A politician is not really capable of giving a speech like this.

This is a beautifully written, profoundly important piece. I have sent this link to everyone I know, including President Obama(well I don't exactly "know" him). I think we may in fact hear this speech one day in the not so far distant future, because as the author states, this is the near future we face. I remember Kenneth Deffeyes writing just before the election, and I paraphrase, "I just voted to Barack Obama. Not because I think any one person can solve all the problems we face, but it will be a great comfort to have him at the helm as we go through these overwhelmingly difficult times".

I saw this over at Energy Bulletin and was excited. If a high school chemistry teacher can write something like this, then there's hope for our future. We just need more of him. And less of Obama's message, which is BAU.

So now what? Growth, in any sense beyond the spiritual, is simply no longer an option -- it’s not even on the table anymore. In fact -- and these are words I never imagined I’d hear in my lifetime -- we have begun the decline phase of our Industrial Civilization. There will be no recovery in the sense promised in years past. Right on. We need to adapt. We are past fixing.

The Laws of Thermodynamics, with their inviolable limits and penalties associated with matter and energy changes will also be appropriate as a starting point. The application of both Ecology and the Laws of Thermodynamics to human affairs has already been investigated in the fields of Steady-State Economics and Permaculture. I suggest we review that literature for some guidance. Energetic limits R us.

Secondly, anything requiring significant amounts of money in the form of credit is out of the question. In a future of a continually-declining resource base, there is simply no such thing as economic growth, and thus no credit. Basically, we play with what material resources we have at this point -- which is a lot less than we used to. We will not have credit and debt in the future. We can't delay our obligations to a future that is permanently contracting.

On the issue of food, if Cuba can do it, we can. If you haven't seen The Power of Community yet, I recommend it highly. We need about 30 million more local-scale farmers, dispersed across the land. Indeed, how does your garden grow?

This is excellent. But it sounds a little like Jimmy Carter's "Moral Equivalent of War" speech way back in April of 1977. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_Jimmy_Carter%27s_Moral_Equivalent...

I suspect the public would refuse to listen to this speech, just like they refused to listen to President Carter.

Daniel,

Excellent speech and I agree wholeheartedly with the fundamental assumptions. But I cannot imagine Obama giving it.

Everything up through the "End of Growth" section sounded perfect. But what followed was far too pessimistic for Obama. He's a smart guy but he's also an optimist. In fact, only a rabid optimist could rise from black child in a single parent family to President of the United States. For instance, Obama would never say:

Our only hope is to minimize this suffering as much as possible while resolutely pursuing some sort of livable future for our children.

No, the "Way Forward" section of Obama's speech would have some quotes from ML King or Ghandi or some famous author I haven't read about the "limitless potential of the human spirit" or the "growth of human understanding" or the "endless frontiers of knowledge". The idea that the way forward is simply to make do with less will not catch on with a nation (a species really) that is genetically predisposed toward optimism about the future and toward feeling lucky.

Yes, we need to be realistic about the change in material consumption that lies ahead of us. But we can also paint a picture of a world that will be a better place than it is now. And you shouldn't underestimate the deep roots of the many groups promoting individual spiritual growth over material consumption. There are lots of places in the world today where people lead generally happy lives consuming a fraction of what we consume. And there are lots of Americans who would like to see our society move in that direction. As you say, it will be a painful transition for some but why not give them a good reason to make the transition willingly.

Genetically predisposed toward optimism,

-- Jon

I think this is a good rough draft toward producing a message that will help the average Joe to accept what is before us.

I also think this is what campfire should be about, coming up with a message that will move the TV addicted masses out of their flat world mentality.

This speech will never happen. No growth in a material sense means wealth distribution is frozen as is. That means millions stuck in poverty and a much smaller group at the top living the good life.

It also means the the only option to resolve this conflict is more socialism which has been tried with unsatisfactory/disastrous results elsewhere.

What is needed is a change in the rules so that they do not favor a wasting of resources and those at the economic top. We need incentives in the "market" to do the right things to resolve the situation rather than incentives to do things that are counter productive.

For example, let's end subsidies for oil such as wars for oil security among others. Let's remove tax credits for gas guzzling pickup trucks purchased by business and farmers. Let's end the mortgage interest deduction. And there are a zillion other tax code and policy changes we can make without abandoning the capitalist system and locking us into a pure socialist hell with no hope.

Too much capitalism is bad and that is our problem; but the answer is not too much socialism, with all its faults, that no growth implies.

We need a capitalism and an economic model that meets the needs of the new limited resources situation. One that distributes resources somewhat equitably so that none feel overly threatened and one can compete in peace for available resources because the rules are equitable.

That implies a safety net for those on the bottom and a ceiling of some kind on material consumption for those on the top. Let them consume art, music and other cultural enterprises to satisfy their ego drive. Perhaps rewards for achievements in this area might help as part of the change in incentives. So long as the rewards are of the recognition type and not physical.

+5.7 billion

Excellent speech.
Maybe you can include a Franklin Roosevelt-quote: "The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself."

It will never get on TV. But then again, this is what we find on TV...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsOMHjXxzSc

Just point me at the nearest cliff, OK?

The word 'population' does not occur in the draft speech or in any comments posted before this one. This is a major omission. The US population is growing, and if current policies are continued, the Census Bureau projects 400M population in 2100. This won't work without fossil fuels, and we already know that we won't have enough fossil fuels well before 2100.

Obama will not give a version of this speech until after the gasoline/diesel fuel rationing starts. My guess is that this will happen during his second 4yr term.

SIEGEL: Do you think, by the way, that say crowding in Medicaid facilities or cuts to education, do you think this is just a rough spell that in a year or two, New York state and the rest of the country comes out of? Or are we talking about ratcheting down what we should expect from public paid services?

Gov. PATERSON: I think we're going to have to dwindle to a certain degree the size of government, and our expectation that government can pay the pensions and health care costs out in the future is unrealistic. There certainly are some indications that there is structural damage in our economy and that we cannot support all the systems that exist right now.

http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=113870761

DonInVA is right: population is the key, the elephant in the room that no one wants to acknowledge. The total stress on our environment is personal use x population; addressing only one of these factors is a guarantee of failure. We can predict responses to an energy/resource crisis by looking at history: No nation has ever voluntarily reduced its per-person consumption, but dozens have ended their population growth. The United States has 306 million people, growing at 3 million per year, obviously an unsustainable situation. The world has 6.8 billion, growing at 75 million per year. But experience has shown that four social reforms, summarized in the acronym HEEP, bring reproduction to the replacement rate or even lower. They are Health, Education, Employment and Pensions. Health care is guaranteed as a human right, not a commodity, and includes reproductive health. Education, especially for women, is the strongest correlate of fertility - the more education a woman has, the smaller her family is likely to be. Employment opens up economic opportunity for women. Pensions offer support in old age without relying on a large number of offspring. These are things that people want, not draconian restrictions.
HEEP reforms have been effective in rich countries like Germany and Japan; in poor countries such as Cuba and Poland; and even in Catholic countries such as Italy and Spain.
Clearly, reducing population before nature reduces it for us is a positive step, but it takes a long time, and consumption measures are needed to balance the equation.

Please keep in mind that our gouvernments know, they slowed the economy in 2007. And they are searching for "solutions" and we have to help them!

Consider the following.

Gouvernments and oil.

If you think that money and energy have no connection please stop reading.

Central banks (CB) must call their puppies* home when there isn't enough energy. Otherwise energy shortages start occuring.
We can't have that can we?

If CB's give huge amounts of puppies to banks, and the banks sends them back. Nothing has changed, it's just smoke and mirrors.

And yet they keep amazed the recovery hasn't occured.

Where on earth will the next wave of energy come from so that CB's can start showering us again with puppies.

Under normal circumstances this shouldn't be a problem. But logic dictates that burning our fossils at this rate makes any (unavoidable?) transition much harder and the downturn much deeper than necessary.
We can't have that can we?

Why not using our remainings for the best possible use?

We don't have to stop burning fossil fuels for a long time if we just bring down our baseload to acceptable levels.
This frees up so much energy that our CB's can start directing money towards the remodelling of our supply lines and all the necessities local community's need. So they can keep doing what they always did: feeding the more densly populated area's. We can also start shouting the recovery is here we fixed it. yeah.

Kicking people out of their houses and depressing a majority of people just doesn't free up enough energy to restart the economy. And it's just the wrong thing to do.
Are we waiting for a miracle or something else.

Sitting on the moon and watching this, just makes me scratch my head. Do they really think that some fossils makes them omnipotent.

*=fill in your local currencie.

Obama stated he was in favor of reducing the deficit.

The federal deficit is three times what it was a year ago.

The 99th bank failure of 2009:

http://bankimplode.com/

Should growth mean something greater than monetary inflation? Obama said Bush was spending like a drunken sailor. What did he mean?

It is well written but only the people that are already aware will fully understad the implications.
Most of it would go over the average persons head. Think mother in Law!
Old I know but I think Carters speach was more direct an to the point.
but Thanks foor trying, better than i could ever write.
thanks

Politicians follow, they don't lead. They will do only what they are browbeaten into doing. Worse yet, they tend to follow the money like an ox led by a ring through its nose. Do not expect politicians to save us. It won't happen, and perhaps it is lazy of us to even expect it. Instead, we need to push on every local, grassroots lever we can find. We need to transform our own lives, our own communities as rapidly as possible. If small numbers of us can learn to live within limits, then there is the possibility that larger numbers can as well. Eventually enough momentum might build that we might avoid unmitigated disaster.

If you're worried about population (and rightly so) a group to give money to is Pro Mujer, a non-profit that provides micro-credit, micro-loans and health care to poor women in Central and South America. This is a model that works. Much better than building a silly wall along the border that will hold back hungry people like a pail of sand holds back the tide.

I voted for Obama. I'm incredibly disappointed that we have not reinstated financial regulations, that we have not eliminated credit default swaps and other fraudulent derivatives, and that we have not allowed corrupt, reckless banks to reap the merited consequences of their poor decisions. And yet, I still love the guy, even as I am sickened by our economic policy and disenchanted by the looting of our tax funds into banker's pockets. Go figure.

Perhaps Obama's hands are indeed tied and the banks own the government. Perhaps he is a master con-artist and we all got taken. At this point, it matters little. We need to transform the world block by block, community by community. How we spend our money is especially important. (Think credit unions, local produce, tap water, low energy transportation. Stay away from pharmaceuticals, high fructose corn syrup, gasoline, and stock trading. Those profits go to the wrong people.) How we live our lives does matter. Even if you think no one notices, you influence more than you know.

The Speech Obama Needs to Give:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYnMYZDsrJM

I took a week off from the drudge to see my daughter at MIT parents weekend. Two speeches were significant. A nobel prize winning economist gave a speech on where the economy was going and what were the issues we needed to address. A electrical engineering asst dept.head gave a speech on the universities new energy minor program started in sept.
THE ECONOMICS SPEECH AND ALL THE QUESTIONS FOLLOWING IT NEVER ONCE MENTIONED THE WORD ENERGY. By the way, business as usual will be back in a couple of years.
The energy guy started off by saying that the world had 4000 years worth of coal. He then stated that we probably shouldn't burn it as it MAY be having some environmental consequenses. But if we cover the sides of the highways with solar panels to a width of 50 feet and ALL highways both sides, probably a million miles or so, we can replace about 60% of what we need. That was nice to know. I'm comforted now
Thinking about the quarter million dollars or so my daughter's education is costing me, I am now getting very drunk.
By the way,
I didn't vote for Obama, although I personally like him, and while I feel he is more likely to give this speech than any of his presidential combatants, the likelihood of him doing so is still 0%.

What's missing here is any concrete steps that government can do to make powerdown a reality. What exactly are you going to do? Gas taxes? One-child policies? Banning the sale of SUVs and banning McMansions? Stopping immigration and deporting illegals?

All this amounts to is a sermon which people will ignore if not backed up by laws.

People are not going to do what Obama says people should do. They were pissed off at his preachy speech aimed at kids in the classroom, for instance.

Obama is not the Pope and he can't make the public get in single file and march in tune.

Even Gore couldn't accomplish much with Live Earth and Inconvenient Truth.

I would be very happily surprised if Obama gave even half the speech above.

A well heard opposition voice could have a great effect with this speech.

But it won't happen.

America's opposition is even wonkier than it's liberals, and the people, who are way out of sync with the dominant ideologies, have no meaningful access to the media. We can have our opinions on deodorant, pampers and teen-age behavior, but on anything serious, we will not be heard.

Where has the idea of single-payer medical care gone again? We probably won't even get a public option, even though we would like that rather than nothing, if we cannot get full single payer without a revolution.

What the people want, will not be allowed to be televised. We would have to force or finagle our way to the airwaves to get a message such as the above one across.

My analysis is that, at least in public, most politicians accept some version of the Yergin to Lynch to Huber outlook, i.e., we respectively might hit an oil production plateau toward the middle of the 21st Century (Yergin), we might hit a production plateau in the 22nd Century (Lynch) or our energy consumption will increase forever (Peter Huber).

Democrats, being more concerned about Global Warming, want to transition from near-infinite fossil fuel resources to abundant renewable energy resources--and thus propose that we drive off the cliff in a plug-in hybrid.

Republicans, being less concerned about Global Warming, want to implement Drill Baby Drill to take advantage of near-infinite fossil fuel resources--and thus they think that a large luxury SUV provides a more comfortable ride as we drive off the cliff.

As long as we are dreaming of the possible (remote) rather than the probable let me give you my version of the speech Obama should give: My fellow Americans I am announcing that I have directed the Pentagon to remove military bases and missions from 135 nations within six months. I have directed the Pentagon to reduce their projected budget for the next fiscal years by a minimum of 60 per cent. I have further directed that all sales of military weapons to other nations will be prohibited as of this moment. Submarines and surface vessels not essential for ongoing humanitarion aid will be recalled for inactivation. I have directed the "Homeland Security" Department to effective immediately begin to follow all procedures which are in compliance with the Constitution. I understand that these actions will free up in excess of 1.3 trillion dollars a year and increase our availability of FF to allow an extra 50 years to make the change to renewable sources. Good Night and Good Luck.

Rahm Emanuel has come in place of Karl Rove. Presidents have, for better and sometimes worse, trusted individuals who manage the schedule, filter the visitors, and take care the POTUS is not receiving controversial reading material, or policy points. PO is still not in Mr. Rahm's consciousness. Can ANYONE get thru to him? Maybe someone in Chicago, or Springfield? Rep. Bartlett? Matt?

A reader of SunTzu would be quite amazed to see how closely the modern nation of China is following Sun Tzu's precepts, particularly regarding instructions for dealing with superior military/economic powers. In September 1985 I was privileged to spend several hours in private meeting with a Mr. Kong Chou-Liu, a veteran of The Long March, driving across the US on a scouting mission, if you will. Mr. Chou-Liu was nominally a representative of the Sino-American Machinery Corporation (SAMCO), with US office HQ in Fort Lee, New Jersey.

Anyone knowing the situation in China in the early days of the economic expansion into the US, it was rare for an individual Chinese to be turned loose in the US by the Bejing Government. This man had an extremely important mission,; his suggestions would be carefully analyzed as China made export decisions at the STRATEGIC level. He visited me at Lake Tahoe, because of expressions of interest from us to SAMCO, regarding Chinese manufacture of full-size replica vintage rail equipment, particularly certain steam locomotives of historical significance that had been scrapped out of existence. New York Central Hudsons, Milwaukee Hiawatha Atlantics, and Southern Pacific MT5-Mountain types were among the examples we talked about. The British have recently actually done such a thing, a "Pacific" along the lines of the 1930's Gresley 100mph+ design.

The replica locomotives were soon forgotten as the man from SAMCO launched into a long discussion about how China admired the Americans, but did not intend to follow the "same mistakes" made by US exconomic planners" Wow! Of course, I took the bait, and Mr. SAMCO was only too happy to tell me where we went wrong (this in 1985). China would sell us whatever we wanted to buy, they would manage the home market so sufficient numbers of Chinese citizens would have access to the same products. They intended to adopt any and all useful foreign manufacturing processes into their industrial know-how base, and become a modern economy ASAP. This has basically occurred; some 25 years later, only a very small percentage of the most cutting-edge US tech has eluded the Chinese quest for equality in Technolgies of all types and disciplines.

We talked frankly in 1985, about SunTzu's dictum of providing an adversary with gifts and trinkets, gradually making it easier for the stronger power to depend on the weaker, for basic products and eventually, even materials needed for defense would involve trade necessities. Mr. Kong Chou-Liu said China would never consider the US policy of downgrading the railway system in place, and understood the politics of motorization here, but could not fathom the simple lack of US strategic foresight. He was worried that US economic counterweight to Russia could be in jeopardy if the US railway component was going to be continually diminished in capacity & reach. In fact, he joked about China being a US ally, but that seemed too difficult to imagine...

Peaking Oil is on China's mind now, and with strategic clarity of SunTzu in Chinese political DNA, all readers of TOD are invited to very carefully and very thoroughly examine Chinese projects having to do with railway expansion and extension. China has embarked on the ($500 Billion+) largest ever railway track miles, equipment and maintenance plant expansion in history. This (TVL)writer has other posts that may offer some insights to Mr. Emanuel; if the US Executive is considering motor fuel rationing, one must only hope the generic railway component in America is in for some serious attention.

Private capital must be alerted, this cannot only be a government railway expansion effort. It must fall to individual US citizens around the country to become intimately aware of the dormant rail branch lines in their respective locale. (spv.co.uk) will help. The Feds need to do things on a thin dime; one painless way is to base the rail line prioritization on agricultural traffic, and basic resource, manufacturing plant sites.

Mechanism for action should be reformed railway operating & maintenance battalions, US Army/Guard rail logistics units. Skeleton rail unit assets are still at Ft. Eustis, VA. Mr. Rahm Emanuel can swing by Eustis on the next junket to Camp David, maybe bring the boss along... No reason why Republican leadership (whodat?) can't do the same thing, thru their Armed Services Subcommittee contacts, for example? Railways are hiding in plain sight.

Sail network will be up to their scuppers with pirates; a vanity, like MagLevs and the Supersonic transport. US Railways for good reason were early on named: Guarantors of Societal & Commercial Cohesion". See you down the line...

Saudi Ministry Explains Cuts

(Riyadh) Saudi petroleum Minister Ali al-Naimi announced an 11 percent cut in crude production for export beginning next month and continuing for the next twelve months; adjustment in the total produced for export averaged over the year amount to a total reduction of 9% from the previous year. al- Naimi admitted that Arabian crude reserves have been overstated 'for years' and that current output reduction of six percent from last year's production reflects the, "New reality on the ground".

"We have pumped over 60% of our reserves," he stated.

al- Naimi remarked the Ghawar oilfield was "watered out" and that output from the Khurais field is unable to match the lost production. He also blamed the new law giving Saudi women the right to drive cars for the first time, "This has cut the amount available for export".

"The amount we will export after one year's time will be a further 6 percent less than will be made available in the announced plan," he said. "We are in a depletion situration, there will be no increase in production from now on, regardless of what we do."

Obama Seeks To Calm Jittery Nation

(Washington) The President addressed the nation today asking Americans to remain calm and not rush to gasoline stations to top up gas tanks. The President spoke on television from the Oval Office after the Saudi Arabian government and the Saudi national oil company ARAMCO announced export cuts of crude oil.

"Against a backdrop of shrinking exports from Mexico, Kuwait and other Middle East suppliers and the decline of domestic production, the United States has become much more dependent upon Saudi Arabian crude. Currently, the Saudis are experiencing a short- term, cyclical downturn in production that experts here have assured me is temporary. Our government has offered to provide whatever technical and financial assistance as necessary to allow the Saudis to increase their oil production."

"We ask that in the meantime, that you act and drive normally and not make daily stops to top up your gas tanks. There is currently sufficient gasoline in distribution, and the government is taking steps to release oil from the strategic reserve."

The President looked unusually somber, and did not refer to the prompter or read from notes as he spoke to the American public.

Gas Lines Block Highways, Some States Completely Out Of Gas

(Washington) Motorists from South Carolina to Oregon lined up for hours at gas stations waiting for gas and diesel. Reports from cities such as Nashville, Charleston, Omaha and Dallas being have all gas stations out of gas, with distributors struggling to keep pace with panic calls from retailers for new supplies.

The energy offices of West Virginia, Maryland and Pennsylvania report that demand by individual drivers 'topping up' their tanks have left gasoline stations in those states without any gas to sell at all.

Pipeline operators are reporting difficulty in supplying refined products other than gasoline and diesel. "When the storage at refiners runs out, that's it," admitted a spokesperson for Colonial Pipeline Company. When the refiners are at the end of production, we have to shut down, there will be no more available." When asked how long the pipeline shutdowns might last, the spokesperson replied, "It could be weeks or months, we have to transport a certain quantity, not less and we cannot obviously transport more than the capacity of the system, although this would be the time to do so."

Police Presence At Retailers

Violence has been reported in some areas and police have been sent, some in riot gear, to keep order at stations where waits for gas have been longest. In cities where there is no gas available and no immediate prospect for deliveries, police have been requested to patrol closed stations where owners fear vandalism or theft from parked vehicles.

Stocks Plummet

(New York) Stocks on the New York Stock Exchange fell today after word that oil supplies in the United States will be sharply reduced. The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 680 points to 8412 and the S&P dropped to 725. Oil prices were higher on the futures exchanges, rising the exchange limit in the days trading to $115 a barrel.

"A trader remarked, "We are going from a depression to the Greatest Depression. It's been armageddon down here. The stock market will go all the way to zero. Peak oil ... it's real. What can I tell you?"

Matt Simmons on Peak Oil

(Houston) Peak Oil theorist Matt Simmons explained to reporters on a conference call that, "Peak Oil is real, it's happening, it has been happening, I've been telling everyone about this for years and nobody has been paying attention ..."

Afghanistan Army Commanders Look Toward Iran, Prepare For Strike, Says Report

(Baghdad) American military commanders in Afghanistan have forwarded a strategic option to the Pentagon that includes a rapid strike into Iran to gain control of Iranian weapons of mass destruction. A copy of this exercise report was leaked to the Washington Post, yesterday. Highlights of the plan include a sweep of areas that contain Iranian nuclear assembly and processing facilities. An aside to this option suggests that support for actions would be 'self supporting' taking command and control of infrastructure needed, including energy producing assets. Commanders have stated that as many as 100,000 US military personnel are in place on the Afghan- Iran frontier with 1,000 tanks and other vehicles, "ready to rock and roll."

Woman Shoots Motorist In Gas Line

(Fairfield, Ohio) A stranded Cincinnati woman waiting for 'several days' for gas at a Fairfield service station was shot to death today by another woman during an altercation. The shooter fled the scene but was apprehended a short distance away by other motorists also waiting in line for gas.

30 People Shot To Death In Gas Lines, Dozens Wounded

Violence and 'line rage' erupts as gas customers panic nationwide.

Energy Chief Calls Peak Oil "Real" and a "Danger To Civilization"

Queried by reporters why peak oil had not been addressed by his office, Energy chief Stephen Chu replied, "Administration policy, admitting peak oil would have caused the stock market to crash ..."

Chu suggested the solution is, "new technology and more electric cars."

Rolling Blackouts, Riots and Empty Grocery Stores

The announcement that US energy supplies will shrink has resulted in panic buying of food and other basic necessities as rumors of diesel shortages threaten the suppliers to grocery stores.

Home Depots and Walmarts across the country are reporting 'Mobs' ransacking shelves taking away all goods considered 'necessities' such as plywood, baby food, toilet paper, bottled water and nails. Police have been called to maintain order, but the police in many areas are being diverted to gas stations and important failities such as reservoirs and pumping stations. Ironically, luxury items such as flat screen televisions and jewelry have been ignored by the throngs of panicked shoppers.

"It was insane, they cleaned us out in about an hour, as soon as the news hit," said a Winn- Dixie store manager in Tampa, Florida. "I just opened the registers, I don't suppose it will matter much ... I've got mine, though."

Written by Dr. R. Daniel Allen:
Mules, oxen, and draft horses will be bred as rapidly as possible for distribution to our farms, towns, and cities.

The scale required for this with our current population makes it impossible. Consider the amount of pasture land, amount of water, the transportation needed for their food and the lack of barns in urban areas requiring construction. I do not think world population could have increased to 6.7 billion while using draft animals and consequently can not revert back to them without a massive reduction in population.

Wood burning stoves can not replace natural gas, fuel oil, propane and electricity for heating urban dwellings. There are not enough trees, transportation would be under stress and urbanites would choke on the smoke.

The proposed speech omits discussion of the underlying problem driving resource depletion: population overshoot. There are many mild ways in which the president could deal with this issue: keep abortion legal, provide rational family planning, legalize doctor assisted suicide, reduce immigration, control the U.S. border, do not pay welfare based on the number of children and eliminate the child tax credit for more than two children (or some other number).

The speech does not mention all of the cubical dormitories that would need to be built to house the new dime per hour factory workers who were recently homeless due to foreclosure. They would be located within walking distance of the factories and be heated using waste heat from the factories to achieve maximum efficiency. Pesky labor laws would just have to be abandoned as they were merely a luxurious product of abundant cheap fossil energy. If the president is being honest, he should show no restraint.

As others have commented, giving the speech as presented would be political suicide because it reveals a leader who has given up despite society continuing to function in many other ways. The president's political rivals would sense his weakness and pounce ripping him to shreds.

This post gets a big thumbs down from me.
The original model for limits to growth is full of holes. It was done in the early 1970s on a ridiculously underpowered piece of hardware with very poor software. The model itself was incredibly limited and the assumptions were by no means proven.

Given all that, even if the model were 100% predictive, the book itself published by the club of rome nowhere states that we need to abandon technology.

Nowhere therein is the assertion that technology cannot run off of anything other than fossil fuels and that there is nothing beyond fossil fuels.

Clearly it can and there are.
This post is very, very poor.

I'm disappointed.

What's also coming out is another twist in the story. The generally accepted solution, improving efficiency, is central to our problem. Our systems thinking is still rather rusty is seems.

What if whole theme of using efficiency for sustainability doesn't change the system?? What if its part of the confusion that has all our solutions making the problem worse?

The evidence is that efficiency improvements, energy codes and things, the emphasis on efficiency that is the central idea of sustainability, doesn't change the system but actually stimulates it!

It appears to just continue to push the system faster up the slope we are trying to get off

Instead of toward one or another goal people would want to achieve.

Because efficiency is really also productivity, and
productivity in this case is for how the system uses efficiencies, and that is to grow

Our systems thinking appears to have reverted to linear thinking when we were confronted with the big problem... and acted without thinking. Does Efficiency Multiply Consumption??

The solution is what people also want to hear, but... as you might guess, that takes returning to the path of systems thinking to begin to see it.

I think the solution is to copy how nature turns from growth to maturation (so systems seek a goal rather than just to multiply themselves). Try Economies that become part of nature.

I may well need to have where I garble the questions or issues explained to me..., of course, as real systems thinking is about fertilizing other people's creative thinking, and that's the new questions it generates, to go along with conveying information. ;-)

People, many well informed intelligent individuals here. And a beutiful sppeech. But as someone else said-this needs to be peppered with pro-American, can-do rhetoric, ie. cite WWII, how we can pull togehter. EVEN THEN unlikely to pull us behind needed changes-laws would need to change.
BUT WHO CAN deliver such a speech? To ask Obama to do it is to lay him down as a sacrifice. HE would surely be killed, if not literally then politically, Democartic party would also be over. LOok at response to health care-he would be portrayed as a "weak, puny, ineffectual Liberal" giving up on American Capitalism, trying to create a new world order-a Socialist for Christ sake!"
He is not unaware of the world situation-he is extremely intelligent and has more access to the doom news that any one of us has. IT'S US. AS A NATION. WE LACK the strength to face this news-it's horrifying people. You here have thought about these issues, teh AVERAGE AMERICAN has not; they know somehting is wrong and they are scared, fear leads to anger! When folks get scared they can be controlled, look at town halls and acting against ones own self interest-with health care-all I had to do was ask myself "who would be against these changes?" Hmmm, insurance companies, and big pharm. companies. THe end. But the average unthinking person. Listens to talk radio, and wants a scapegoat- a bad "other" to blame, blacks, immigrants, gays, liberals. IT's a hoot really, if it weren't so sad.
The failure is in us, where are the MASSIVE DEMONSTRATIONS supporting our president, ug? We just sit back and start throwing stuff at him, and how he's "failed us." He hasn't failed us. We the majority, are failing, failing to speak, to rouse ourselves and our children from our playstations, our malls, our football games and on and on....He's not the messiah people. Basically I think we are watching him be mauled and doing nothing. As many have said look what happend to Jimmy Carter. And things were not as bad then.

Here's a speech I'm working on for lay people.

Surrendering the Offensive: A Story of a Realization of Individual Limits

Actually, the story has been lived out thousands of times throughout history. Let’s go back only 120 years or so to understand the limits faced by one man and his company. In this case, his company is the 7th Calvary and the man is General Armstrong Custer.

You might ask what would possess Custer to take his horse Comanche and travel hundreds of miles with his men marching two abreast through the dust and elements with scarce rations and resources and without the benefit of modern conveniences or female companionship. With his bible in his saddle bag and a Colt 45 in his holster, Custer believed he was the spearhead to assert to the will of the Union in which he served; a Union that strongly believed in the Doctrine of Manifest Destiny.

You’d like to think Custer was able to realize his limits and that of his men. But sadly, those thoughts never entered into his mind. You’d hope at some point in time, Custer would realize that his own personal actions and limitations could cost him his life as well as the lives of his brothers Tom and Boston, his friend Myles Keogh and the entire 7th Calvary.

At the very least, you would think the moment was on that dark Sunday in American History when General Custer looked around and realized he lost the offensive and that Crazy Horse and his warriors would determine the outcome of the engagement. This moment might have been when the General and his 80 troops found themselves at the bottom of a little knoll ready to deploy to higher ground, only to find out that the higher ground was thickly occupied by Indians and warriors stealthily moving through the fog created by gunfire and dust.

He called his officers together to assess the situation. They surveyed all around and found themselves hemmed in at all sides. The rearguard was being overrun by hostiles and the enemy on the left flank presented a very serious threat. General Custer must have realized the offensive was lost when he ordered all the horses shot and the carcasses piled into a temporary shelter from which to face the advancing onslaught. He must have started to suspect what a terrible outcome this would be.

But, let us not just know the history of this but we need also to learn the lesson for it is still relevant for today. Let us individually and collectively realize at some point in time that our limitations can get us in a situation not unlike General Custer’s. Instead, let us in a timely manner realize that the resources we have at our disposal are very precious and should be treated as such. One of the great tragedies in life is when something precious becomes common. We must realize that the resources we have now at our disposal are finite and limited.

Manifest Destiny. In this chapter I will show how relevant this is to our day and age.

You can see by this story, what length the United States will go to get the resources it needs and assumes it deserves. Manifest Destiny is the historical belief that the United States (white men) is destined and divinely ordained by God to expand. The unintended consequence of Manifest Destiny was the decimation and outright destruction of many native Indian cultures. The consequence of one people believing in no limitations was the eradication of another just as valuable people.

In today’s terms, it’s like the Wall Street boys belief that profit was unlimited ending up in bank failures, massive unemployment, millions of people losing their homes, and escalating crime and suicide rates, the beginning of the decimation of the American people.

Living in Limitations – two years ago we spent $100 an hour, this year we feed five people on $200 a week. Two years ago we each had 2-3 cars; now five adults share one car. We have learned to live on limitations and learned we can live well. Now that we live within limitations we can truly appreciate the occasional luxury; the steak dinner or the chocolate chip ice cream cone. Those same items we threw away two years ago because they sat too long in the refrigerator.

The above is just the beginning of a foundation I will use to bring our current energy situation to the lay person. I know I don’t write that well but any constructive input will be appreciated.

Po – be easy on me it’s my first time.

It's always fascinating to me that a group of people who see so easily through one set of illusions - about humanity's relationship to the environment via the energy linkage - could fail so utterly to see through another. To wit, the illusion that the government is a socially beneficent entity which exists to serve the needs of we the people. That what we have is in fact a 'representative' government. That this government can and will act in ways that support the 'greater good.'

Ain't gonna happen. It's like entering a clown car in the Indy 500 - that's not what it was *designed* for. Government - aka the State - is, simply, an arbiter of economic advantage and as such, employs violence and the threat of violence to achieve it's core end: plunder via parasitism. Thus, to expect it to 'lead the way' in initiating Americans to a saner, less exploitative way of living is to expect milk from a bull. It simply doesn't work that way. Wake up, read your history (Zinn's 'A People's History of the United States' would be a start - Rothbard's 'Conceived in Liberty set even better), and realize that it will be up to private individuals, communities, non-profits and other NGOs to take the lead - and that in doing so they will be unalterably opposed in doing so by the very entity government many hope will 'save' us. Governments exist to exploit the masses, not to save them.

Wheeldog's excellent comments include this line:

"...when the promise of better times do not pan out the public would lose all respect for political leadership and anarchy could follow."

...the implication being that this would be a 'bad thing' (when in fact it fills me with hope to imagine he is right and we reach that stage!). This is the old canard: anarchy (literally, the absence of a State) = chaos and lawlessness. In point of fact, anarchy is precisely what I am hoping for - the opportunity to establish functional and productive private (rather than parasitical State) institutions which today have been usurped by the State (really, does anyone here trust the findings of the FDA more than those of Underwriter's Laboratory?? If the latter took over the former, would this not be a vast improvement in terms of the greater good being served?? Think about it...). An honest and rational analysis of the historical role of the State (across various nations) in our current predicament would yield the conclusion that the excesses of the Industrial Revolution and its aftermath have been wholly facilitated by governments. The State is part of the problem, any solution will need to dispense with it.

How many here are aware that the 'corporation' in it's original (non-profit) form, was typically an entity granted a charter to build a bridge, hospital, school, etc - a public works project. Until the State saw the potential and turned corporations into for-profit, money generating machines - with most of the money going to the State and its friends who invariably ran these new institutions. Little has changed. Corporatism reigns and has for centuries. The modern State and the money and power elites are inextricably intertwined - the latter having designed the former for the purposes of exploitation.

So anarchy isn't the bogeyman - it's the solution. Under an anarchic system, megacorporations' themselves - including their megacontributions to biosphere degradation - would be an impossibility, for example (the 'mega' comes from government intervention to protect large corporations from smaller, nimble competition - which eventually creates entities then deemed 'too big to fail' and so assured continued government protection for all eternity). And under an 'archic' system (i.e. one where government successfully asserts a monopoly claim on violence across a geographic area), the problems of pollution, etc, will persist because the problems of environmental degradation are at core a problem of hierarchy - i.e. of power differentials - and the organization which maintains and supports those differentials is the State.

This is why no high government official could possibly give a speech like the one above. Obama is, as have been his predecessors, captive of the money and power elites, a true Statist as are virtually all elected and appointed officials of both major political parties. And those elites would rather suck the life out of us than live in primitive conditions. They won't give in until there is literally no other option. Imagining that their servant government would act in opposition to those preferences is an illusion, a modern myth, a fairy tale.

As the author of this piece might say: it's time to grow up and stop believing in fairy tales.

So hope, beg and pray for anarchy - it's arguably humanity's only chance.

When I first read the Speech I kept looking up to see if I was really at The Onion. My laughter died down after reading the posts. I realized people took this seriously.
As Winston Churchill once described a policy taken by another, "it was made in a spirit divorced from reality". I can't imagine a policy prescription that could be more nonsensical than reverting to 19th century technology. I can just see the glee in the faces of the leaders of the world's capitalist countries when they hear the the US is going back to the horse and buggy stage. Lord only knows what our enemies would think or do.
Dr. Allen's prescription is just the ticket if we are to make "80 by 50"[80% reduction in Carbon emissions by 2050]. An old fashioned economic collapse would certainly do the trick! That's how Russia became the only country to attain the Kyoto emission standards. But I doubt any sane politician [or economist]would recommend that.
So let us try and wean off oil & gas by using renewable and nuclear energy. Let us mitigate what ecologic damage we have and will cause while we proceed. But the reality is that every major city is 3-5 days from anarchy if the trucks that supply us don't roll.