbook”

Joanne Poyourow is the initiator who brought the ideas of the international Transition movement to many areas of Los Angeles. She is actively involved in the Transition Los Angeles city hub. She was a CPA in public practice for more than 13 years and holds a degree in Business Economics from the University of California at Santa Barbara

quarta-feira, 3 de novembro de 2010

Documentário - Anima Mundi

Podemos sobreviver à transição da civilização industrial humana acontecendo agora devido ao pico do petróleo e às mudanças de clima? Será capaz de ver a floresta para as árvores, a Terra para o sonho, o Universo para a semente? Anima Mundi é um filme sobre esperança, mas também um filme sobre a falta de esperança, é um filme sobre a realidade, do lado de fora olhando para dentro.

A Canção Permie por Michelle Morgan como ouvida no documentário filme Anima Mundi

Mais informações no sítio Anima Mundi

Bioterra

Páginas