Original Morrison posting.
It is precisely the enormous second law advantages posed, for example, by a global efficient renewable energy transformation to replace high entropy and ecologically ruinous fossil fuels and nuclear energy is at the heart of an ecological growth strategy.
I am well aware that industrial systems, both market and planning based are at the heart of our march toward ecological self-destruction.
I am merely trying to raise the prospects that it is possible to adopt and build a comprehensive system of ecological market rules that guide consumption, production and investment decisions and make the price system through a system of ecological consumption taxes, assessments and fees make the price system send signals for sustainability at the same time market rules and regulation mandate ecological conduct, for example, renewable portfolio standards that require non-polluting efficient renewable energy resources.
I am suggesting that there may be prospects rising from below for demands for systematic ecological conduct that can relate in a great increase in monetary values and human well being, at the same time a great decrease in pollution, depletion, and ecological damage.
All production and consumption and investment must be informed by an industrial ecology regulations supported by clear market price signals for zero-waste zero-pollution future.
Perhaps there is an alternative global ecological path worth examining that is not a de-growth future. We can increase our efficiency and decrease pollution by an order of magnitude. This can not be done by letting the market run wild. Rather, a structure of regulation and market price signals can make economic growth mean ecological improvement. Energy, industry, agriculture and forestry can be conducted as sustainable practices. This will not happen magically, but by a comprehensive bundle of ecological changes that I think is a worthy topic for discussion and examination by the ISEE.
