- 2 hours ago
Web š https://www.contronews.org/morte-per-progressione-geometrica/
Telegram š https://t.me/Contronews
Signal š https://signal.group/#CjQKIFATZtC6iKyHdG2Vr5U4MO1J87HXdoxwW7OqPPz20LdjEhDRCvB3T9S0Fh0Q0kR-6pMu
Sono i piccoli punti di crescita percentuale costante a scatenare le esplosioni geometriche, e a decretare la morte per progressione geometrica. I padroni del mondo, le duemila persone che sono a capo dellāintera economia della Terra lo sanno perfettamente, e per questo motivo hanno deciso, giĆ a partire dal 2000, di sfoltire e decimare gli inutili āMangiatori di Risorseā, cioĆØ tutto il resto della popolazione mondiale.
Il prof. Bartlett spiega in modo semplice e comprensibile i numeri che ci condannano senza via di scampo al genocidio. Non esiste appello, non esistono vie di uscita alternative. Il COVID Rocky Horror Show, insieme alle inoculazioni forzate di trattamenti genici tossici e mortali, sono la āSoluzione Finaleā alla āQuestione della Progressione Geometricaā.
Telegram š https://t.me/Contronews
Signal š https://signal.group/#CjQKIFATZtC6iKyHdG2Vr5U4MO1J87HXdoxwW7OqPPz20LdjEhDRCvB3T9S0Fh0Q0kR-6pMu
Sono i piccoli punti di crescita percentuale costante a scatenare le esplosioni geometriche, e a decretare la morte per progressione geometrica. I padroni del mondo, le duemila persone che sono a capo dellāintera economia della Terra lo sanno perfettamente, e per questo motivo hanno deciso, giĆ a partire dal 2000, di sfoltire e decimare gli inutili āMangiatori di Risorseā, cioĆØ tutto il resto della popolazione mondiale.
Il prof. Bartlett spiega in modo semplice e comprensibile i numeri che ci condannano senza via di scampo al genocidio. Non esiste appello, non esistono vie di uscita alternative. Il COVID Rocky Horror Show, insieme alle inoculazioni forzate di trattamenti genici tossici e mortali, sono la āSoluzione Finaleā alla āQuestione della Progressione Geometricaā.
Category
š
NewsTranscript
00:00www.mesmerism.info
00:30But they're all tied together. They're tied together with arithmetic, and the arithmetic isn't very difficult.
00:35And what I hope to do is, I hope to be able to convince you that the greatest shortcoming of
00:41the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function.
00:46So you say, well, what's the exponential function?
00:49This is a mathematical function that you would write down if you're going to describe the size of anything that
00:55was growing steadily.
00:56If you had something growing 5% per year, you'd write the exponential function to show how large that growing
01:02quantity was year after year.
01:04And so we're talking about a situation where the time that's required for the growing quantity to increase by a
01:11fixed fraction is a constant.
01:125% per year, the 5% is a fixed fraction, the per year is a fixed length of time.
01:17Now that's what we want to talk about, it's ordinary steady growth.
01:22Well, if it takes a fixed length of time to grow 5%, it follows it takes a longer fixed length
01:27of time to grow 100%.
01:29Now that longer time is called a doubling time.
01:32We need to know how you calculate the doubling time, and it's easy.
01:35You just take the number 70, divide it by the percent growth per unit time, and that gives you the
01:41doubling time.
01:41So our example of 5% per year, you divide the 5 into 70, you find that growing quantity will
01:47double in size every 14 years.
01:50Well, you might ask, where did the 70 come from?
01:52The answer is it's approximately 100 multiplied by the natural logarithm of 2.
01:57If you wanted the time to triple, you'd use the natural logarithm of 3, so it's all very logical.
02:03But you don't have to remember where it came from if you'll just remember 70.
02:08Now, I wish we could get every person to make this mental calculation every time we see a percent growth
02:14rate of anything in a news story.
02:17For example, if you saw a story that said things have been growing 7% per year for several recent
02:22years, you wouldn't bat an eyelash.
02:23But when you see a headline that says crime has doubled in a decade, you say, my heavens, what's happening?
02:30Well, what is happening?
02:327% growth per year.
02:34Divide the 7 into 70, the doubling time is 10 years.
02:38But notice, if you're going to write a headline, you'd never write crime growing 7% per year,
02:43because most people wouldn't know what it really means.
02:47Now, do you know what 7% really means?
02:50Let's take another example from Colorado.
02:52The cost of an all-day lift ticket to ski at Vail has been growing about 7% per year
02:58ever since Vail first opened in 1963,
03:00and at that time you paid $5 for an all-day lift ticket.
03:06Now, what's the doubling time for 7% growth?
03:10Ten years.
03:11So what was the cost ten years later in 1973?
03:15Ten years later in 1983?
03:18Ten years later in 1993?
03:20And what do we have to look forward to?
03:25Now, this is what 7% means.
03:29Most people don't have a clue.
03:32Well, let's look at a generic graph of something that's growing steadily.
03:36After one doubling time, the growing quantity is up to twice its initial size.
03:40Two doubling times, it's up to four times its initial size.
03:43Then it goes to 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 5, 12.
03:50In just ten doubling times, it's a thousand times larger than when it started.
03:55And you can see, if you try to make a graph of that on ordinary graph paper,
03:59the graph will go right through the ceiling.
04:03Now, let me give you an example to show the enormous numbers you get with just a modest number of
04:08doublings.
04:09Legend has it that the game of chess was invented by a mathematician who worked for a king.
04:13The king was very pleased.
04:15He said, I want to reward you.
04:16And the mathematician said, my needs are modest.
04:19Please take my new chessboard and on the first square place, one grain of wheat.
04:24On the next square, double the one to make two.
04:26On the next square, double the two to make four.
04:28Just keep doubling until you've doubled for every square.
04:31That will be an adequate payment.
04:33Well, we can guess the king thought this foolish man.
04:36I was ready to give him a real reward.
04:38All he asked for is just a few grains of wheat.
04:41Well, let's see what's involved in this.
04:43As we note, there are eight grains on the fourth square.
04:46Now, I can get this number eight by multiplying three twos together.
04:50It's two times two times two.
04:52It's one two less than the number of the square.
04:54Now, that follows in each case.
04:56So, on the last square, I'd find the number of grains by multiplying 63 twos together.
05:02Now, let's look at the way the totals build up.
05:05When we have one grain on the first square, the total on the board is one.
05:08We add two grains.
05:09That makes a total three.
05:11We put on four grains.
05:12Now, the total is seven.
05:14Seven is a grain less than eight.
05:15It's a grain less than three twos multiplied together.
05:18Fifteen is a grain less than four twos multiplied together.
05:22Well, that continues in each case.
05:23So, when we're done, the total number of grains would be one grain less than the number I get
05:28and multiplying 64 twos together.
05:31And my question is, how much wheat is that?
05:34You know, would that be a nice pile here in the studio?
05:37Would it fill the building?
05:39Would it cover the county to adapt the two meters?
05:42How much wheat are we talking about?
05:44The answer is it's roughly 400 times the 1990 worldwide harvest of wheat.
05:54Now, that could be more wheat than humans have harvested in the entire history of the earth.
05:59You say, how did you get such a big number?
06:01Well, it was simple.
06:02We just started with one grain, but we let the number grow steadily until it had doubled
06:06a mere 63 times.
06:08There's something else that's very important.
06:11The growth in any doubling time is greater than the total of all of the preceding growth.
06:16For example, when we put eight grains on the fourth square, the eight is larger than the total
06:20of seven that were already there.
06:22When we put 32 grains on the sixth square, the 32 is larger than the total of 31 that were
06:28already there.
06:29Every time the growing quantity doubles, it takes more than all that you'd used in all
06:35of the preceding growth.
06:36Now, let's translate that into the energy crisis.
06:40Here's an ad from the year 1975, and it asked the question, could America run out of electricity?
06:47America depends on electricity.
06:49Our need for electricity actually doubles every 10 or 12 years.
06:53That's an accurate reflection of a very long history of steady growth of the electric industry
07:00in this country, growth at a rate of around 7% per year, which goes with doubling every
07:0410 years.
07:05Now, with all that history of growth, they expected the growth would just go on forever.
07:10Fortunately, it stopped.
07:12Not because anyone understood the arithmetic.
07:14The ticket stopped for other reasons, but let's ask, what if?
07:18Suppose the growth had continued, then we would see here the thing that we just saw on the chessboard.
07:24In the 10 years following the appearance of this ad, in that decade, the amount of electrical
07:30energy that we would have consumed in this country would have been greater than the total
07:34of all of the electrical energy we had ever consumed in the entire preceding history of the steady growth of
07:42that
07:43industry in this country.
07:45Now, did you realize that anything as completely acceptable as 7% growth per year could give such an incredible
07:52consequence that in just 10 years you'd use more than the total of all that had been used in all
07:58of
07:58preceding history?
08:00Well, that's exactly what President Carter was referring to in his famous speech on energy.
08:05One of his statements was this.
08:07He said, and in each of those decades, more oil was consumed than in all of mankind's previous history.
08:15Now, by itself, that's a stunning statement.
08:18Now, you can understand it.
08:19The President was telling us a simple consequence of the arithmetic of 7% growth each year in world
08:27oil consumption, and that was the historic figure up until the 1970s.
08:33Now, there's another beautiful consequence of this arithmetic.
08:36If you take 70 years as a period of time, and note that that's roughly one human lifetime,
08:42then any percent growth continued steadily for 70 years gives you an overall increase by a factor
08:48that's very easy to calculate.
08:50For example, 4% per year, you find the factor.
08:54By multiplying four twos together, it's a factor of 16.
08:58Now, a few years ago, one of the newspapers here in Boulder quizzed the nine members of the Boulder City
09:04Council
09:04and asked them, what rate of growth of Boulder's population do you think it would be good to have in
09:10the coming years?
09:11Now, the nine members of the Boulder City Council gave answers ranging from a low of 1% per year.
09:18Now, that happens to match the present rate of growth of the population of the United States.
09:22We are not at zero population growth.
09:24Right now, the number of Americans is increasing by more than 3 million people every year.
09:32No member of the City Council said Boulder should grow less rapidly than the United States is growing.
09:38Now, the highest answer any council member gave was 5% per year.
09:42Well, you know, I felt compelled.
09:44I had to write him a letter and say, did you know that 5% growth for just 70,
09:50I can remember when 70 years used to seem like an awful long time.
09:54It doesn't seem so long now.
09:56Well, that means Boulder's population would increase by a factor of 32.
10:01That is where today we have one overloaded sewer treatment plant.
10:05In 70 years, we need 32 overloaded sewer treatment plants.
10:09Now, did you realize that anything as completely all-American as 5% growth per year
10:15could give such an incredible consequence in such a modest period of time?
10:20Our City Council people had zero understanding of this very simple arithmetic.
10:28Well, a few years ago, I had a class of non-science students.
10:32We were interested in problems of science and society.
10:35We spent a good deal of time learning to use semi-logarithmic graph paper.
10:40It's printed in such a way that these equal intervals along the vertical scale
10:45each represent an increase by a factor of 10.
10:48So you go from 1,000 to 10,000 to 100,000.
10:52And the reason you use this special paper is that on this paper,
10:55a straight line represents steady growth.
10:59We worked a lot of examples.
11:00I said to the students, let's talk about inflation.
11:03Let's talk about 7% per year.
11:05It wasn't this high when we did this.
11:07It's been higher since then.
11:09And fortunately, it's lower now.
11:11And I said to the students, as I can say to you,
11:14you have roughly 60 years life expectancy ahead of you.
11:17Let's see what some common things will cost
11:20if we have 60 years of 7% annual inflation.
11:24Well, the students found that a 55-cent gallon of gasoline
11:27will cost $35.20.
11:31$250 for a movie will be $160.
11:35The $15 sack of groceries that my mother used to buy for $1.25,
11:40that'll be $960.
11:42A $100 suit of clothes, $6,400.
11:46A $4,000 automobile will cost a quarter of a million dollars.
11:50And a $45,000 home will cost nearly $3 million dollars.
11:55Well, I gave the students these data.
11:58These came from a Blue Cross Blue Shield ad.
12:00The ad appeared in Newsweek magazine.
12:03And the ad gave these figures to show the cost escalation
12:06of gallbladder surgery.
12:07In the year since 1950, when that surgery cost $361.
12:13I said, make a semi-log with me plot.
12:16Let's see what's happening.
12:17The students found that the first four points
12:19lined up on a straight line,
12:21whose slope indicated inflation of about 6% per year.
12:25But the fourth, fifth, and sixth were on a steeper line,
12:28almost 10% inflation per year.
12:31Well, then I said to the students,
12:33run that steeper line on out to the year 2000.
12:36Let's get an idea what gallbladder surgery might cost.
12:40The answer is $25,000.
12:44The lesson there is awfully clear.
12:46If you're thinking about gallbladder surgery, do it now.
12:53In the summer of 1986,
12:56the news reports indicated that the world population
12:59had reached the number 5 billion people
13:02growing at the rate of 1.7% per year.
13:05Well, your reaction to 1.7 might be to say,
13:08that's so small, nothing bad could ever happen
13:10at 1.7% per year.
13:13So you calculate the doubling time,
13:14you'll find it's only 41 years.
13:17More recently, in 1999,
13:20we read that the world population
13:22had increased from 5 billion to 6 billion people.
13:26The good news is that the growth rate
13:28had dropped from 1.7% per year
13:30to 1.3% per year.
13:33The bad news is that in spite of the drop in the growth rate,
13:36the world population today
13:38is increasing by something over 80 million people every year.
13:44Now, if this modest current 1.3% per year
13:48could continue,
13:50the world population would grow to a density
13:52of one person per square meter
13:54on the dry land surface of the earth
13:56in just 780 years,
13:59and the mass of people would equal
14:00the mass of the earth in just 2,400 years.
14:04Now, we can smile at those.
14:06We know they couldn't happen.
14:08This one makes for a cute cartoon.
14:11The caption says,
14:12Excuse me, sir,
14:13but I am prepared to make you
14:14a rather attractive offer for your square.
14:18Now, there's a very profound lesson in that cartoon.
14:21The lesson is that zero population growth
14:23is going to happen.
14:24Now, we can debate
14:26whether we like zero population growth
14:28or don't like it.
14:29It's going to happen,
14:30whether we debate it or not,
14:32whether we like it or not.
14:33It's absolutely certain.
14:35people could not live at that density
14:37on the dry land surface of the earth.
14:39Therefore, today's high birth rates will drop.
14:42Today's low death rates will rise
14:44till they have exactly the same numerical value.
14:47That will certainly be in a time short
14:49compared to 780 years.
14:52So, maybe you're wondering
14:54what sort of options are available
14:57if we wanted to address the problem.
14:59In the left-hand column,
15:01I've listed some of those things
15:02that we should encourage
15:03if we want to raise the rate of growth
15:05of population
15:06and in so doing make the problem worse.
15:09Just look at the list.
15:11Everything in the list
15:12is as sacred as motherhood.
15:14There's immigration,
15:16medicine, public health, sanitation.
15:18These are all devoted
15:19to the humane goals
15:21of lowering the death rate.
15:22And that's very important to me
15:24if it's my death they're lowering.
15:26But then I have to realize
15:28that anything that just lowers the death rate
15:31makes the population problem worse.
15:34There's peace, law and order.
15:37Scientific agriculture has lowered
15:38the death rate due to famine.
15:40That just makes the population problem worse.
15:43The 55 mile an hour speed limit
15:45saved thousands of lives.
15:48That makes the population problem worse.
15:50Clean air makes it worse.
15:52Now, in this column are some of the things
15:54we should encourage
15:55if we want to lower the rate of growth
15:57of population and in so doing
15:58help solve the population problem.
16:01Well, there's abstention,
16:03contraception, abortion,
16:04small families,
16:06stop immigration,
16:07disease, war, murder, famine, accidents.
16:10Now, smoking clearly raises the death rate.
16:14Now, that helps solve the problem.
16:17Well, remember our conclusion
16:19from the cartoon of one person
16:21per square meter.
16:22We concluded that zero population growth
16:24is going to happen.
16:25Let's state that conclusion
16:27in other terms
16:28and say it's obvious
16:29nature is going to choose
16:30from the right-hand list
16:31and we don't have to do anything.
16:36Except be prepared to live
16:38with whatever nature chooses
16:39from that right-hand list.
16:41Or we can exercise
16:42the one option that's open to us.
16:45And that option
16:47is to choose first
16:49from the right-hand list.
16:50We've got to find something here
16:51we can go out and campaign for.
16:54Anyone here for promoting disease?
16:57We now have the capability
16:58of incredible war.
17:00Would you like more murder,
17:01more famine, more accidents?
17:03Well, here we can see
17:04the human dilemma.
17:05Because everything we regard as good
17:08makes the population problem worse.
17:11Everything we regard as bad
17:13helps solve the problem.
17:14Now, there is a dilemma
17:16if ever there was one.
17:18And the one remaining question
17:20is education.
17:21Does it go in the left-hand column
17:22or the right-hand column?
17:24Well, I'd have to say
17:25thus far it's been firmly
17:26in the left-hand column.
17:27It hasn't done much
17:28about reducing ignorance
17:30of the problem.
17:32And nature is already choosing
17:34from that right-hand list.
17:36You've read about the AIDS epidemic
17:38that's devastating
17:40the continent of Africa.
17:41I had a friend back
17:42from Zimbabwe.
17:43People, he said,
17:45are dying on the streets.
17:48Nature's taking care
17:50of the problem.
17:52So where do we start?
17:54Well, let's start
17:54in Boulder, Colorado.
17:56Here's a graph
17:57of Boulder's population.
17:59There's the 1950
18:00U.S. Census figure,
18:021960, 1970.
18:03In that 20-year period,
18:06the average growth rate
18:07of Boulder's population
18:08was about 6% per year.
18:10Now, we've been able
18:11to slow the growth somewhat.
18:13There's the 2000 Census figure.
18:15Well, I like to ask the people,
18:17let's start with the 2000 Census figure,
18:20go another 70 years,
18:22one more human lifetime,
18:23and ask,
18:24what rate of growth
18:25of Boulder's population
18:26would we need in that 70 years
18:28so that at the end of 70 years,
18:30Boulder's population
18:31would equal today's population,
18:33of your choice
18:34of major American cities.
18:36Well, Boulder,
18:37in 70 years,
18:38could be as big
18:39as Boston is today
18:40if we just grew
18:412.58% per year.
18:44Now, if we thought
18:45Detroit was a better model,
18:46we'll have to shoot
18:47for 3.27% per year.
18:50And remember
18:51the historic figure
18:52on the preceding slide,
18:546% per year.
18:55If that could continue
18:57for one lifetime,
18:59Boulder would be larger
19:01than Los Angeles.
19:02Now, this isn't Boulder
19:04plus Broomfield,
19:05Louisville,
19:06Lafayette,
19:06the other towns
19:07in the county.
19:08This is just Boulder.
19:09Well, it's obvious
19:10you couldn't put Los Angeles
19:12in the Boulder Valley.
19:13Therefore, it's obvious
19:15Boulder's population growth
19:16is going to stop.
19:17Now, the only question is,
19:19will we be able
19:20to stop it
19:21while there's still
19:21some open space,
19:22or will we wait
19:24until it's wall-to-wall
19:26people
19:26and we're all
19:27choking to death?
19:30Now, it's interesting
19:31to read what
19:32the boosters say.
19:33Some years ago,
19:34we read that doubling
19:35its population
19:36in 10 years,
19:37Boulder is indeed
19:37a stable community.
19:40What in the world
19:41are they talking about?
19:42You're going 100 miles
19:43an hour,
19:447% growth per year,
19:46doubling in less
19:47than 10 years,
19:48and someone makes
19:49the idiotic statement
19:50that we're stable,
19:51we're standing still,
19:53we're not moving.
19:53they don't even
19:54understand the meaning
19:56of the words
19:56that they put down
19:57on paper.
19:58Well, every once in a while
20:00somebody says,
20:01but you know,
20:01a bigger city
20:02might be a better city.
20:04And I have to say,
20:05wait a minute,
20:06we've already done
20:07that experiment,
20:08we don't need to wonder
20:10what will be the effect
20:11of growth on Boulder,
20:12because Boulder tomorrow
20:13can be seen
20:14in Los Angeles today.
20:16And for the price
20:17of an airplane ticket,
20:19we can step 70 years
20:20into the future
20:21and see exactly
20:23what it's like.
20:25And what is it like?
20:27Well, here's an interesting
20:29headline from Los Angeles.
20:36That headline probably
20:38has something to do
20:39with this headline.
20:42So, well,
20:44how are we doing
20:45in Colorado?
20:46The Denver Post tells us
20:48that we're the growth capital
20:50of the USA
20:51and proud of it.
20:52The Rocky Mountain News
20:54tells us to expect
20:55another million people
20:57in the front range
20:58in the next 20 years.
21:00But in the Post,
21:01there was an interesting story.
21:03Someone was quoted
21:04as saying,
21:04Colorado has a 3% growth rate.
21:07That's like a third world country
21:08with no birth control.
21:10We send foreign aid,
21:13family planning assistance,
21:14to countries
21:15that have smaller population growth rates
21:18than Colorado has.
21:20Well, as you can imagine,
21:23growth control
21:24is very controversial.
21:26And I treasure the letter
21:28from which
21:28these quotations are taken.
21:30Now, this letter
21:31was written to me
21:32by a leading citizen
21:33of this community.
21:34He's a leading proponent
21:36of controlled growth.
21:38Now, controlled growth
21:39just means growth.
21:42This man writes,
21:43I take no exception
21:44to your arguments
21:45regarding exponential growth.
21:47I don't believe
21:48the exponential argument
21:49is valid
21:50at the local level.
21:54So, you see,
21:55arithmetic doesn't hold
21:56in Boulder.
21:59Now, I have to admit
22:01that man has a degree
22:02from the University of Colorado.
22:05It's not a degree
22:07in mathematics,
22:08in science,
22:08or in engineering.
22:12Let's look now
22:13at what happens
22:14when we have this kind
22:15of steady growth
22:16in a finite environment.
22:17Bacteria grow by doubling
22:19and one bacteria
22:19divides to become two,
22:21the two divide
22:21to become four,
22:23the four become eight,
22:2416, and so on.
22:25Suppose we had bacteria
22:26that doubled in number
22:28this way every minute.
22:30Suppose we put
22:31one of these bacteria
22:32in an empty bottle
22:33at 11 in the morning
22:34and then observed
22:35that the bottle's full
22:36at 12 noon.
22:37Now, there's our case
22:38of just ordinary,
22:40steady growth.
22:41It has a doubling time
22:43of one minute.
22:44It's in the finite environment
22:46of one bottle.
22:47I want to ask you
22:48three questions.
22:50Number one,
22:51at what time
22:51was the bottle half full?
22:57Well, would you believe
22:5811.59,
23:00one minute before 12,
23:02because they double
23:03in number every minute?
23:06And the second question,
23:08if you were an average
23:09bacterium in that bottle,
23:10at what time
23:11would you first realize
23:13that you were running
23:14out of space?
23:17Now, think about this.
23:19This kind of steady growth
23:21is the centerpiece
23:22of the national economy
23:24and of the entire
23:25global economy.
23:27Think about it.
23:29Well, let's just look
23:30at the last minutes
23:31in the bottle.
23:32At 12 noon,
23:33it's full.
23:34One minute before,
23:35it's half full.
23:36Two minutes before,
23:36it's a quarter full.
23:37Then an eighth
23:38and a sixteenth.
23:39Let me ask you,
23:40at five minutes before 12,
23:42when the bottle's
23:43only 3% full
23:44and is 97% open space
23:46just yearning
23:47for development,
23:49how many of you
23:50would realize
23:51there was a problem?
23:53Now, in the ongoing
23:54controversy over growth
23:56in Boulder,
23:57someone wrote
23:57to the newspaper
23:58some years ago
23:59and said,
23:59look, there isn't
24:00any problem
24:01with population growth
24:02in Boulder
24:03because the writer said,
24:04we have 15 times
24:06as much open space
24:08as we've already used.
24:09So let me ask you,
24:10what time was it
24:11in Boulder
24:11when the open space
24:13was 15 times
24:14the amount of space
24:15we'd already used?
24:16And the answer is,
24:17it was four minutes
24:18before 12 in Boulder Valley.
24:22Well, suppose
24:23that at two minutes
24:24before 12,
24:25some of the bacteria
24:26realize that they're
24:26running out of space
24:27so they launch
24:28a great search
24:29for new bottles.
24:31And they search offshore
24:32on the outer continental shelf
24:34in the overthrust belt
24:35and in the Arctic
24:36and they find
24:37three new bottles.
24:39Now, that is
24:40a colossal discovery.
24:42That discovery
24:43is three times
24:44the amount of resource
24:45they ever knew about before.
24:47They now have
24:47four bottles
24:48before the discovery
24:50there was only one.
24:51Now, surely
24:53this will give them
24:53a sustainable society.
24:56Won't it?
24:57Well, you know
24:58what the third question is.
24:59How long can the growth
25:00continue
25:01as a result
25:02of this magnificent discovery?
25:04Well, let's look
25:05at the score.
25:06At 12 noon,
25:06one bottle's filled,
25:07there are three to go.
25:0912.01,
25:10two bottles are filled,
25:11there are two to go.
25:12And at 12.02,
25:13all four are filled
25:15and that's the end
25:16of the line.
25:19Now, you don't need
25:20any more arithmetic
25:21than this
25:21to evaluate
25:22the absolutely
25:24contradictory statements
25:25we've all heard
25:26and read
25:27from experts
25:28who tell us
25:28in one breath
25:29we can go on
25:30increasing our rates
25:31of consumption
25:31of fossil fuels.
25:33In the next breath
25:34they say,
25:34but don't worry,
25:35we'll always be able
25:36to make the discoveries
25:37of new resources
25:38that we need
25:39to meet the requirements
25:40of that growth.
25:41Well, some years ago
25:42in Washington,
25:43our energy secretary
25:44observed
25:45that in the energy crisis
25:47we have a classic case
25:49of exponential growth
25:51against a finite source.
25:55So, let's look
25:56at some of these
25:57finite sources.
25:58From the work
25:58of the late Dr. M. King Hubbard,
26:01we have here
26:02his semi-logarithmic plot
26:03of world oil production.
26:05The line's been
26:06approximately straight
26:07for over 100 years,
26:09clear up here
26:09to the year 1970.
26:11Average growth rate,
26:12very close to 7% per year.
26:15So, it's logical to ask,
26:17well, how much longer
26:17could that 7% continue?
26:20Well, that's answered
26:21by the numbers
26:21in this table.
26:22In the top line,
26:24the numbers tell us
26:24that in the year 1973,
26:27world oil production
26:28was 20 billion barrels.
26:30The total production
26:31in all of history,
26:32including that 20,
26:33was 300 billion.
26:34The remaining reserves,
26:351,700 billion.
26:37Now, those are data.
26:38The rest of this table
26:40is just calculated out.
26:41Assume that the historic
26:427% growth
26:43continued steadily
26:45each year
26:46following 1973,
26:48exactly as it had been
26:49for the preceding
26:51100 years.
26:53Now, in fact,
26:54the growth stopped.
26:55Not because of the arithmetic.
26:57It stopped because OPEC
26:58raised their oil prices.
26:59So, we're asking,
27:01what if?
27:02Suppose the growth
27:03had continued.
27:04Let's go back
27:05to the year 1981.
27:06By 1981,
27:08on the 7% curve,
27:09the total usage
27:10in all of history
27:11would add up to
27:11500 billion barrels.
27:13The remaining reserves,
27:141,500 billion.
27:16The reserves at that point
27:17are three times
27:19the total
27:19of all that have been used
27:20in all of history.
27:22That's an enormous reserve.
27:25But what time is it
27:26when the remaining reserve
27:27is three times the total
27:28of all you've used
27:30in all of history?
27:31And the answer is
27:32two minutes before 12.
27:34Well, we know
27:36for 7% growth
27:37the doubling time
27:38is 10 years.
27:39We go from 1981
27:40to 1991.
27:41By 1991,
27:43on the 7% curve,
27:44the total usage
27:45in all of history
27:46would add up to
27:471,000 billion barrels.
27:48There'd be 1,000 billion left.
27:50At that point,
27:51the remaining oil
27:52would be equal
27:53in quantity
27:54to the total
27:55of all that we had used
27:56in something like
27:57130 years
27:59of the oil industry
28:00on this earth.
28:01By most measures,
28:02you'd say that
28:02is an enormous
28:03remaining reserve.
28:05But what time is it
28:07when the remaining reserve
28:09is equal to all
28:11that you've used
28:12in all of history?
28:13And the answer is
28:14it's one minute
28:15before 12.
28:17So we go one more decade
28:18to the turn of the century.
28:20That's like right now.
28:22That's when 7%
28:23would finish using up
28:24the oil reserves
28:25of the earth.
28:26Now let's look at this
28:27in a very nice
28:28graphical way.
28:30Suppose the area
28:31of this tiny rectangle
28:32represents all the oil
28:33we used on this earth
28:34before 1940.
28:36Then in the decade
28:37of the 40s,
28:38we use this much.
28:39That's equal to the total
28:40of all that have been used
28:41in all of history.
28:42In the decade of the 50s,
28:44we use this much.
28:45That's equal to the total
28:46of all that have been used
28:47in all of history.
28:48In the decade of the 60s,
28:50we use this much.
28:51And again,
28:51that's equal to the total
28:53of all the preceding usage.
28:55Now here we see graphically
28:56what President Carter
28:57told us.
28:59Now if that 7%
29:00had continued
29:01through the 70s,
29:0280s, and 90s,
29:03there is what we need.
29:05But that's all the oil
29:06there is.
29:08Now there's a widely held
29:09belief that if you throw
29:10enough money
29:11at holes in the ground,
29:12oil is sure to come up.
29:14Well, there will be
29:15discoveries in new oil.
29:16There may be major
29:17discoveries,
29:18but look,
29:18we have to discover
29:19this much new oil
29:21if we would have
29:21that 7% growth
29:23continue 10 more years.
29:25Well, ask yourself,
29:26what do you think
29:27is the chance
29:28that oil discovered
29:29after the close
29:30of our class today
29:31will be in an amount
29:32equal to the total
29:33of all that we've
29:34known about
29:35in all of history?
29:36And then realize
29:37if all that new oil
29:38could be found,
29:39that would be sufficient
29:41to let the historic
29:427% growth continue
29:4410 more years.
29:48Well, it's interesting
29:49to read what the experts
29:50say.
29:51Here's an interview
29:51in Time Magazine
29:52with one of the most
29:53widely quoted oil experts
29:55in all of Texas.
29:56They ask him,
29:57but haven't many
29:57of our bigger fields
29:58been drilled nearly dry?
30:00He responds saying,
30:01there's still as much
30:02oil to be found
30:03in the U.S.
30:03as has ever been produced.
30:06Now, let's assume
30:07he's right.
30:09What time is it?
30:12And the answer is,
30:13it's one minute
30:14before 12.
30:16I've read several things
30:17this guy's written.
30:18I don't think he has
30:19any understanding
30:20of this very simple arithmetic.
30:24Well, in the crisis
30:25back in the 70s,
30:27ads such as this appeared.
30:28This is from the
30:29American Electric Power Company.
30:31It was a bit reassuring,
30:32so to say,
30:32now don't worry too much
30:34because we're sitting
30:35on half of the world's
30:37known supply of coal,
30:38enough for over 500 years.
30:42Now, where did that
30:43500-year figure come from?
30:45Well, it may have had
30:46its origin in this report
30:48to the Committee on Interior
30:49and Insular Affairs
30:51of the United States Senate
30:52because in that report
30:54we find this sentence.
30:55At current levels
30:56of output and recovery,
30:58these American coal reserves
30:59can be expected to last
31:00more than 500 years.
31:04There is one of the most
31:05dangerous statements
31:06in the literature.
31:08It's dangerous
31:09because it's true.
31:10But it isn't the truth
31:12that makes it dangerous.
31:13The danger lies
31:14in the fact that people
31:16take the sentence apart.
31:17They just say coal
31:19will last 500 years.
31:20They forget the caveat
31:22with which the sentence
31:23started.
31:23And what were those
31:24opening words?
31:26At current levels.
31:28Now, what does that mean?
31:30It means if and only if
31:32we maintain zero growth
31:33of coal production
31:34in this country.
31:36So let's look at
31:37a few numbers.
31:38We go to the
31:39Annual Energy Review
31:40published by the
31:41U.S. Department of Energy.
31:42They give this figure
31:44as the coal demonstrated
31:45reserve base.
31:46And it carries a footnote
31:47that says about half
31:48the demonstrated reserve base
31:50is estimated to be recoverable.
31:52You cannot recover and use
31:54100% of the coal
31:56that's in the ground.
31:57So this number
31:58is half of this number.
32:00And we'll come back
32:00to those in just a moment.
32:03Now, the report also tells us
32:04that in the year 1971,
32:06we were mining coal
32:07in this country
32:08at this rate.
32:0920 years later, 1991,
32:11we were mining at this rate.
32:13Put those numbers together
32:14and the average growth rate
32:16of coal production
32:17in those 20 years
32:18was 2.86% per year.
32:21And so we have to ask,
32:22well, how long could
32:23a resource last
32:24if you had steady growth
32:26in the rate of consumption
32:27until the last bit
32:28of it was used?
32:29Well, I'll just show you
32:31that equation.
32:32For the expiration time,
32:34I'll tell you,
32:34it takes first year
32:36college calculus
32:37to derive that equation.
32:38so it can't be very difficult.
32:41You know, I have the feeling
32:42there must be dozens
32:43of people in this country
32:44who have had
32:45first year college calculus.
32:47But let me suggest,
32:49I think that equation
32:50is probably the best kept
32:51scientific secret
32:53of the century.
32:54Now, let me show you why.
32:56If you use that equation
32:58to calculate
32:58the life expectancy
33:02of the reserve base
33:04or the one half
33:05the reserve base
33:06that's estimated
33:07to be recoverable
33:08for different steady rates
33:09of growth,
33:10you find if the growth rate
33:11is zero,
33:12the small estimate
33:13would go about 240 years.
33:15The large one
33:16would go close
33:16to 500 years.
33:18So that report
33:19to the Congress
33:19was correct.
33:21But look what we get
33:22when we plug in
33:23steady growth.
33:25Back in the 1970s,
33:27we had national goal
33:28of achieving
33:298% per year
33:31growth rate
33:32in coal production
33:33in the United States.
33:34If that could be achieved
33:36and continued,
33:36coal would last
33:37between 37 and 46 years.
33:41President Carter
33:42cut that goal
33:43roughly in half,
33:44hoping to reach
33:444% per year.
33:46If that could continue,
33:47coal would last
33:47between 59 and 75 years.
33:50Here's that 2.86
33:52that we just saw,
33:53the average
33:54for a recent 20-year period.
33:56If that could continue,
33:57coal would run out
33:58between 72 and 94 years.
34:00That's within
34:01and the life expectancy
34:02of children born today.
34:04The only way
34:05we're going to get
34:06anywhere near
34:06this widely quoted
34:08500-year figure
34:09is to do simultaneously
34:11two highly improbable things.
34:15Number one,
34:16we've got to figure out
34:18how to use 100%
34:19of the coal
34:20that's in the ground.
34:22Number two,
34:23we've got to figure out
34:25how to have 500 years
34:26of zero growth
34:28of coal production.
34:31Now,
34:32these are simple facts.
34:36Just look at those numbers.
34:39I got a report recently
34:41from the coal fields
34:43of Kentucky,
34:45West Virginia,
34:46Virginia,
34:47these giant bituminous coal fields
34:49that supply
34:50a large fraction
34:51of the electricity
34:52in the eastern United States.
34:55They estimate
34:56that maybe
34:57they have another
34:5830 years
34:59of coal mining
35:00before it will become
35:02uneconomical
35:03to mine there.
35:04And then,
35:05what will we do
35:06when we want to
35:07switch on the lights?
35:08and then,
Comments