Newsgroups: bit.listserv.xcult-l
Date:         Mon, 4 Jan 1993 22:25:33 EST
From:         Dave Nasatir <nasatir@DHVX20.CSUDH.EDU>
Subject:      Energy Use, Population Growth, The future

Oliver's excellent commentary on the unequal consumption of
fossil fuel energy has raised a series of questions in my
mind and I would be grateful for any assistance in arriving
at answers to them.

1.  Do the national rankings remain the same when other
    sources of energy are factored in, e.g. nuclear
    energy?  Perhaps the picture would be altered if this
    non-renewable, pollution generating source were to
    be figured in as well.

2.  What happens when available solar energy is factored
    in?  As I recall the list of nations that consumed
    large amounts of fossil based energy per capita, most
    of them were above the 30th parallel where there is
    somewhat less solar energy available for half the
    year.

    Is there a similar (relative) phenomenon in the
    Southern Hemisphere?  If so, geographic location
    (cold weather) might account for some of the disparity
    in energy consumption.

3.  Are the data credible (considering the source)?  How
    was the data on consumption of renewable carbon based
    fuel (e.g. methane, wood, and/or animal dung) obtained?

4.  The data presented are for a single year.  Was this a
    typical year or are there trends in energy consumption
    per capita?  I suspect that there may be a trend that
    reveals an increase, worldwide, in energy use per capita
    with more rapid increases ocurring in countries in
    the processes of urbanization and industrialization.

5.  There is certainly a trend in the fertility rates
    of countries in the processes of industrialization
    and/or urbanization -- and that trend appears to show
    a decrease in the rate of population growth.

6.  If any of the above is true, it might appear that one
    of the consequences of the transformation of a society
    from a rural, agricultural base to an urban
    industrial one is the substitution of fossil based
    energy sources for human beings to accomplish some
    of the less desirable tasks of keeping the species
    alive, (e.g. growing food).

7.  An apparent paradox in all of this, it would seem,
    is that among the many modes of social organization
    that are possible, there appears to be a tendency for
    those living in low fossil fuel energy consumption
    per capita/ high birth rate societies to do what
    they can to reorganize their lives in ways that
    require high energy use per capita -- with an
    associated drop in the rate of population increase.
    But there seems to be little evidence of any
    tendency for those in the high energy
    consumption per capita/low birth rate societies
    to rechoreograph their lives in ways that would
    reduce their energy consumption (or, for that
    matter, increase their birth rate).

8.  Upon re-reading all of the above, I find that
    I am still unclear about what actions I, as an
    individual, should take regarding energy use and
    population growth (I already have six grandchildren
    and am expecting news of a seventh any day now)
    that would result in a general improvement for
    all human beings, now and yet to come.


9.  I would be grateful for any guidance you might wish
    to provide.

Dave Nasatir
nasatir@dhvx20.csudh.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU