[Marxism] A Different Environmental Threat: Peak Rare Minerals, China, and Green Technology

S. Artesian sartesian at earthlink.net
Sun Sep 6 13:28:03 MDT 2009

Nope.  Not true.  The debates about "peak oil" do not, all of them, revolve 
around when the size of the fixed supply.  The debates revolve around 
whether or not the representations of peak oil advocates are accurate.

To say something has a definite supply is not to say tapping that supply 
will follow the "peak schematic,"  and in fact, in most "less developed 
countries" production and output have not followed the peak format.

Extraction, rates of extraction, are social developments, not geological. 
Without technological advancements, production rates can remain at static 
levels.  Technology applications  are a social relation of production.

Iron ore, coal, copper all have definite quantities.  Has any of that 
production conformed to a peak schematic, based on depletion of reserves? 
Not hardly.  Why oil is considered to be different than iron ore, coal, has 
much more to due with commerical fears rather than known reserves, known 
production patterns.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael Perelman" <michael at ecst.csuchico.edu>
To: "David Schanoes" <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Sunday, September 06, 2009 12:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] A Different Environmental Threat: Peak Rare 
Minerals,China, and Green Technology

. Mathematically, as long as a fixed supply exists, there
> will necessarily be a peak point in extraction. The debates about peak
> oil revolve around the question of the size of that fixed supply. 

More information about the Marxism mailing list