Post Carbon Institute hereby issues a formal call for the U.S. Department of Energy to come forward with all possible clarity and directness on where the world stands with regard to future oil supplies. The American people have already paid for this information through their taxes and they will bear the brunt of higher oil prices if these are indeed in the offing.

…This is not to say that the remainder of the 21st century must consist of a collapse of industrialism, a die-off of most of the human population, and a return by the survivors to a way of life identical to that of 16th century peasants or indigenous hunter-gatherers. It is possible instead to imagine various acceptable and even inviting ways in which humanity could adapt to ecological limits while further developing cultural richness, scientific understanding, and quality of life (more on this below).

…It’s tempting to dismiss these as isolated incidents and those who perpetrate them as fringe crackpots. I’m sure some of them are. But their anger and fear are far from isolated. I’ve often wished that carbon dioxide were visible, so we could actually see how much of the stuff we emit. I now wish the same for the flow of powerful emotions (and don’t talk to me about mood rings, okay?)—that we could somehow see when and how love and fear were passed from person to person. In these days of economic, environmental, and social uncertainty I bet fear would hang over many of our houses, neighborhoods, cities in varying layers of darkness.

…More and bigger not only is not better, it is not possible. The response I often get to this view is the assertion that we need not worry about the physical limits of the planet because human ingenuity will invent increasingly clever ways of exploiting those resources. This technological fundamentalism—the belief that the use of evermore sophisticated high-energy, advanced technology is always a good thing and that any problems caused by the unintended consequences of such technology eventually can be remedied by more technology—is more prevalent, and more dangerous, than religious fundamentalism.

As a historian, Carolyn Baker has a keen eye for current events that are indicators of the collapse we’re seeing all around us. But she’s also a psychologist concerned about how we personally navigate the turbulence and find meaning within it. The author of Sacred Demise: Walking the Spiritual Path of Industrial Civilization’s Collapse, she describes the old story that isn’t working anymore (humans are separate from nature), and the new story we must live by for real sustainability. Her Speaking Truth to Power website is a rich collection of articles reflecting both collapse and preparedness action. Here she talks with Janaia Donaldson of Peak Moment TV…

…We are at the cusp of rapid and severely disruptive changes. From now on the risk of entering a collapse must be considered significant and rising. The challenge is not about how we introduce energy infrastructure to maintain the viability of the systems we depend upon, rather it is how we deal with the consequences of not having the energy and other resources to maintain those same systems. Appeals towards localism, transition initiatives, organic food and renewable energy production, however laudable and necessary, are totally out of scale to what is approaching.

…We’ve come to a point now where some people, like Stewart Brand, are arguing that we’ve got our backs to the wall and maybe we have to be ready to do things that otherwise we’d prefer not to do. I’m not a happy camper with that stuff. I think that’s a way to try to prop up the Western project to dominate nature and with ever more heroic technology, and it will fail ever more catastrophically and spectacularly, to the point where you’re trying to geo engineer the planet, and well who the hell knows enough to do that?! How will you ever adjudicate the differences, if you’re going to increase rainfall there, decrease rainfall someplace else, tell me how you adjudicate those decisions, let alone know what you’re actually doing. … we don’t have the ecological know-how.

One of foundational challenges of any social movement is “changing the conversation.” That is, transforming an existing paradigm (say, some people are less than human and can be enslaved) to a new paradigm (all people have an inherent right to liberty). That kind of transformation isn’t driven by logical argument alone. Sometimes, changing the conversation also involves an important precursor: “making it safe to have the conversation.” And, as we know, feeling safe sometimes has very little to do with logic, and a whole lot to do with emotion, trust, relationships… and stories.

…The Financial Times reported on Monday that a new study by British and American economists finds that global oil demand predictions by the US Department of Energy, the International Energy Agency, and OPEC fall well short of the mark. The study (available for download in its complete form at the NYU Department of Economics’ website) predicted that global crude oil demand would reach 138 million barrels per day (bpd) in 2030, about 30 million higher than the estimates of the aforementioned organizations.

Our crises are getting worse while our leaders are focused on their petty differences and agendas instead of the global commons on which the whole world depends for life sustenance. The bureaucracies we have created cannot effectively function anymore! They are dysfunctional to the core. They are obsolete! Trying to transform them has proven impossible to date so why not take them out of the equation and invest that energy elsewhere?