Dr. Morgan is quite right regarding how essential Energy is to a modern economy.
The price of energy production is of course logically connected to the available energy or Surplus Energy available for productive purposes within the real economy. This tautology is though only part of the story.
Before reaching the same conclusion that the inevitable age of surplus energy has arrived the Nature of the Debt-based model used in the creation of the money used as the measure of and currency for exchange in modern political economy must first be accounted for. A sensible explanation of the main contributory causes of the present difficulties faced by the Global economy particularly in the Post Fordist developed economies is assisted with a judicious application of Occam’s razor..
Dr Morgan says that “before the coronavirus crisis, Britain had been borrowing more than £4 for each £1 of “growth” whilst this is broadly correct the allocation of the debt, largely to the FInancialised sector for speculation on non-productive purposes such as Share buybacks, and purchases of existing assets and not for production actually make Professor Richard Werner’s work of the dis-aggregated theory of credit a much more significant cause of the low growth delivered by each additional unit of debt. and not the energy cost of Energy, Ecoe is a theory whose time has not come and may still not ever arrive.
The problems in Political Economy as they stand presently and the question of future Political Economy based upon future unknown Energy realities are I think helpfully separated which is something Prof. David MacKay is very successful with, in his presentation of the question see the excellent online book, Sustainable energy without hot air.
The Problems are only weakly related with respect to future solutions and breaking the process into 3 parts is useful rather than lumping them all together. It is clear that the existing Form of Market economy and political economy is not able to solve the problem at stage 3 ( I.E Post 2050 post-Oil Economy)
Stage 1 requires a reform of the existing paradigm which involves facing up to the broken debt-based money system. Pension provision, the sovereign debt crisis and Public debt crisis are all addressable and will see improvements even within the deteriorating Cost of energy inputs as a share of output. We could call this stage lets fix what we know is not working.
Stage 2 covers the Post Financialised ( Big Bang Experiment) period to the oil running out in 2050.
This requires a much more long-term investment horizon and complicating the energy mix by overstating the ”Climate Change question** seems to be counterproductive, again I like the way Prof David Mackay dealt with the question including stating the necessities of **Clean Coal and Nuclear”. In this stage, we will be implementing ideas previously barred due to the denial inherent in clinging to a failing system.
Stage 3 Post 2050, This part is much easier than Stage 2 and stage 1, in my opinion, the myth-busting and levelling out inherent in solving the political problems at stage 1 and the challenge to vested interests in stage 2 are by far and away the largest obstacles to getting down to Brass tacks in my opinion.
To Quote Quine, I have in mind his differences of degree and not kind in a way,
this from Two dogmas of empiricism.
´´As an empiricist I continue to think of the conceptual scheme of science as a tool, ultimately, for predicting future experience in the light of past experience. Physical objects are conceptually imported into the situation as convenient intermediaries — not by defnition in terms of experience, but simply as irreducible posits18b comparable, epistemologically, to the gods of Homer. Let me interject that for my part I do, qua lay physicist, believe in physical objects and not in Homer’s gods; and I consider it a scientifc error to believe otherwise.´´
Is the present “Collapse” Managed, Engineered, or an inevitability of Elitist Hubris?
I would argue its a combination of Premature transition management engineering, What’s known as the “Great Reset”
Presently though Central Bank Digital Currencies a new Going Direct solution to the misdiagnosed Banking collapse of the September 2019 New York repo rate spike is being implemented.
“The BlackRock plan calls for blurring the lines between government fiscal policy and central bank monetary policy – exactly what the U.S. Treasury and the Federal Reserve are doing today in the United States. BlackRock has now been hired by the Federal Reserve, the Bank of Canada, and Sweden’s central bank, Riksbank, to implement key features of the plan. Three of the authors of the BlackRock plan previously worked as central bankers in the U.S., Canada and Switzerland, respectively.”
Douthwaite can usefully be consulted in how the monetary system can sensibly be modified or recalibrated to avoid the credit misallocation inherent in the modern monetary regime his short book,The Ecology of Money (Schumacher Briefing, 4) https://az.1lib.to/book/896040/105bf6
Chapter 4: One Country, Four Currencies
“Now we’ve surveyed the various types of the money system, we come to the exciting bit – specifying
the integrated multi-currency system of the future. We have seen that three groups (commercial
institutions, governments and users) can create money. Very little can be said in favour of
allowing the commercial creation of money to continue. Instead, money should be created by
non-profit-seeking organisations representing the people using it. In the case of a democratic
country, this would obviously include a national or regional government working on behalf of its
At least four types of money are needed. One is an international currency, playing the role taken
by gold before the collapse of the gold exchange standard. The second is a national or regional
(sub-national) currency that would relate to the international currency in some way. Thirdly, we
would need a plethora of currencies which, like LETS, the WIR and the commodity-based
currencies, could be created at will by their users to mobilise resources left untapped by national
or regional systems. Many of these user currencies would confine their activities to particular
geographic areas, but some would link non-spatially-based communities of interest. And fourth,
as our current money’s store of value function can so easily conflict with its use as a means of
exchange, special currencies are needed for people wishing to see their savings hold their value
while still keeping them in a fairly liquid form.”
Douthwaite’s briefing has a foreword by Bernard Leitaer.
“Do I agree with all the ideas that are presented here? Even Douthwaite admits that he doesn’t
“expect everyone to agree with the conclusions he has reached”. For instance, although I agree
with him on the importance of linking monetary issues to energy sustainability, I question the
viability of the means he proposes. (Why not include his “Energy-Backed Currency Units”
(ebcu) as part of a basket of commodities and services backing the currency – rather than being
the exclusive backing of currency?”
Leitaers TERRA is easily sourced online.
SEEDS sady has rushed to put the ECOE cart before the usury horse. in Short Seeds is a metric whose day has not and may not come particularly if one follows the science and technology of energy, materials and production.
Concerns about rising #energy costs have so far focused on heating/lighting/petrol but you can't run business without energy. Rising costs will add more to already increased food bills & put more pressure on living expenseshttps://t.co/98cxAdhgM9
— Radix Big Tent – RBT (@Radix_UK) February 9, 2022