Sources on exponential growth from The Oil Drum

[ggirod]

This presentation on the Oil Drum site is a pretty good presentation of the interaction of peak oil, economy, population, and global warming in one package. I am strangely relieved that actuaries, who are in the business of predicting things and mostly being right, are wading into the morass of our current mess.

Also linked in the Oil Drum is this report ...

In this report, the fifth in the Tullett
Prebon Strategy Insights series, we set out our core thesis, which is that the global economy is in the grip of a forest of dangerous financial and non-financial exponentials.

[LargoWinch]

Re: Sources on exponential growth from The Oil Drum

Good stuff thanks ggirod for posting.

[c1ue]

Re: Sources on exponential growth from The Oil Drum

Interesting how the presentation by the so-called actuarial expert actually contains zero actuarial data.

The actuary also talks about debt - strangely again with no actual numbers.

And then talks about oil and energy supply being constrained due to finance (!)

Equally interesting how the 'actuary' predicts a 95% reduction in the world's population by 2050.

Makes the AGW-CO2-Catastrophe alarmists look warm and fuzzy.

If Gail the so called actuary is correct, then we need do nothing now. The 95% reduction in the world's population will resolve everything.

[jiimbergin]

Re: Sources on exponential growth from The Oil Drum

This presentation on the Oil Drum site is a pretty good presentation of the interaction of peak oil, economy, population, and global warming in one package. I am strangely relieved that actuaries, who are in the business of predicting things and mostly being right, are wading into the morass of our current mess.

Also linked in the Oil Drum is this report ...

As a retired actuary, I appreciate your comment, but I have a bit less confidence than you.
jim

[ggirod]

Re: Sources on exponential growth from The Oil Drum

I like the fact that unlike many who make predictions, the actuary's job is to put their money where their mouth is with real bets on the outcome.

Makes the AGW-CO2-Catastrophe alarmists look warm and fuzzy.

I guess that is what happens when you start looking at more variables than the simplified ones most people consider. Heck, I think she said that it won't get as warm as the worst case being bantied about so the prediction is conservative. Energy, economy, population, food, and climate all interact to produce the situation. We already know that climate is exquisitely complex, the economy seems the same, food is dependent on climate, the economy, and energy, etc etc etc.

One of the comments in the parent thread had to do with the yeast population fermenting wine when various food sources were available. When more sources and food were available, the population of yeast rose higher and crashed more dramatically. That has some interesting ramifications for applying solar, wind, etc. as supplemental sources. Possibly, by increasing available energy, we can make the situation worse.

The most interesting part of the presentation for me was the interaction between energy prices and incomes and the resulting model that as energy prices rise conservation starts in more ernest and the prices drop. The result is a long term miserable economy as any growth is opposed by increased energy costs and they act as a spoiler (my description) for the economy.

If Gail the so called actuary is correct, then we need do nothing now. The 95% reduction in the world's population will resolve everything.

I suspect Gail is an actuary. Between actuaries and medical researchers, lots of people make pretty pessimistic predictions. Were I to smoke, I would be dead a lot sooner. Were I to eat badly or drink to excess, ditto. Using a bit of wisdom, I refrain from either. The 95% population crash assumes humanity remains in its current fugue state and does nothing about the problem. Considering what I observe now, that is a possible and maybe likely outcome. At least as we observe humanity continue its stupid course, we can know what the outcome will be. Heck, as data are gathered, we might even have some useful warning.

[Rajiv]

Re: Sources on exponential growth from The Oil Drum

Also referred to in the same article

dangerous exponentials - a radical take on the future

• In this report, the fifth in the Tullett Prebon Strategy Insights series, we set out our core thesis, which is that the global economy is in the grip of a forest of dangerous financial and non-financial exponentials.

• As Fig. 1 illustrates, a series of key indicators – including population growth, energy consumption, cumulative inflation and the money supply – all appear to have turned into exponential‘hockey-stick’ curves.

• Amongst the non-financial indicators, there are reasons to fear that exponential trends in population growth and energy consumption may not be sustainable, because both may be heading for practicality constraints. Meanwhile, the intrinsic values of the principal currencies (including the dollar, the euro and sterling) may be threatened by escalating debt, by dangerously rapid expansion in the mone supply, and by continuing deteriorations in purchasing power.

• This report has been reinforced by the thinking of Crash Course author Chris Martenson, whose interpretation uncannily parallels our own. Amongst the many thought-provoking aspects of Crash Course, perhaps the most important is the identification of the parallel trajectories of the financial and resource exponentials discussed in this report.

• We conclude that the ‘forest of exponentials’ is indeed highly dangerous, particularly because it is neither properly understood, effectively calibrated or coherently managed.

• In particular, we identify an urgent need to foster an understanding of energy returns on energy invested (EROEI), and to develop a universal system of measurement and calibration.

• Ultimately, the economy is an energy-driven construct, yet the vital concept of energy returns is woefully misunderstood.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

[jiimbergin]

Re: Sources on exponential growth from The Oil Drum

I like the fact that unlike many who make predictions, the actuary's job is to put their money where their mouth is with real bets on the outcome.

I suspect Gail is an actuary. Between actuaries and medical researchers, lots of people make pretty pessimistic predictions. Were I to smoke, I would be dead a lot sooner. Were I to eat badly or drink to excess, ditto. Using a bit of wisdom, I refrain from either. The 95% population crash assumes humanity remains in its current fugue state and does nothing about the problem. Considering what I observe now, that is a possible and maybe likely outcome. At least as we observe humanity continue its stupid course, we can know what the outcome will be. Heck, as data are gathered, we might even have some useful warning.

Gail is indeed a FCAS, a Fellow of the Casualty Actuarial Society. She has her own firm outside Atlanta and has been writing about energy and resources for some time. You can google her Gail E. Tverberg and see for yourself.

[c1ue]

Re: Sources on exponential growth from The Oil Drum

I like the fact that unlike many who make predictions, the actuary's job is to put their money where their mouth is with real bets on the outcome.

Gail the actuary is putting her money where her mouth is, but not quite in the way you think:

http://gailtheactuary.wordpress.com/about/

Gail Tverberg is available to provide consulting services relating to peak oil and other related issues.

http://www.linkedin.com/in/gailtverberg

In addition to writing for The Oil Drum, I also provide consulting services on topics related to oil and energy and speak about energy related issues. I have developed educational materials relating to peak oil that are now being used by Kennesaw State University in its freshman science classes.
Gail Tverberg’s Specialties:

Peak oil, public speaker, consultant, forecasting, educational materials,

The other problem with Ms./Mrs. Tverberg's statements are that they are extremely un-nuanced.

For example, present oil usage is at least 25% due to personal transportation. If indeed food is the most basic need, already there is an immediate source of present demand which can be re-oriented.

A second example: the 95% population reduction. Where did this number come from?

World population was around 2.3B in 1940, and 1.6B in 1900.

A reversion to pre-oil based farming techniques - which certainly is true for 1900 and significantly true for 1940 - and thus presumably pre-oil based food production, and thence to pre-oil based population levels, would not equal a 95% reduction - rather a 75% or 60% reduction.

I'd also note that the population levels in 1900 were also due to a nearly pre-germ theory state of medical science - similarly the genetic manipulation of seed stock also isn't entirely oil dependent.

So whenever I see such an outrageous statement, I'd like to see ALL of the thinking leading up to this.

Said presentation shows nothing of the sort - just a long series of blanket suppositions.

Now certainly there may be more - but it isn't in the posted presentation.

[jiimbergin]

Re: Sources on exponential growth from The Oil Drum

So whenever I see such an outrageous statement, I'd like to see ALL of the thinking leading up to this.

Said presentation shows nothing of the sort - just a long series of blanket suppositions.

Now certainly there may be more - but it isn't in the posted presentation.

It appears the presentation was probably for an actuarial meeting and it was presented to give an overview of the situation to other actuaries. She probably said much more than the slides show. I have made a number of presentations to other actuaries and my slides only gave me an outline to use in my talk. The 5% may have been to get their attention!

jim