MIT Has Predicted that Society Will Collapse in 2040

Submitted by David Trammel on Thu, 12/30/2021 - 05:50
David Trammel's picture
Forums: 
The Green Wizard's Cafe

Though a later study says we're ahead of schedule.

"MIT Has Predicted that Society Will Collapse in 2040"

Good video, worth watching because of some of the points they make. I like how they compare the global economy and past economies to a jet engine versus a donkey. Yeah, the jet engine is fast and more powerful than a donkey, but which one is more resilient?

The paper/study from MIT they reference seems to be from 1972 though.

"MIT Predicted in 1972 That Society Will Collapse This Century. New Research Shows We’re on Schedule."

The newer study is in the Yale Journal of Industrial Ecology in November 2020 and is available on the KPMG website.

Download here

This study though did not consider we'd have a global pandemic and its effect on the economy.

pygmycory

Mon, 01/10/2022 - 16:18

The video could do with some work on the historical knowledge, for example, better understanding of what can and was done to make buildings comfortable without air conditioning, or that the aztec empire was already having troubles and likely past its peak when Cortez arrived, or that in the immediate leadup to WW1 economic integration was widely cited as to why europe would not have a war, and if they did, that it would be 'over by Christmas'. That's in the first 3 minutes or so. That made it feel pretty slapdash to me.

I think I'll take a look at the study, though, that might be better.

I agree that the comparison of donkeys and jet aircraft societies is cool.

pygmycory

Mon, 01/10/2022 - 16:39

Had a look at the study. Between the BAU2 and CT scenarios, the BAU2 does seem more likely. Even if the point at which the two scenarios diverge is fairly late, I just can't see technology managing to pull a rabbit out this hat. If it were going to do that, why hasn't it happened already?

What I expect from technological innovation going forward is lots of ways to get buy using less energy and other resources, and for this to blunt the impact of the fall on people's lives. I don't expect it to make up for resource depletion, pollution etc. and allow us to stabilize at a level near today's in terms of population or social complexity. I don't really have any numbers on this - it's more a gut sense than anything else, based on reading too much history, and an assumption of human cussedness and out-of-touch people in powerful positions making decisions that match their short-term needs at best.

If we were going to handle this situation well because technology, why aren't we already using the most efficient and least resource intensive technology available now? Why do many homes in Calgary Alberta not only not have brilliant insulation, many have no insulation? Why hasn't every home from the 1980s onward been built with good insulation, rainwater catchment, and assorted passive solar technologies? Why do SUVs exist?

If we were going to handle this well, we'd be in a very different situation right now. I can't see us changing our ways en masse until it is obviously absolutely necessary RIGHT NOW - and by, then it'll be too late.