Olduvai theory

The Olduvai theory establishes that the current industrial civilization would have a maximum duration of one hundred years, counted from 1930. From 2030 onwards, humanity would gradually return to levels of civilization comparable to others previously lived, culminating within about a thousand years (3000 AD) in a culture based on hunting, as it existed on Earth three million years ago, when the Olduvaya industry developed; hence the name of this theory, raised by Richard C. Duncan based on his experience in handling energy sources and his love of archaeology.

Originally, the theory was proposed in 1989 under the name "pulse-transient theory." data collected on that site. Richard C. Duncan has published several versions since the appearance of his first article with different parameters and forecasts, which has been the subject of criticism and controversy.

In 2007, Duncan defined five postulates based on the observation of data on:

1. World energy production per capita.
2. The land load capacity.
3. Turning to the use of coal as the primary source and peak of oil production.
4. Migratory movements.
5. The stages of energy use in the United States (Duncan, 2007).

In 2009, he again published an update restating the postulate concerning world energy consumption per capita with respect to the OECD countries, where previously he only compared it with the United States, downplaying the role of emerging economies.

Different people, such as Pedro A. Prieto, based on this and other theories of catastrophic collapse or die-off, have formulated probable scenarios with various dates and social events. On the other hand, there is a current of people, like Richard Heinberg or Jared Diamond, who also believe in social collapse, but still envision the possibility of more benevolent scenarios where welfare can continue to decrease.

This theory has been criticized for the way in which it presents the problem of migratory movements and for the ideological orientation of the publisher that has published its articles, The social contract press, which is an advocate of anti-immigration measures and birth control. There are important criticisms of each of the argumentative bases and different ideologies contrary to such approaches such as cornucopians, defenders of the economy based on natural resources, ecological positions and positions of different nations also fail to establish a coherent basis for such assertions.

History

Richard C. Duncan is an author who first proposed Olduvai's theory in 1989 under the title "The pulse-transient theory of industrial civilization". This theory was later supplemented in 1993 with the article "The life expectancy of industrial civilization: The decline of the world balance".

In June 1996, Duncan submitted a paper titled "Olduvai Theory: Falling Into a Stone Age Post-Industrial Era", adopting the term "Olduvai Theory" instead of "pulse-transient theory". used in earlier work. Duncan published a more updated version of his theory under the name "Peak World Oil Production and the Pathway to Olduvai Gorge" at the Geological Society of America's 2000 Summit Symposium on November 13, 2000. In 2005, Duncan extended the data set within his theory to 2003 in the article "Olduvai's Theory: Energy, Population, and Industrial Civilization".

Description

The Olduvai theory is a model that is mainly based on the theory of peak oil and the per capita energy yield of oil. Given a foreseeable depletion, it establishes that the rate of energy consumption and the growth of the world population cannot be the same as that which occurred during the XX century (Duncan, 2007).

In other words, Olduvai's theory is defined by the rise and fall of the material quality of life (CVM) which consists of the resulting rate of increase or decrease in the production, use and consumption of energy sources (E) between the growth of the world population (P), (CVM = E/P). From 1954 to 1979 this rate grew annually close to 2.8%, from that date until the year 2000 it increased erratically by a 0.2% per year (Duncan, 2007, p. 147). From 2000 to 2007 it grew again at an exponential rate due to the development of emerging economies.

In work prior to the year 2000, Richard C. Duncan considered the peak of per capita energy consumption in 1979 to be the apex of civilization. Currently, due to the growth since the year 2000 of the emerging economies, he considers the year 2010 as the probable date of the per capita energy peak. But despite this adjustment, he continues to ensure that in 2030 that per capita energy production rate would be similar to that of 1930, considering that date as the end of current civilization.

The theory argues that the first reliable signs of collapse are likely to be a series of widespread blackouts across the developed world. In the absence of electrical energy and fossil fuels, the current civilization will go to a situation close to that of the pre-industrial era. He goes on to argue that in events subsequent to that collapse, the level of technology is expected to eventually pass from levels resembling those of the Middle Ages to those observed in the Stone Age in approximately three thousand years.

Duncan takes as a basis for the formulation of his theory data consisting of the following facts (Duncan, 2007, p. 142-147):

1. The data on global energy production per capita.
2. The development of the population from 1850 to 2005.
3. The Earth's cargo capacity in the absence of oil.
4. The stages of energy use and its growth in the United States anticipate the world, due to its dominance.
5. Estimate 2007 as the time of the oil zenith.
6. Migratory movements or atractivity principle.

According to Duncan, the theory has five postulates (Duncan, 2007, p. 141-142):

1. The exponential growth of global energy production ended in 1970.
2. The growth, stagnation and final declines in per capita energy production in the United States anticipate the intervals of per capita energy production in the rest of the world. In such intervals it is passed from oil to coal as the main source of energy.
3. The final decline of industrial civilization will begin around 2008-2012.
4. Partial and total blackouts will be reliable indicators of terminal or final decline.
5. The world ' s population will decline along with world energy production per capita.

Bases for the formulation of the theory

Carrying capacity limit and population explosion

It stipulates that the real capacity of the Earth without oil in the long term is between 500 and 2 billion people, which has been exceeded by a factor of three thanks to an artificial bubble of welfare due to cheap oil (Duncan, 2007, p. 142). He argues that since the homeostatic balance of the Earth is around 2 billion people at most, when the oil runs out at least 4 billion people will not be able to be regulated by the system, which will translate into a great mortality.

Before 1800 the world population doubled at a rate between 500 and 1000 years, and by that date the world population was just under 1 billion. With the first industrial revolution and colonialism, the population in the western world began to double at a rate of slightly more than 100 years, followed shortly by the rest of the world, with 1.55 billion people by the year 1900. With the second industrial revolution the world began to double at a rate of less than 100 years. 100 years, and with oil production and the digital revolution it doubled at a rate of approximately 50 years, from 2.4 billion people in 1950 to 6.07 billion people in the year 2000.

The theory not only predicts that the net charge of the Earth does not allow the rate of such growth but that its population already exceeded its capacity after the year 1925. Thus, an apocalyptic scenario can be seen where the population would slow down in 2012 due to the sudden global economic decline and would peak in 2015 at around 6.9 billion inhabitants (see criticism section), and never in history would it grow at these levels again, with as many deaths as births at any given time (1:1), approximately around the year 2017 or so. From then on the number of deaths would exceed the number of births (>1:1) and the world population would begin to contract drastically, leaving approximately 6.8 billion inhabitants by the end of 2020, 6.5 billion by 2025, 5.26 billion by 2027, 4.6 billion by 2030 (reduction between 1.8 and 2 billion people in 5 years), until the number of humans stabilizes at between 2 and 500 million people at a point between the years 2050 and 2100.

Duncan compares his theory's forecast with that put forward by Dennis Meadows in his book "The Limits to Growth". While Duncan expects the peak population in 2015 at around 6.9 billion, Meadows expects the peak by 2027 around 7.47 billion inhabitants. In addition, Duncan forecasts only 2 billion people by 2050, while Meadows estimates 6.45 billion people by that date.

Other estimates similar to that of Olduvai's theory predict that the population will reach a zenith around the year 2025-2030, achieving a number of between 7.1 and 8.0 billion inhabitants and subsequently the population will decrease at the same rate that it grew before the zenith describing a symmetrical Gaussian bell.

Students of the subject, such as Paul Chefurka, point out that the carrying capacity of the Earth will be defined by factors such as the level of damage caused to ecosystems during the industrial period (contamination, alterations and even depletion of ecosystems, highly polluting and long-lasting waste and destruction of resources due to possible competition for them), the development of alternative technologies or oil substitutes and the existence of knowledge that allows the surviving population to be maintained in a sustainable manner (such as the rescue of traditional ways of life prior to the industrial revolution).

Principle of attractiveness

The formulation of this basis, based on Jay W. Forrester's work on the dynamics of complex social systems, proposes that the variables of per capita natural resource and material standard of living are subordinated to the per capita energy output of oil. This principle holds that attractiveness is the difference in the material standard of living between different nations. Thus, the US material standard of living in 2005 was 57.7 barrels of oil equivalent per capita, while the material standard of living for the rest of the world was 9.8 barrels of oil equivalent per capita, with a difference in consumption. of 47.9 barrels of oil equivalent per capita (Duncan, 2007, p. 144). Put another way, the enormous difference in lifestyle and consumption makes immigrants attractive.

The new immigrant, upon arriving in that society, adopts the same consumer lifestyle, further overloading that system. Duncan argues that the greater the immigration, the greater the number of population where the differences in the material standard of living of the attractive country will decrease in an equalizing process until that country reaches the world material standard of living.

This proposal has already received criticism in various parts of the world, because although Duncan hints that borders should be closed, he does not stop to meditate that the main cause of resource depletion is the consumerist and predatory lifestyle of those attractive countries (see reviews section).

• 

  Per capita energy consumption expressed in kilograms of equivalent oil (kgoe) per person in 2001 per country. In black the countries from which data were not collected, in light colors the countries with the least consumption, in strong colors the countries with the most consumption; the ones for the red are those that have shown increased consumption and those for the green are those that have shown decrease in consumption. Source: International Energy Agency (IEA) Statistics Division 2006.

• 

  Global migration in 2016, in blue attractive countries, in orange the countries of which there is migration to attractive countries. In green the countries that showed insignificant migratory movements, in gray the countries of which no data were collected. Source: Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), U.S.

An oil production curve, as originally suggested by M. King Hubbert in 1956.

Peak Oil

Duncan, along with geologist Walter Youngquist, using a predictive method they called the "peak oil constituency" estimated oil production in the coming years. Based on this model and using system dynamics software, they calculated that the peak of oil production was in 2007. It was observed that from 2003 to 2004 world oil production increased by 4.0%. The next, from 2004 to 2005, increased by 1.1% (BP, 2006). And from 2005 to 2006 it increased a mere 0.17%. Therefore, in recent years, the rates of increase in oil production have gone from being strong to being almost zero (Duncan, 2007, p. 144).

OPEC's production will momentarily exceed the production of countries that are not members of the cartel and from there it will be the producing countries that will manage the total oil distribution in the world, establishing in fact a division between countries that have oil and countries that do not have it. However, even with the cartel's production increases, world total production will continue its slow process of decline after the peak.

Duncan emphasizes that this stage of human history differs from the others because the consumption of energy sources is so important that it will condition the regression to previous historical stages, denying the use or a better use of these sources of energy. energy to future civilizations (diachronic competition), and even non-human intelligent life that may develop later on Earth.

Return to the use of coal as a primary source

Evolution of global carbon consumption 1984-2004. Source: World Coal Institute..

The theory proposes that due to the predominance of one nation the rest of the world will follow the same sequence in the implementation of a resource as a primary source. In this way, he comparatively analyzes a chronology of the use of resources as a primary source between the United States and the rest of the world (Duncan, 2007, p. 145):

Use of biomass as primary source

• In the United States until 1886.
• In the rest of the world until 1900.

Use of coal as a primary source

• In the United States from 1886 to 1951.
• In the rest of the world from 1900 to 1963.

Use of oil as a primary source

• In the United States from 1951 to 1986.
• In the rest of the world from 1963 to 2005.

Return to the use of coal as a primary source

• In the United States since 1986.
• The rest of the world since 2005.

According to Duncan, from 2000 to 2005 while global coal production increased 4.8% per year, oil increased only 1.6% (Duncan, 2007, p. 145).

The return to the use of coal as a primary source, another fact taboo due to its high level of contamination, has been silenced in the media as well as the carrying capacity of the Earth for obvious political reasons according to Duncan.

Graphics showing the level of energy consumption from 1930 to 2005. In green, stages of growth; in blue, stagnation stages; in red, decline stages. Source: Richard C. Duncan (2007), "The Olduvai Theory: Terminal Decline Imminent".

Energy consumption of the population

Just as the change from oil to coal as the primary source in the United States is marking the world changes in advance, the indicator of the level of energy consumption and production per capita over time in the United States is also marking the from the rest of the world (Duncan, 2007, p. 146). Thus, Duncan distinguishes three stages in US consumption that were later reflected in world consumption (Duncan, 2007, p. 146-147).

Growth

• 1945-1970 U.S. growth stage, an average growth of 1.4% per capita energy production per year is observed during the period.
• 1954-1979 World growth stage, an average growth of 2.8 per cent per capita energy output is observed during the period.

Stagnation

• 1970-1998 U.S. stagnation stage, an average decrease of 0.6 per cent per capita energy output during the period is observed.
• 1979-2008 World stagnation stage, an average growth of 0.2 per capita energy production per year is observed during the period, after the year 2000 there is a rebound due to the growth of emerging economies.

Final decline or decline

• 1998 onwards: U.S. final decline phase, an average decrease of 1.8% per capita energy production per year during the period 1998-2005.
• 2008-2012 onwards: probable stage of the global final decline. The development of emerging economies and the enormous use of coal in China can slow this process until 2012.

Theory Updates

2009 Update

After criticism of the discrepancy shown by the per capita energy consumption curve in the United States, which tends to decrease, with respect to the world curve, which has tended to increase extraordinarily after the year 2000, Duncan published a 2009 update of his theory in which he compares a curve for OECD members (30 countries) relative to the curve for the rest of the non-OECD world (165 countries) including Brazil, India and China.

In this new work on the different peaks of energy consumption per capita in the world, Duncan concludes the following:

• 1973: Per capita energy pipe in the United States.
• 2005: Per capita energy pool in OECD countries around 4.75 tonnes of oil per capita.
• 2008: After the per capita consumption of non-OECD member countries increased from 2000 to 2007, by 28 per cent, the leading indicator composed of China, India and Brazil declined dramatically in 2008, leading to the conclusion that the average standard of living of non-OECD countries has already begun to fall. However, an OECD report of February 2010 appears to contradict this claim (see critical section).
• 2010: Most likely date of global per capita energy peak.

In this new scenario, he forecasts that the average standard of living or energy per capita in the United States would fall by 90% between 2008 and 2030, OECD levels would fall by 86%, and the level of non-OECD countries OECD would fall by 60%. The average standard of living in the OECD would be equal to the average level of the rest of the world in 2030, standing at 3.53 barrels of oil equivalent per capita.

• 

  The thirty OECD countries in 2009, considered to be the club of rich countries plus Turkey and Mexico. According to Duncan, the peak of per capita energy consumption in these countries was presented in 2005. Map source: OECD.

• 

  Map with newly industrialized countries or emerging economies. According to Duncan, the leading indicator composed of China, India and Brazil dropped dramatically in 2008. Map source: Pawel Bozyk.

• 

  Update of 2000. Prognosis of per capita energy consumption. In blue the stage of growth, in green and yellow the stagnation stage, in red stage of final decline. Source: Richard C. Duncan (2000), "The Peak Of World Oil Production And The Road To The Olduvai Gorge".

• 

  Update of 2007. Prognosis of per capita energy consumption. In blue the stage of growth, in green and yellow the stagnation stage, in red stage of final decline. Source: Richard C. Duncan (2007) «The Olduvai Theory: Terminal Decline Imminent».

• 

  Update of 2009. Prognosis of per capita energy consumption. In blue the stage of growth, in green and yellow the stagnation stage, in red stage of final decline. Source: Richard C. Duncan (2009) «The Olduvai Theory: Toward Re-Equalizing the World Standard of Living».

Timeline of history according to theory

It was pre-industrial, industrial and post-industrial according to Olduvai theory. In blue the pre-industrial era at the beginning of the neolytic revolution, in green colour the consummated facts of the industrial era (1765-2009), in yellow color the predictions of theory until the end of industrial civilization (2100) and in red the post-industrial era. Source: Richard C. Duncan (1996) «The Olduvai Theory:Sliding Towards a Post-Industrial Stone Age»; Richard C. Duncan (2009) «The Olduvai Theory: Toward Re-Equalizing the World Standard of Livin».

Richard C. Duncan, based on the historical facts predicted by Olduvai's theory, proposes a division into three periods consisting of pre-industrial, industrial and post-industrial eras.

Historical Facts Accomplished

In this chronology, the pre-industrial era and the first half of the industrial era have already been consummated.

Pre-industrial era

• 3 million BC: Start of hunting for human ancestors.
• 1 million a. C.: Use of fire.
• 8000 BC: Neolytic Revolution: Beginning of agriculture and domestication worldwide.
• 6000 BC: Apparition of the first civilization.

Industrial era, first half

• 1732: First use of coal, beginning of the first industrial revolution.
• 1765: Watt steam machine.
• 1859: First oil drilling.
• 1869: Production of electricity, beginning of the second industrial revolution.
• Before 1886: Biomass is the main energy source in the United States.
• Before 1900: Biomass is the main energy source in the World.
• 1886: Coal is the main energy source in the United States.
• 1900: Coal is the main energy source in the world.
• 1914-1918: First World War.
• 1929: Great depression.
• 1930-1945: Beginning of modern industrial civilization or third industrial revolution and second world war.
• 1946-1964: Western demographic explosion or baby boom.
• 1950: 2629 million humans in the world population.
• 1951: Oil is the main energy source in the United States.
• 1963: Oil is the main energy source in the world.
• 1970: 3692 million humans in the world population.
• 1973: First oil crisis, Yom Kipur War
• 1973: Per capita energy consumption in the United States.
• 1979: Second oil crisis, Iranian Revolution.
• 1991: Fall of the USSR
• 2007: Global food crisis
• 2008: Global economic crisis.

Theory predictions

The speculative framework proposed by Richard C. Duncan begins with his estimate of peak energy per capita, return to coal use, and peak oil production (Duncan, 2007).

Industrial era, second half

• 1970-1979: Deceleration of the exponential growth of global per capita energy consumption, continuing with a low growth plateau of 0.2 per cent per year to 2000.
• After 1986: Return to the use of coal in the US. as the main energy source.
• After 2005: Return to the use of coal in the World as the main energy source.
• 2000: Aim of the growth of global per capita energy consumption due to the growth of emerging economies.
• 2005: Per capita energy consumption in OECD countries.
• 2007: Oil production at its peak, in decline or "acantilate" since 2010-2012.
• 2010: World per capita energy consumption.
• 2012 (or before): Prevalent electrical energy acronyms and cuts in the United States and the start of global decline.
• 2015: 6.9 billion humans in the global population (see critical section).
• 2015: Hunger and disease in the rest of the world caused by inefficient supply and medical care.
• 2027: 5260 million humans in the world population.
• 2030: Equivalence in per capita energy consumption with the 1930 level, end of modern industrial civilization.
• 2050: After a great slaughter, the Earth has a maximum of 2000 million humans.
• 2100: End of the industrial era.

Post-Industrial Era

• After 2100: Post-industrial stage where the former industrial civilization would disintegrate into oasis of agricultural lands between deserts of buildings, rusty vehicles and jungles. These peoples would live in independent communities by continuing human history in a sustainable way in the form of tribal cultures or parasitic societies. Possible failed attempts at reindustrialization.
• 3000-5000 d.C.: End of the arable land, beginning of hunting and gathering again, end of the last civilization and re-emergence of the paleolithic culture.

Social settings according to the theory

Pedro A. Prieto, one of the specialists in the Spanish language on the subject, has come to outline a probable scenario of societal collapse based on aspects of this theory.

Crisis of the Nation State

Rich nations would suffer from increased insecurity, and what had been democratic societies would become totalitarian and ultra-conservative societies where the population itself would demand foreign resources and greater security. It is possible that before the great final death great nations developed countries disputed scarce resources in a kind of Third World War, without ruling out scenarios similar to the final solution or nuclear war. Others argue that such a war, if it occurred, would be an intercapitalist war in which three blocs would be involved of civilizations. The first would be constituted by the Western civilization, the second by the Orthodox civilization as well as by the Sinic, and a third block formed by the Islamic civilization. Japan and India would play a huge role in such a war as they define their position.

Should some nations survive, lack of resources could unleash famines in large urban centers forcing widespread looting, and governments would issue decrees and martial laws restricting social liberties and removing property rights to keep the population at bay. hungry population. Faced with permanent shortages, governments would impose rationing that would not reach the minimum required, which would cause those who impose force to loot for their own benefit, this would be the first symptom of the fading of states.

The financial system would succumb, money would be momentarily replaced by precious metals, but these would end up having no value either and it would be time for "my kingdom for a horse" . It is the point at which many have predicted that they would "trade an SUV for a loaf of bread". Dominant minorities and military forces would plunder for themselves, and form small dictatorships and kingdoms within the they were great nations. On the other hand, from the “big masses of disinherited” disorganized groups of a highly unstable nature would form that would act in a violent and chaotic manner to seize the scarce resources. Between one and the other the conflict would be served and in the end both one and the other would succumb like the rest of the population.

Survivor Profile

It is estimated that cities with more than twenty thousand inhabitants would be very unstable, with better life expectancy in the first place those societies of hunters and gatherers in the Amazon, the Central African jungles, those of Southeast Asia, those of bushmen and the aborigines in Australia. In second place of survival would be the fairly homogeneous nuclei of three hundred to two thousand inhabitants with an agricultural lifestyle close to places with uncontaminated, inaccessible water resources and hundreds of kilometers from the big cities and the hordes of hungry people that these cities would exude. or of the decaying military forces that would dedicate themselves to looting.

In the end there could also be an enormous number of small agricultural towns that would dispute the few privileged places, surviving only those towns that land carrying capacity allowed.

Other visions

Pedro A. Prieto himself speculates that war scenarios resembling World War III or other types of exhausting warfare would be less likely if social collapse is rapid, as Olduvai's theory predicts. The difference between scenarios is that the majority of the population, contained in the cities, dies of famine in rapid collapse, while in slow collapse the war would extend to the safest areas, ranging from large cities to small rural communities. isolated.

The conjectures of those who opine on the possibility of a post-industrial era are scattered on a spectrum that ranges from scenarios of rapid and catastrophic social collapses to scenarios of slow and benevolent collapses, and even scenarios where they still envision continuous declines in economic growth. well-being.

Catastrophic collapse or die-off

The first group, the pessimists, includes Duncan's Olduvai theory and other works such as the die-off or catastrophic collapse proposed by David Price, Reg Morrison and Jay Hanson. They usually invoke a series of determinisms such as the strong, genetic, biological, and energetic (Basic Law of Evolution by Leslie A. White) to announce the inevitable collapse that will lead to the decomposition of civilized life, discarding the possibility of a peaceful descent.

Gentle descent or "prosperous path downhill"

Those who predict slow and benevolent collapse scenarios where the option of degrowth with continued welfare may still enter may find Elizabeth and Howard T. Odum's "prosperous road downhill", the end of suburbanization and the a return to ruralization proposed by James Howard Kunstler, societies that can still choose to save or fail proposed by Jared Diamond, and Richard Heinberg's "wind down" option.

Heinberg, in his book "Shutdown: Options and Actions in a Post-Coal World", proposes four possible paths nations could take in the face of coal and oil depletion:

• «The last one and we're leaving.» or the "the last one standing": Scenario where there is a fierce global competition for the remaining resources.
• «Gradual off»: Where global cooperation is provided in reducing the use of energy, conservation, sound management of water, and reducing the global population.
• «Negative»: Posture in the hope that some unforeseen element or serendipia will solve the problem (see also black swan).
• «Lifeline Community»: Preparation of local areas in a sustainable way if the global economic project collapses.

The rebirth of utopias

These are visions where collapse is both a result and a goal. As in the 19th century, and at the beginning From the industrial age, romanticism and utopian movements arose, again and in view of the forecast of a collapse of the industrial age, a new outbreak of utopian visions was registered. This renaissance advances in the opposite direction to the decline of sociological theories that no longer exist. can give adequate solutions due to the transboundation situation.

For Joseph Tainter, a complex society that collapses is suddenly smaller, simpler, less stratified and with fewer social differences. This situation, according to Theodore Roszak, evokes the utopian dogma of the old ecological program that consists of reducing, stopping, democratize and decentralize.

According to Ernest García, many of these proponents are scientists dedicated to areas ranging from ecology to geology, computer science, biochemistry and evolutionary genetics, far removed from the study of social sciences. Among recent utopian movements more palpable is anarcho-primitivism, deep environmentalism and techno-utopias such as transhumanism.

Criticism and positions before the theory

300px United Nations Report 2004 calculating estimates for the development of the world population from 1800 to 2100.

Criticism of the argumentative bases

Criticism of the limit of carrying capacity and population explosion

This forecast also differs from that of a 2004 United Nations report where estimates of the development of the world population from 1800 to 2300 were calculated, the worst case scenario being that where the world population reaches a zenith of 7,500 million inhabitants between the years 2035-2040, subsequently reducing to 7 billion inhabitants by 2065, 6 billion by 2090 and approximately 5.5 billion by the year 2100.

A report issued in 2011 by the Population Division of the United Nations states that on October 31, 2011, the world population would officially reach 7 billion inhabitants and in 2019 a total population of 7,800 was estimated millions of people All contradicting Duncan's estimate that by 2015 there would be around 6.9 billion humans in the world population. However, in recent times there has been a decline in population growth, albeit due to the increasingly common decision to have fewer children or rule out paternity due to cultural and social factors rather than deaths caused by famines and diseases mentioned in the theory. Due to these factors China abolished its one-child policy and in various parts of the world their governments offer incentives to have children.

Criticism of the principle of attractiveness

Of the critics who object to some point of the theory, those who criticize the xenophobic and racist cultural biases that are reflected to a greater extent on the principle of attractiveness stand out. Pedro A. Prieto criticizes the proposal to close borders to immigrants, but not the closure to the entry of pillaged resources that end up serving the high US consumption. However, he concludes that the most general principles of the theory such as peak oil, land-carrying capacity and a return to coal as a primary source are feasible to some degree.

Many of Richard C. Duncan's works have been published by The social contract press, an American publishing house founded by John Tanton and directed by Wayne Lutton. This editorial is an advocate of birth control and immigration reduction, in addition to emphasizing issues such as culture and the environment, covering everything from the point of view of the political right. Among his most controversial publications is the book "El Desembarco" by French author Jean Raspail (published in Spanish by Plaza & Janés and in English by Charles Scribner's Sons) causing The Social Contract Press has been described by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a "hate group" that "publishes a number of racist works".

Various estimates of the peak of oil consumption. Source: Freddy Hutter, TrendLines.ca.

Criticism of peak oil estimation

There are positions that speak from the fact that the peak oil theory can be a hoax, as argued by Lindsey Williams (2006), to that of different governments, social organizations or private companies that predict the peak on dates ranging from two years before to forty years after the date proposed by Duncan and with very different behaviors in the production curve.

The argument of the theory of the inorganic origin of petroleum, proposed since the 19th century, maintains that natural petroleum is It formed in deep coal deposits, perhaps dating to the formation of the Earth. Therefore, this would show that the fossil fuel reserves are more numerous, according to the geophysicist Alexander Goncharov of the Carnegie Institution of Washington, who simulated in 2009 the conditions of the mantle with a diamond probe and a laser, creating from methane other molecules such as ethane, propane, butane, molecular hydrogen and graphite. Goncharov says that all peak estimates to date have been wrong, therefore he believes in peak oil is unreliable and claims that oil companies could search for new abiotic fields.

Energy consumption scheme in 2006 according to the EDRO page.

Per capita energy consumption worldwide (grey line) and broken down into energy sources according to TheOilDrum.com. Oil in green, coal in red, gas in blue, hydroelectric in coffee and nuclear in yellow. Enclosed in circles are increases in consumption that come into contradiction with Duncan's postulate.

Criticism of the return to the use of coal

Another piece of information that can be observed and that does not correspond to the prediction that coal replaced oil in 2005 differs from other reports such as the one on the EDRO website where for 2006 oil still it represented 35.27% as a source of consumption, while coal still represented 28.02%, although the growing use of coal compared to oil is admitted on the same page. Also on the BP Global page in its mode Using the energy graph tool, it can be seen that in 2007 oil consumption had a slight decrease from 3,939.4 Mtoe to 3,927.9 Mtoe. Even so, coal consumption during the same period rose from 3,194.5 Mtoe to 3,303.7 Mtoe.

Another position is that the theory of climate change caused by man-made greenhouse gas emissions is wrong, since the cause of such warming is actually due to variations in solar activity. progressive increase in the production and consumption of carbon will replace oil without environmental or economic consequences in a way that justifies the way of acting of China and the United States.

Criticism of per capita energy consumption

Duncan's papers assume that the peak energy per capita was 11.15 boe/c/yr in 1979, but other data from the US Department of Energy (EIA) show that it has been around since then. an increase in this figure up to 12.12 boe/c/year after the year 2004. Which is in contradiction with the postulate of the theory in which energy per capita does not grow exponentially from 1979 to 2008.

TheOilDrum.com page argues that between 2004 and 2005 a true peak of per capita energy consumption was observed around 12.50 boe/c/year based on data from the Organization of United Nations, British Petroleum and the International Energy Agency. These proponents mention that Duncan relied primarily on the per capita energy consumption of oil, but with notable omissions of the growth of per capita energy consumption of coal since 2000, attributed to the Asian emergency, and of the uninterrupted growth of natural gas since 1965..

They point out that the peak of civilization was not in 1979 but after 2004 and with a duration of industrial civilization between 1950 and 2044. They also add that other resources are not so dependent on the behavior of oil consumption probably the duration of civilization is much greater than a hundred years.

After the reliability of the postulate that the rest of the world followed the United States in the behavior of the dynamics of energy consumption per capita was challenged, in 2009 he published a new article called «Olduvai Theory: Towards the re-equalization of the world standard of living", where he compared the behavior of world per capita consumption with respect to that of the most developed countries (OECD). In said article, based on an OECD report of March 2009 from the leading indicator composite of China, India and Brazil, ensures that world energy consumption per capita would begin to decline, however, in a new report of the leading indicator composite of the OECD in February 2010 sees a huge recovery, which which contradicts what Duncan assured.

Global employed power, between 1965 and 2013 according to the U.S. Department of Energy BP. Oil in red colour, black coal, natural gas in the sky, nuclear in orange, hydroelectric in blue.

Political and ideological criticism

Renewable energy sources worldwide in 2006. Source: Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century.

Environmental criticism

Social ecologists and international associations such as Greenpeace are more optimistic, pinning their hopes on alternative energies that neo-Malthusians despise such as geothermal, solar, wind and other low- or zero-pollution energy, but they reject energy of fusion, since they consider it potentially polluting. They say that data such as population growth are counted without taking into account the panoramas that open up the large number of social and technological changes to solve problems (debote effect), such as alternative energies and radical changes in lifestyle that can reduce the effects that such a theory predicts. Instead, market ecologists claim that these types of changes will be forced on consumers through the use of the laws of supply and demand.

Meanwhile, anarcho-primitivists and deep ecologists see this catastrophic scenario as a painful path that civilization is leading us on. Thus, they tend to view the collapse of civilization as an inevitable outcome as much as a goal to be reached.

Criticism from the left

Some libertarians, anarchists and socialists think that this type of theories are lies or exaggerations that benefit economic speculation, and that they basically have the purpose of selling more expensive an easily controllable resource that is apparently depleted or scarce, to perpetuate the game of the free market and the ruling classes.

Jacque Fresco mentions that energy resources are not only inappropriate, but also that there are other very abundant energy sources that the social elites could not easily control because they are not speculable, since their reserves would be virtually inexhaustible in a term of no less than 4000 years at the current rate of consumption, and this only counting the case of geothermal energy.

It should be noted that Jacque Fresco has used the concept of the economy based on natural resources that has already been used in academic articles on economics for more than half a century. «A Historical Comparison of Resource-based Theory and Five Schools of Thought Within Industrial Organizations Economics» (in English). «A historical review of strategy research suggests that a resource-based perspective lang has been central to the field. Influential literature, including, for example, Barnard (1938), Selznick (1957), Sloan (1963), (...) ».

He has also created the Venus Project in supposed opposition to the current capitalist economic model based on monetary profit.

Some time ago there was a wide movement on the web to check the movement and, above all, the figure of Jacques Fresco. From the results we can infer a possible fraud in the actions of Jacques Fresco.

Meanwhile, authors such as Peter Lindemann or Jeane Manning add that there are a number of alternatives to freely obtain and distribute energy, which, if used, would put an end to the capitalist model of hoarding of obtaining and distribution. This has led them to formulate a conspiracy theory for the suppression of free energy. Prominent among such forms of free and free energy distribution is the wireless transfer of energy devised by Nikola Tesla.

In turn, all the authors of this type of arguments about supposed conspiracies, see the formulations of peak oil, warmongering ideas, catastrophism and neo-Malthusianism as an elitist agenda.

International prices of the Brent oil barrel from May 1987 to March 2009. The huge bubble that exploded in July 2008 was observed, with 60% attributable, according to the U.S. Senate Chamber, to speculation. Source: U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration.

Right-wing criticism

Cornucopians are libertarians who argue that population growth, scarcity of resources, and their polluting potential are exaggerations or lies, such as peak oil or the devastating environmental effect of coal. They maintain that the same laws of the market would solve this type of problem, if they were real.

The main theses defended by cornucopians are usually optimistic and pragmatic. Meanwhile, others consider them conservative, moralistic and exclusive. These theses consist of the following points:

• Technological progress is equivalent to environmental progress. Environmental deterioration is minimized as technologies that use clean and efficient resources appear.
• Anti-ambientalism. They criticize catastrophic positions, such as Olduvai's theory, for being based on inadequate models that produce precarious scenarios that do not portray economic dynamics in their historical perspective. They reject the idea of decreation because it goes against technological and in turn environmental progress.
• Technological optimization. Technological progress continually invents energy substitutes before a resource is exhausted. In this way man from the Neolithic has continually surpassed the earthly burden from one technology or energy source to another. Also the availability and efficiency of land for food production increases with the use of new and efficient technologies such as better agrochemicals, pesticides and genetic manipulation.
• Growth is green. Economic growth solves all the problems, i.e., poverty and not wealth that degrades and misuses the environment.
• Trust in the free market. The creation of new forms of ownership and new markets exerts pressure to change from one technology or energy source to another through the use of economic speculation. For this reason, the cornucopians do not approve the intervention of the State.
• Abolition of birth control. They argue that for every new mouth that requires resources for its food, a brain and a pair of hands are also born that contributes to technological progress. In other words, contrary to what neo-Maltusians think, the population is seen as a resource that far from causing problems solves them.
• Defense for the anthropocentric aesthetic value of resources rather than for its future value.

Reactor Tokamak KSTAR from South Korea that by toroidal engineering plans to circulate extremely hot plasma to extract energy from nuclear fusion. Image source: Michel Maccagnan.

Criticism and national positions

Conservatives, traditionalists and nationalists focus their positions only on temporary benefit from an ethnocentric or anthropocentric point of view without taking into account the adverse effects on the environment, and they do not usually openly deny peak oil or Olduvai's theory, but they tend to omit some points or all of the theory as a form of institutional denial. to coal or nuclear power like the United States or China without caring about the social or ecological consequences.

An argument in favor of the positions of the various countries, especially China and the United States, is that although they are moving from oil to coal, the latter is beginning to be used in a non-polluting way through gasification plants integrated into the combined cycle, although its rate of energy return may be lower than doing it in a polluting way.

Another argument in favor is the cooperation of China, India, Japan, the United States and Europe in the ITER project to demonstrate the scientific and technological feasibility of nuclear fusion, although the participation of some countries has been intermittent.

If fusion energy were possible, the energy potential of the deuterium contained in all the seas, rivers and lakes of the planet would be equivalent to approximately 1,068 x 10⁹ times the world oil reserves in 2009, that is, each cubic meter of terrestrial water would be equivalent to 150 tons of oil in energy content.

At 2007 global "rate of consumption" this would equate to a duration of approximately 17.5 billion years of modern industrial civilization before this resource could be depleted assuming a constant population of 6.5 billion people that is not growing and not economic growth existed. In reality, the current system is based on economic, productive, demographic, material or energy growth and this growth rate is usually measured on an annual basis. For example, at a growth rate of 2% per year the energy consumption of oil would be doubling every 34.65 years and, after 1,220 years, as much energy would be consumed as is available in all the seas in the form of deuterium to carry out nuclear fusion. At a growth rate of 5 % per year all deuterium would run out in 488 years, and at a growth of 11.4% per year in just 214 years.

Some positions and various developed countries have opted for the version of non-anthropogenic global warming or of solar origin, seeing environmental warnings as an exaggeration. Other countries, Third World countries, see the theories of depletion and international ecological agreements as measures imposed by the first world countries to stop their development.

Part of carbon production by countries in 2007 Source: British Petroleum, Statistical Review of World Energy 2008.