It seems that more and more energy is needed to keep the capitalist exhaustion of the Earth going, which also requires more and more material. How did we get here, and where do we go from here? A thought experiment.
Originally, however, there was (and is) plenty of energy—solar energy—and ecosystems built and continue to build themselves through biomass using that solar energy. These are also self-healing, for example after a fire, with an inherent capacity for organization based on the constant inflow of energy (solar radiation).
Out of that evolution came animals, and ourselves—organisms that process energy independently. We, too, are self-sufficient: solar energy grows food, we humans eat it and deliver labor energy. To build things, for example.
That worked just fine until about 200 years ago; the system naturally kept itself in balance, with ups and downs. Society was forced to live within limits. For example, if a forest was cut down, there would be no fuel or building material for years. Physical labor was the benchmark—it determined the (speed of) progress.
Then came the era of greed, with fossil fuels. At first, we used them to build more of the same: larger buildings, roads, and we electrified, industrialized, and automated various processes. We increasingly phased out physical labor and busied ourselves with managing, and inventing even more things so we could just sit on our butts.
But since World War II, we’ve been discovering new things—artificial worlds of images and video, data—and all that devours energy. At first, we still programmed computers ourselves, but now we even fear that these new developments will take over and even marginalize us as managers.
However, there are still no cars that grow on their own and run on a self-sustaining energy cycle: energy still needs to be supplied externally. Nor are there self-sufficient computers.
Sure, you can connect a solar panel, and that works for a while. And then what? If something breaks down?
Yes, humans also only function for a limited time… but we reproduce and ensure continuity. Cars don’t. Nor do computers or solar panels.
Theoretically, you could claim that with enough energy or electricity, solar panels could eventually replace themselves. Maybe, perhaps. If there are enough materials. But still, everything needs energy, or electricity—and ever more of it.
And really, we don’t have an energy problem—there’s plenty of energy—but a resources problem. To convert that energy into a usable form. A problem we only exacerbate by trying to solve a non-existent energy problem, which means energy use doesn’t go down but up—because those resources need to be processed, and thus material use skyrockets as well. According to the latest Circularity Gap Report, in the past 10 years we’ve consumed as many raw materials as in the entire 20th century combined…! So much for sustainability. [1]
You can already see it—the global unrest is all about resources. So we should be moving toward fewer and renewable resources. But we aren’t, and to make things worse, now there’s rearmament, which by definition involves non-renewable materials. So we’ll have to produce even more energy-intensive metals instead of less. Wasting resources to defend or even conquer the last scraps of resources. Greenland, Ukraine, the South Pole, the ocean floor, African nations.
The only sensible solution is to drastically reduce the use of resources and energy. It’s strange then that the EU is doing everything it can to protect the metal industry so it can keep growing. When it should actually be helping us use much less—making us less dependent on foreign resources.
Mario Draghi, on the other hand, called for more investment and self-production. Because he warned: otherwise Europe will become an open-air museum for the rest of the world. [x] But that might actually be the best option—we likely won’t get any closer to a sustainable way of living than that… Of course, it’s not going to happen.
But I take comfort in the thought that we can still pull the plug, to stop developments going in the wrong direction. And then the whole system collapses. We can unplug it. Then everything falls back to what is directly powered by solar energy. Just like 200 years ago. That’s the hopeful part—we can turn it off.
Which raises the question: could there come a moment when we can’t interrupt the power anymore? When we can no longer intervene? Or do we have to wait until the system collapses from lack of energy input? Or maybe there comes a point where all infrastructure can generate its own energy, without humans? And I mean permanently, including replacing components once they’re depleted?
That’s the crucial question. Could our modern technology eventually prevent us from switching off the power—could it sustain itself independently?
As of now, I’d say: no, it can’t. At least not in the short term. I estimate that would still require hundreds (?) of years of (artificial) evolution, before something like “photosynthesis 2.0” emerges that can autonomously generate electricity—because that’s the core issue.*
Could it be possible, say, that a production unit in a forest cuts trees for energy and replants them, and can thus produce and survive at a certain pace continuously?
Yes, in theory that’s imaginable. But that would still involve living nature. That process is therefor limited by the rate at which renewable (biomass) energy is captured, grows, or becomes available—per space and time unit. That’s basically the rate we should already be living at to be sustainable. So I wouldn’t be too worried about a factory in the forest. (That’s how things worked until 200 years ago, without fossil fuels!)**
Secondly, the factory also wears down—things will need to be replaced. Say, a new roof. How does that happen?
The energy may be there, but how does the system channel that energy toward a new roof without human intervention? Could robots do that? And who repairs them?
So, lots of questions—and I don’t have all the answers. What I do know is that we’re going to run out of resources at some point. That’s already happening. Today’s global unrest is fundamentally about resources—land grabs like the claims on Greenland, exploiting Ukraine, and all the plundering of African nations.
But still—for now, and I don’t see this changing in the next few decades—we can still pull the plug, and everything shuts down. That’s something to cherish.
Unless it happens naturally: blackouts have already been predicted. And in fact, pulling the plug is already happening: ships dragging anchors across the seafloor to damage cables is a brutal form of unplugging. Another example: hacker attacks that shut down entire systems—also a form of pulling the plug. So, be prepared, whether voluntarily or not: the plug being in isn’t guaranteed. And it may well be that our society does become an open-air museum.
.
.
* Someone once came up with the term “artificial intelligence”—probably without using their own intelligence. Because what it actually is, so far, is a bunch of algorithms that have no idea what they’re doing, performing countless analyses to appear intelligent.
But it’s really just analysis. There’s nothing intelligent about it. Maybe it’ll become intelligent someday, who knows—but not yet. So let’s just call it what it is: AA, Artificial Analysis. Nothing more, nothing less. Let’s stop fooling ourselves with the term “intelligence.” It’s just analysis. Period.
** Fossil fuels aren’t an option—not just because of CO₂, but because local sources are finite.
[1] https://www.circularity-gap.world/2024
[2] https://www.politico.eu/article/ursula-von-der-leyen-mission-europe-economy/
