Its subtitle fairly describes its subject, but gives little indication of the breadth of coverage of its subject matter. It explains the concept of entropy and its relation to the ecology of living systems, including humankind; the political, economic, ethical and social implications of the ending of the bonanza of fossil-fuel derived energy; and the possible and probable futures for society and the environment, including both best and worst cases.

The author notes that while many human societies have integrated into their environments over long periods as cooperative members of ‘climax ecosystems’, since the start of the ‘industrial revolution’ we in the ‘west’ have been predominantly a ‘colonising specie’, taking over the energy-sources of other societies and species and expanding to the limits imposed by available energy. Such ‘colonising species’ typically eventually either reach their limit of growth, and integrate into a new balance with their habitat, or become extinct due to exhaustion of their food supply. Heinberg sees the growth of population and of industrial production as the direct result of the increase of available energy due to the exploitation of fossil fuels.

We are now fast approaching the peak of fossil fuel production, expected by many experts to be between 2006 and 2010, after which supplies will inevitably diminish, though at a rate dependent on future policies. He examines the realistic possibility of compensating for this with renewables, examining each in turn, and concludes that over the next several decades it will be impossible, even with a major, concerted and coordinated effort starting now, to substantially compensate for this. His concern is with net energy, or EROEI (energy return on energy invested), since the advocates of many of the options present an unrealistic picture of their potential by ignoring the energy needed to extract or initiate them.

Heinberg looks at all the options available for coping with this decline, looking at the political, economic, social and personal implications, and expresses his own hopes for the future. He looks at the strengths and weaknesses of both political right and left, from fascist to anarchist, and the corrupting influence of funding by corporations, grown too large and powerful by virtue of their legal standing as ‘persons’, with all the rights and privileges but not the responsibilities and duties this should imply. He sees hope in the growth in numbers of the ‘cultural creatives’, skeptical of both right and left, and against ‘globalisation’, seeking instead ‘globalisation from below’ (localisation, globally); but makes no reference to the Green movement or Parties.

He notes the influence of the debt-money system in compelling, not just facilitating ‘growth’, and the dire consequences, as a result, of the coming downturn in economic activity due to the growing shortage of energy. He notes the proposals for mitigation, by means of alternative currency systems, as well as for fundamental reform, but does not elaborate on these.

He notes the need for fairer distribution of wealth, and the ideas of Henry George on land rent and resource taxes, instead of on human labour, but does not mention Basic or Citizens’ Incomes (or National Dividends).

Stable ecosystems, he notes, are characterised much more by cooperation and mutual aid within and between species, than by competition and exploitation. ‘Nature red in tooth and claw’ is not the norm.. We need urgently to recognise this, and base our relationships with each other and with ‘nature’ primarily on cooperation and mutual aid.

He regards the eventual sustainable human population, if it does not destroy itself with nuclear winter or such, as being in the region of 2bn, which may be reached as a result of famine, resource wars and pestilence, or by concerted action to achieve it by more compassionate means, over perhaps the next century.

While his assessment of the possibility for organic food production to maintain adequate volume of food in a future without fossil-fuel based fertiliser, power and agro-chemicals is pessimistic, noting the extent of debasement of soil quality due to factory-farming methods and the loss of traditional farmers and farming expertise, he makes no allowance for the greater nutritional value of organic food, and the resulting lower need for it.

In all this, my only small points of criticism are that he regards the necessarily greater use of human power in place of the dwindling availability of mechanical energy as a socially good thing, despite the millennia of effort to reduce this burden; and his apparent ignorance of the extent to which current use of energy and materials is pure waste – planned obsolescence, desperate competition for markets, and repressive efforts to maintain power and privilege (though he does note the huge waste involved in the armaments industry and the military).

His message reinforces for me the vital importance of three basic reforms: to move from the debt-money system toward one in which money is spent into circulation and adjusted in volume to meet society’s needs, to eliminate the mountains of debt which drive the ‘growth imperative’ and are the basis of the growing inequality of income, as well as distorting the balance of the economy; move to LVT and resource and pollution taxes, and away from taxes on effort; and introduction of Basic/Citizens’ Incomes, to distribute the ‘wages of the machine’, or ‘common cultural inheritance’. These would make possible the development of a fundamentally cooperative, mutual aid society.

This book is so packed with information and informed comment that it should be read by everyone concerned for the future.

Brian Leslie

Next