5 ms·

Purchased on the credit card of carbon release. We might get lucky and see some technological or social innovation negate or stop the coming disaster, or civili

by Kye 6y ago

Purchased on the credit card of carbon release. We might get lucky and see some technological or social innovation negate or stop the coming disaster, or civilization could snap back to where it was centuries ago.

LeifCarrotson 6y ago
The worst part is not the horror of mass extinctions and runaway greenhouse gasses might eventually resolve itself on geologic timescales, but that the society that rebuilt might find it impossible to get out of the stone age; much less through an industrial revolution: we've pillaged the highest-yield mines, germs have been developed into antibiotic-resistant superbugs, we've extracted the easiest-to-reach stored hydrocarbons, and replaced natural, hardy, diverse crops and the "basic 5" domestication-friendly animals with inbred monocultures.
- troutwine 6y ago
  I do wonder how much our extractive technological culture would play to the benefit of a child society that intended to learn from us. There'd be an awful lot of material at the surface that could be recycled or repurposed, if we're talking a reboot on the order of centuries. Idle thought.
  - eropple 6y ago
    There are, but a lot of them can't be reconstituted without other resources. Take, like, rebar, which is the post-apocalyptic author's favorite source of "chunky metal"--it's low-grade steel that melts north of 1200 deg C. If you don't have access to fossil fuels (or an electric arc furnace, and then how are you going to power it?) you're probably looking at a charcoal forge. Charcoal forges require a ton of airflow (relatively easy, if potentially work-intensive) and a ton of fuel to get hot enough to melt even iron, let alone steel (and remember that modern shitty steel is still pretty good by historical standards!). You can absolutely do it, but you're crawling by your fingernails. And then you have to multiply that by thousands of different factors and different problems. I've thought about this a bunch through the lens of building a game in a world like this and done quite a bit of research, and I tend to think that most of what you might consider "ready resources" in such a world require a pretty significant amount of re-bootstrapping that become really, really hard without easy hydrocarbons. Maybe doable! Probably really really hard.
    - troutwine 6y ago
      Thought provoking. Thanks!
  - smogcutter 6y ago
    Something like this is part of the background of Gene Wolfe’s “Book of the New Sun” series, totally wild books that are set in a far future earth. Mineral wealth is totally exhausted, and “mining” just means digging up the detritus of forgotten civilizations. I’m really tempted to post spoilers by way of example, but part of the fun of the book is putting the pieces together and realizing what’s going unsaid because the narrator either takes it for granted or doesn’t understand it himself. Very strong recommend if you have any interest in sci fi/fantasy.
- glenstein 6y ago
  >but that the society that rebuilt might find it impossible to get out of the stone age; much less through an industrial revolution I don't disagree, necessarily, but I would be fascinated to know if there are any books or articles that game out this scenario in detail. What would industrialization without massive reserves of hydrocarbons look like?
  - samus 6y ago
    There are promising approaches to break down organic matter into basic hydrocarbons. Also, landfills generate huge amount of natural gas. These approaches are not mainstream yet because hydrocarbons from oil reserves are still cheaper. But if they are not available, it might be worthwhile. Again, this assumes sufficient knowledge in chemistry and a vision on what to do with in the first place. Both might or might not be present in a future civilization.
- take_a_breath 6y ago
  ==the "basic 5" domestication-friendly animals== Can you expand on what you mean by this? I’m not finding much through search.
  - Arnavion 6y ago
    The list is generally cows, pigs, goats, sheep and horses. But it's not a rigid list; sometimes goats and sheep get merged, and sometimes chickens get added.
  - LeifCarrotson 6y ago
    Sorry, that was a point from Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond. I should have just listed the cow, horse, sheep, goat, and pig. Those are the basic examples of the few animals which are docile herbivores, breeding in captivity, growing to a large, breeding adult in a couple years, and which live in social groups that accept humans at the top of the hierarchy. Building a society with protein and labor from cows is much easier than, say, harnessing turkeys. There are a billion cows on the planet, but if human society grinds to a halt and we stop artificially inseminating them and running the feed plots those species might not survive.
    - take_a_breath 6y ago
      Thank you! This book is actually on my night stand right now, next in line.
- Wowfunhappy 6y ago
  For how long would bacteria maintain their antibiotic resistance once antibiotics stopped being used?
  - samus 6y ago
    Most adaptations come at significant metabolical costs. Molecule complexes that funnel toxins out of the cell, alternative metabolimal pathways, exotic cell wall configurations and the like all have disadvantages in the race to the bottom that bacterial evolution is. But it's hard to say how long it takes until gene drift gets rid of them completely. After all, many are derived from the chemical weaponry of fungi.
bluedevil2k 6y ago
This is a perfect example of the trendy "everything's leading to a doomsday" sentiment among some people on this site. "We might get lucky" - humans have overcome every adverse condition in our 2 million years alive, why do you have the hubris to believe that you know we can only survive if we get lucky. "stop the coming disaster" - again, hubris to think that the only possible outcome for humans is a disaster. "could snap back to...centuries ago" - this has happened once in the past 2000 years, you really think you're going to be alive when we enter a 2nd Dark Age. I think it's the same sort of thinking with the "Jesus is coming back in the next 5 years" religious crowd. You want to feel important and part of something bigger than yourself, something planet-wide, so you're almost looking forward to being a part of it so you can feel like you're part of history.
- Kye 6y ago
  Please soapbox on someone else's comment.
  - hevelvarik 6y ago
    Someone had to do it.
- bmitc 6y ago
  By the same token, one could argue your comment is part of the trendy progress worship that's been happening since the beginning of humanity. Mental disorders are at an all-time high. Extinction levels are well beyond their natural baseline rate, due to human activity. Environmental destruction is at an all-time high. Now, with the Internet, we've managed to build a system that can amplify nearly every negative aspect of human society but at the same time offers a shield of sorts from those effects. Yes, humans are likely to survive in the same way that a virus survives. We find a way but it isn't always a virtuous path. We humans have yet to understand that nature is a balance and that we choose to operate outside of that balance. Everytime we progress we invent new ways for people and other animals to suffer.
  - bluedevil2k 6y ago
philwelch 6y ago
Which is exactly how you like it so it must not be that bad.

by Kye 6y ago

LeifCarrotson 6y ago

The worst part is not the horror of mass extinctions and runaway greenhouse gasses might eventually resolve itself on geologic timescales, but that the society that rebuilt might find it impossible to get out of the stone age; much less through an industrial revolution: we've pillaged the highest-yield mines, germs have been developed into antibiotic-resistant superbugs, we've extracted the easiest-to-reach stored hydrocarbons, and replaced natural, hardy, diverse crops and the "basic 5" domestication-friendly animals with inbred monocultures.

troutwine 6y ago
I do wonder how much our extractive technological culture would play to the benefit of a child society that intended to learn from us. There'd be an awful lot of material at the surface that could be recycled or repurposed, if we're talking a reboot on the order of centuries. Idle thought.
- eropple 6y ago
  There are, but a lot of them can't be reconstituted without other resources. Take, like, rebar, which is the post-apocalyptic author's favorite source of "chunky metal"--it's low-grade steel that melts north of 1200 deg C. If you don't have access to fossil fuels (or an electric arc furnace, and then how are you going to power it?) you're probably looking at a charcoal forge. Charcoal forges require a ton of airflow (relatively easy, if potentially work-intensive) and a ton of fuel to get hot enough to melt even iron, let alone steel (and remember that modern shitty steel is still pretty good by historical standards!). You can absolutely do it, but you're crawling by your fingernails. And then you have to multiply that by thousands of different factors and different problems. I've thought about this a bunch through the lens of building a game in a world like this and done quite a bit of research, and I tend to think that most of what you might consider "ready resources" in such a world require a pretty significant amount of re-bootstrapping that become really, really hard without easy hydrocarbons. Maybe doable! Probably really really hard.
  - troutwine 6y ago
    Thought provoking. Thanks!
- smogcutter 6y ago
  Something like this is part of the background of Gene Wolfe’s “Book of the New Sun” series, totally wild books that are set in a far future earth. Mineral wealth is totally exhausted, and “mining” just means digging up the detritus of forgotten civilizations. I’m really tempted to post spoilers by way of example, but part of the fun of the book is putting the pieces together and realizing what’s going unsaid because the narrator either takes it for granted or doesn’t understand it himself. Very strong recommend if you have any interest in sci fi/fantasy.
glenstein 6y ago
>but that the society that rebuilt might find it impossible to get out of the stone age; much less through an industrial revolution I don't disagree, necessarily, but I would be fascinated to know if there are any books or articles that game out this scenario in detail. What would industrialization without massive reserves of hydrocarbons look like?
- samus 6y ago
  There are promising approaches to break down organic matter into basic hydrocarbons. Also, landfills generate huge amount of natural gas. These approaches are not mainstream yet because hydrocarbons from oil reserves are still cheaper. But if they are not available, it might be worthwhile. Again, this assumes sufficient knowledge in chemistry and a vision on what to do with in the first place. Both might or might not be present in a future civilization.
take_a_breath 6y ago
==the "basic 5" domestication-friendly animals== Can you expand on what you mean by this? I’m not finding much through search.
- Arnavion 6y ago
  The list is generally cows, pigs, goats, sheep and horses. But it's not a rigid list; sometimes goats and sheep get merged, and sometimes chickens get added.
- LeifCarrotson 6y ago
  Sorry, that was a point from Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond. I should have just listed the cow, horse, sheep, goat, and pig. Those are the basic examples of the few animals which are docile herbivores, breeding in captivity, growing to a large, breeding adult in a couple years, and which live in social groups that accept humans at the top of the hierarchy. Building a society with protein and labor from cows is much easier than, say, harnessing turkeys. There are a billion cows on the planet, but if human society grinds to a halt and we stop artificially inseminating them and running the feed plots those species might not survive.
  - take_a_breath 6y ago
    Thank you! This book is actually on my night stand right now, next in line.
Wowfunhappy 6y ago
For how long would bacteria maintain their antibiotic resistance once antibiotics stopped being used?
- samus 6y ago
  Most adaptations come at significant metabolical costs. Molecule complexes that funnel toxins out of the cell, alternative metabolimal pathways, exotic cell wall configurations and the like all have disadvantages in the race to the bottom that bacterial evolution is. But it's hard to say how long it takes until gene drift gets rid of them completely. After all, many are derived from the chemical weaponry of fungi.

bluedevil2k 6y ago

This is a perfect example of the trendy "everything's leading to a doomsday" sentiment among some people on this site. "We might get lucky" - humans have overcome every adverse condition in our 2 million years alive, why do you have the hubris to believe that you know we can only survive if we get lucky. "stop the coming disaster" - again, hubris to think that the only possible outcome for humans is a disaster. "could snap back to...centuries ago" - this has happened once in the past 2000 years, you really think you're going to be alive when we enter a 2nd Dark Age. I think it's the same sort of thinking with the "Jesus is coming back in the next 5 years" religious crowd. You want to feel important and part of something bigger than yourself, something planet-wide, so you're almost looking forward to being a part of it so you can feel like you're part of history.

Kye 6y ago
Please soapbox on someone else's comment.
- hevelvarik 6y ago
  Someone had to do it.
bmitc 6y ago
By the same token, one could argue your comment is part of the trendy progress worship that's been happening since the beginning of humanity. Mental disorders are at an all-time high. Extinction levels are well beyond their natural baseline rate, due to human activity. Environmental destruction is at an all-time high. Now, with the Internet, we've managed to build a system that can amplify nearly every negative aspect of human society but at the same time offers a shield of sorts from those effects. Yes, humans are likely to survive in the same way that a virus survives. We find a way but it isn't always a virtuous path. We humans have yet to understand that nature is a balance and that we choose to operate outside of that balance. Everytime we progress we invent new ways for people and other animals to suffer.
- bluedevil2k 6y ago

philwelch 6y ago

Which is exactly how you like it so it must not be that bad.