Degrowth and Technology: Towards feasible, viable, appropriate and convivial imaginaries

Kerschner, Christian; Wächter, Petra; Nierling, Linda; Ehlers, Melf-Hinrich

doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.147

Cited by 115 publications

(97 citation statements)

References 91 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The notion of viable technologies is stressed, in the bioeconomic context [8], as the capacity of feasible recipes, similar to living organisms, to operate given a fuel flow, maintaining and reproducing their material structure (fund resources), and yielding surplus energy to society (of the desired quality), which is ultimately used to cover endosomatic and exosomatic human needs at the expense of the entropy of terrestrial energy and material resources (flows resources) [7,8]. Although there are no absolutely efficient technologies from the thermodynamics point of view, understanding the working conditions to maximize the attainable output is essential where sustainability is concerned [9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy Sustainability Analysis (ESA) of Energy-Producing Processes: A Case Study on Distributed H2 Production

Gómez-Camacho

Ruggeri

2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the sustainability context, the performance of energy-producing technologies, using different energy sources, needs to be scored and compared. The selective criterion of a higher level of useful energy to feed an ever-increasing demand of energy to satisfy a wide range of endo- and exosomatic human needs seems adequate. In fact, surplus energy is able to cover energy services only after compensating for the energy expenses incurred to build and to run the technology itself. This paper proposes an energy sustainability analysis (ESA) methodology based on the internal and external energy use of a given technology, considering the entire energy trajectory from energy sources to useful energy. ESA analysis is conducted at two levels: (i) short-term, by the use of the energy sustainability index (ESI), which is the first step to establish whether the energy produced is able to cover the direct energy expenses needed to run the technology and (ii) long-term, by which all the indirect energy-quotas are considered, i.e., all the additional energy requirements of the technology, including the energy amortization quota necessary for the replacement of the technology at the end of its operative life. The long-term level of analysis is conducted by the evaluation of two indicators: the energy return per unit of energy invested (EROI) over the operative life and the energy payback-time (EPT), as the minimum lapse at which all energy expenditures for the production of materials and their construction can be repaid to society. The ESA methodology has been applied to the case study of H2 production at small-scale (10–15 kWH2) comparing three different technologies: (i) steam-methane reforming (SMR), (ii) solar-powered water electrolysis (SPWE), and (iii) two-stage anaerobic digestion (TSAD) in order to score the technologies from an energy sustainability perspective.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy Sustainability Analysis (ESA) of Energy-Producing Processes: A Case Study on Distributed H2 Production

Gómez-Camacho

Ruggeri

2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More broadly, while degrowthers have to some extent considered individual FIR technologies (particularly AI and biotechnology) (e.g. Kallis, ; Kerschner et al, ), they have yet to address their convergent and mutually amplifying character, which leaves them vulnerable to the arguments of techno‐optimists.…”

Section: The Fourth Industrial Revolutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, they argue that economic growth need not come at the expense of climate and earth system stabilization. On the other side are ‘degrowth’ proponents who challenge the evidential basis on which claims for relative decoupling rest and argue that visions of absolute decoupling are unlikely to be realized in the future (Hickel, ; Hickel and Kallis, ; Kerschner et al, ; Kallis, ; O’Neill et al, ; Wiedmann et al, ) Thus they claim that a transition to a post‐growth global economy will be necessary to prevent runaway climate change and stabilize the earth system.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is not necessary to buy into all the hype surrounding these technologies, often promoted by entrepreneurs with financial investments in these industries, to accept that they are indeed enabling new vistas of technological creativity that may significantly alter the geopolitical, economic, and ecological landscape. Degrowthers would be right to critically scrutinize the claims of their advocates, which they have done to a limited extent (Kallis, ; Kerschner et al, ). However, when forecasting technological trends there is an irreducible element of uncertainty, and skeptical technology assessments will always be insufficient in the eyes of techno‐optimists.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Dangers of Decoupling: Earth System Crisis and the ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution’

Albert

2020

Global Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The question of whether global capitalism can resolve the earth system crisis rests on the (im)possibility of 'absolute decoupling': whether or not economic growth can continue indefinitely as total environmental impacts shrink. Ecomodernists and other techno-optimists argue for the feasibility of absolute decoupling, whereas degrowth advocates show that it is likely to be neither feasible in principle nor in the timeframe needed to ward off ecological tipping points. While primarily supporting the degrowth perspective, I will suggest that the ecomodernists have a wildcard in their pocket that hasn't been systematically addressed by degrowth advocates. This is the 'Fourth Industrial Revolution', which refers to convergent innovations in biotechnology, nanotechnology, artificial intelligence, 3D printing, and other developments. However, I will argue that while these innovations may enable some degree of absolute decoupling, they will also intensify emerging risks in the domains of biosecurity, cybersecurity, and state securitization. Overall, these technologies will not only place unprecedented destructive power in the hands of non-state actors but will also empower and incentivize states to create a global security regime with unprecedented surveillance and force mobilization capacities. This reinforces the conclusion that mainstream environmental policies based on decoupling should be reconsidered and supplanted by alternative policy trajectories based on material-energetic degrowth, redistribution, and technological deceleration. Policy Implications• Policy makers should explore the evidence challenging mainstream assumptions about 'green growth' and consider the possibilities for a 'post-growth' transition.• Policy makers should recognize the potentially catastrophic risks posed by Fourth Industrial Revolution technologies, which will increase in severity if they are relied upon to decouple economic growth from growing resource consumption.• To manage the risks posed by Fourth Industrial Revolution technologies, citizens assemblies should be empowered to shape the pace and direction of innovation and deployment, rather than relying solely on traditional arms control and private sector initiatives.

show abstract

“…Almost ignoring, therefore, that the concepts of 'blue economy' as well as 'blue growth' are economic ones, Burgess et al (2018, 331) have described blue growth as "the newest of many recent calls for a more holistic management of complex marine socio-ecological systems", and "an ambitious framework for ocean management". During Rio + 20, blue economy was being invoked to connect oceans with "green economy"-both of which with their growth focus usually brought 'false solutions' (Gunderson et al 2018;Kerschner et al 2018; Norgard and Xue 2016)-whereby different actors worked to further define the term in ways that prioritized particular ocean problems and solutions, and left it unclear for whom and how the blue economy will eventually be a strategy (Silver et al 2015, 135). Other scholars realized the limitations of current definitions and called for new ones, such as Spalding (2016, 14), who referred to a new blue economy "to promote economic benefits of "good for the ocean" industries and activities, while ensuring truly sustainable development".…”

Section: The Illusion(s) Of Blue Growthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Editorial: Blue degrowth and the politics of the sea: rethinking the blue economy

Ertör

Hadjimichael

2019

Sustain Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1 Latouche (2015) comments on the understanding of the phrase 'decolonization of the imaginary' referencing the [philosopher Cornelius Castoriadis and his book The Imaginary Institution of the Society (1975) where a social reality is described as 'imaginary significations' meaning representations which mobilise feelings. In a social reality, therefore, in which (economic) growth has a strong imaginary signification, degrowth can only be realised once a growth-oriented imaginary is decolonized.

show abstract

Degrowth and Technology: Towards feasible, viable, appropriate and convivial imaginaries

Cited by 115 publications

References 91 publications

Energy Sustainability Analysis (ESA) of Energy-Producing Processes: A Case Study on Distributed H2 Production

Energy Sustainability Analysis (ESA) of Energy-Producing Processes: A Case Study on Distributed H2 Production

The Dangers of Decoupling: Earth System Crisis and the ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution’

Editorial: Blue degrowth and the politics of the sea: rethinking the blue economy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About