Intro to Throughput: Connecting the Dots
This article describes the challenges our global culture faces. The separate issues of global warming, poverty (income disparity), race relations, soil carbon loss, destruction of the oceans and forests, etc., all point to one inescapable solution: the reduction of throughput. In articles throughout the website are descriptions and examples of throughput. This article will refer to the other articles and work to give more background information. As stated in the introduction of the website, the global challenges are analogous to a picture being painted; as the spaces in the painting are filled in one can start to see the whole picture. Even before the painting is finished the observer watching the artist begins to fill in the spaces with his or her imagination. I hope you will find these articles thought provoking and that they will help to start the debate about throughput verses efficiency.
If I had to pick one issue that is the cause of our collective global problems it would be the systematic increase of throughput. This website addresses the subject of throughput in many ways and, to define it simply, throughput is the collective energy and resources needed to build a system and then to keep that system going, including all the ramifications. For example, I have a cell phone and a factory is needed to produce the phone; however, the factory to build cell phones did not suddenly appear and the cellphone factory probably does not produce the components needed to build the cell phone factory and thus, other factories, usually more than one, are needed to build the factory to make the phone. There are also many resources sourced in the machinery used in mining the materials needed to build and run these factories. There is also a need to solve the problems of pollution created by building and running these factories, including global warming, and let’s not forget the resources the military uses protecting these resources, all in the name of national interests. When you start thinking about throughput it seems to go on forever. If we can reduce or eliminate the need for so many material goods, throughput can be greatly reduced.
As our global culture progressed, we moved more and more towards specialization. Each main discipline has been divided into many and as this has occurred the issues we are now facing seem to also be divided at a time when they need to be combined. For example, we can no longer just look at clean air, clean water, and poverty independently. All of these issues influence each other in many ways. What if we could address the one basic issue that seems to escape us as a global culture? Throughput is that issue. It permeates all of our challenges yet in all of the years I’ve been looking at this, 35 +, I have only heard the term throughput mentioned once on the radio and once on TV.
Let’s take a look at poverty and low income wage earners. Money allows access to resources and if one’s income is low the result is you have a very limited amount of resources. In this case one would want to make wise choices to utilize these resources in a holistic way to increase expected results. Two examples, both from our house, come to mind. The first is the foundation for the octagon. (Refer to History of the Yurt, chapter 3). The environmental benefits to building a foundation in this way are many, such as the reduction of many of the costs due to flooding and droughts, when throughput is placed front and center. (Refer to The True Foundation of Building). A typical concrete foundation of our size house can cost $10,000 or more, whereas our foundation cost around $90. Another example is our summer hot water heater which during the warmer months provides us with free hot water. Again the resources to make this heater were inexpensive and the environmental benefits are many. A class of 8th grade students built the hot water heater demonstrating that there was no need for highly specialized people to build and maintain such a system, what was needed was education and skill building. (Refer to Eighth Grade 2014- Building a Hot Water Solar Panel). Both of these examples are simple enough for most people to build and maintain, or one could hire someone local, using common parts purchased at your local hardware store, increasing community participation. Government funds to help low income people have been cut or have decreased due to inflation, so when building in this way more people can be helped and the environmental benefits reduce the costs needed to solve the many mounting problems due to pollution (in these articles climate change is regarded as a pollution problem along with a decrease in carbon in our soil). (Refer to Movement Education Part 1).
The empowerment of taking charge of your life by knowing how your house works is tremendous. This gives one the possibility of knowing how to reduce throughput while at the same time living comfortably. So how in the world could we even consider a program considering a low-input lifestyle which uses low-cost and low-impact methods as an option? We could federally or locally fund these kinds of projects and by starting small there would be a reduction of the amount of money needed. Also, volunteers could engage in such programs. These volunteers could be of low income, or those wishing to live on a reduced income, and would agree to have oversight. A portion of each participant’s income could go to fund the project and this percentage might depend on individual circumstances. The funding could pay for project leaders knowledgeable in a sustainable way of living and the leaders would help the participants along the way. Since the object is to reduce the resources needed, more can be accomplished with the resources available.
Since money gives us access to resources, for those in higher income levels addressing throughput can also be highly beneficial. If a person can greatly reduce their throughput the amount of work for pay needed to fund their lifestyle can also be reduced. I’m not sure the total amount of actual work is reduced because this lifestyle does require working time to maintain, however it is much less vulnerable to the ups and downs of the economy. If you are not paying for the entire throughput, chances are the debt incurred can be greatly reduced or eliminated altogether. For example, if one takes out a 30-year mortgage for 100,000 dollars they can end up paying 200,000 dollars back to the banks. That means the low income person must work to earn 100,000 dollars to pay the banks. If we can collectively cut throughput resources would be freed up to create more jobs. If you think about it there is no job that doesn’t need the input of resources.
If our educational system began enculturating our young students into a low throughput lifestyle we would start to reduce the release of greenhouse gases. (Refer to Immovable Belief). This would include more bicycles coupled with mass transit. There are many small shops producing bicycles locally and if local production was increased, local employment would increase. If students were responsible for their transportation, and they began using bicycles, obesity would decrease and they would feel a sense of empowerment instead of disillusionment. Schools imparting this vision, this education, would certainly reduce their dependency on the global stream of resources and this would lessen the pressure on budgets and taxpayers. (Refer to Economy Part 1 and Economy Part 2). Our present educational system ensures that graduates can fit into the workforce and this economic system depends on a continued rise in the GDP. Since 2008 our GDP has inched along and economists point out although the economy is not growing at a pace we would like, at least it is growing. What they fail to mention is the huge effect on the economy that climate change has. Let’s just take a quick look at California, which has gone through four years of drought and now is experiencing wildfires. California now needs firefighting equipment whose manufacturing adds to the GDP. Buildings and infrastructure have been destroyed and have to be rebuilt, again adding to the GDP. If you start thinking of all the goods that are now needed because of flooding, fires, and other weather related events that add to the GDP, and if we add them all up, can we actually count this part of the GDP as positive growth? What kind of a number would we get if we subtracted these numbers? Could this be a truer GDP?
An important point to consider in planning for the future is resource availability. (Refer to History of the Yurt – chapter 2). It is commonly thought that the availability of resources will be limited because of resource drawdown or depletion; however, there are many other factors to consider. Let me mention a few of these limits. In our fast paced world the computer is essential to keeping resources moving quickly throughout the system. Mining machinery, processing plants, including refineries, factories to produce goods and places to purchase goods, including the internet, all depend on the computer. Cyber-attacks have increased in recent years making the system vulnerable. The way this is countered adds to the resource stream to stem these cyber-attacks. Computers rely on rare earth elements, 95% of which come from China. The relationship between China and the United States must stay strong, regardless of different morals or viewpoints, to keep our high throughput system going. It turns out that rare earth elements are not so rare, they are found all over the world including the US. However, they occur in small amounts and mining wastes can be up to 90% of material mined, adding greatly to the whole problem. Straight-up terrorism, including piracy, adds vulnerability to the stream of resources. As the need for the resource stream to keep flowing in order for the system to function, we can expect more acts of terrorism from those who want to bring down the Western world. Again, we will need more technology (rare earth elements) to insure this does not happen. As the throughput increases, climate change increases, which in itself can disrupt resource availability due to weather conditions and other factors.
As a nation we are now facing budget cuts due to the huge debt we have created. Many are calling for cuts in the military, yet it is the military’s job is to protect our national interests. These interests include what we consider our resources, the resources needed to keep our system running. Since it takes more resources to mine and refine the resources, limits to the resources increases. It becomes a simple math problem our culture has to face, and if we don’t we are relegated to unmanageable weather situations and disillusioned people saddled with debt and paying for throughput and war (including economic warfare) over the resources needed.
Think of a program that you personally deem very important. Are the issues facing this program increasing or decreasing in intensity, while at the same time the budget is in question? If so, the programs are forced to face challenges by increasing efficiency, however, there is a limit to efficiency where results start to diminish.
In the past decade wealth in the US has migrated to the top 1% of the population. Many agree that this is not socially sustainable and have plans to remediate this problem through tax relief, closing loop holes, job creation, etc., hoping that this would in turn stimulate the economy. Without looking at Jevons Paradox and discussing the similarities to this issue, added efficiency will only add to environmental degradation. William Stanley Jevons was an economist who observed in the mid 1800’s that when the coal industry became more efficient in its uses, extraction and processing, the amount of coal used per capita was greatly reduced. Yet, since more people could now afford to use coal the total amount of coal burned increased. The effect of redistributing the wealth is similar to the Jevons effect whereas now a small amount of the population uses a large amount of resources per capita, however if we redistribute the wealth, again without investigating throughput, the total amount of resource use will skyrocket, increasing the problems. On the other hand, if we don’t redistribute the wealth, social unrest is a plausible outcome. If instead our culture had a direction of a low cost, low impact society, one that on every level strives to lower its throughput, everyone, no matter what gender, religion, or race could collectively offer new ideas while at the same time increasing the average standard of living.
If we look at efficiency instead of throughput for solutions I believe we will miss our window of opportunity. In the works of Joseph Tainter in The Collapse of Complex Societies and Jared Diamond’s Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed there was a repeated theme that threaded its way through past societies that had collapsed. They all depended on certain resources to operate their system. When the resource availability diminished the system failed to operate. The resource availability as stated can change due to many factors such as overextending, climate change, war and trading affiliations. With what we know about paradigm change it is very hard for the population to see what is apparent (refer to paradigm articles). For the first time in the history of humanity we have this knowledge of what is to come and we can proactively do something to divert this direction.
If I had to pick one issue that is the cause of our collective global problems it would be the systematic increase of throughput. This website addresses the subject of throughput in many ways and, to define it simply, throughput is the collective energy and resources needed to build a system and then to keep that system going, including all the ramifications. For example, I have a cell phone and a factory is needed to produce the phone; however, the factory to build cell phones did not suddenly appear and the cellphone factory probably does not produce the components needed to build the cell phone factory and thus, other factories, usually more than one, are needed to build the factory to make the phone. There are also many resources sourced in the machinery used in mining the materials needed to build and run these factories. There is also a need to solve the problems of pollution created by building and running these factories, including global warming, and let’s not forget the resources the military uses protecting these resources, all in the name of national interests. When you start thinking about throughput it seems to go on forever. If we can reduce or eliminate the need for so many material goods, throughput can be greatly reduced.
As our global culture progressed, we moved more and more towards specialization. Each main discipline has been divided into many and as this has occurred the issues we are now facing seem to also be divided at a time when they need to be combined. For example, we can no longer just look at clean air, clean water, and poverty independently. All of these issues influence each other in many ways. What if we could address the one basic issue that seems to escape us as a global culture? Throughput is that issue. It permeates all of our challenges yet in all of the years I’ve been looking at this, 35 +, I have only heard the term throughput mentioned once on the radio and once on TV.
Let’s take a look at poverty and low income wage earners. Money allows access to resources and if one’s income is low the result is you have a very limited amount of resources. In this case one would want to make wise choices to utilize these resources in a holistic way to increase expected results. Two examples, both from our house, come to mind. The first is the foundation for the octagon. (Refer to History of the Yurt, chapter 3). The environmental benefits to building a foundation in this way are many, such as the reduction of many of the costs due to flooding and droughts, when throughput is placed front and center. (Refer to The True Foundation of Building). A typical concrete foundation of our size house can cost $10,000 or more, whereas our foundation cost around $90. Another example is our summer hot water heater which during the warmer months provides us with free hot water. Again the resources to make this heater were inexpensive and the environmental benefits are many. A class of 8th grade students built the hot water heater demonstrating that there was no need for highly specialized people to build and maintain such a system, what was needed was education and skill building. (Refer to Eighth Grade 2014- Building a Hot Water Solar Panel). Both of these examples are simple enough for most people to build and maintain, or one could hire someone local, using common parts purchased at your local hardware store, increasing community participation. Government funds to help low income people have been cut or have decreased due to inflation, so when building in this way more people can be helped and the environmental benefits reduce the costs needed to solve the many mounting problems due to pollution (in these articles climate change is regarded as a pollution problem along with a decrease in carbon in our soil). (Refer to Movement Education Part 1).
The empowerment of taking charge of your life by knowing how your house works is tremendous. This gives one the possibility of knowing how to reduce throughput while at the same time living comfortably. So how in the world could we even consider a program considering a low-input lifestyle which uses low-cost and low-impact methods as an option? We could federally or locally fund these kinds of projects and by starting small there would be a reduction of the amount of money needed. Also, volunteers could engage in such programs. These volunteers could be of low income, or those wishing to live on a reduced income, and would agree to have oversight. A portion of each participant’s income could go to fund the project and this percentage might depend on individual circumstances. The funding could pay for project leaders knowledgeable in a sustainable way of living and the leaders would help the participants along the way. Since the object is to reduce the resources needed, more can be accomplished with the resources available.
Since money gives us access to resources, for those in higher income levels addressing throughput can also be highly beneficial. If a person can greatly reduce their throughput the amount of work for pay needed to fund their lifestyle can also be reduced. I’m not sure the total amount of actual work is reduced because this lifestyle does require working time to maintain, however it is much less vulnerable to the ups and downs of the economy. If you are not paying for the entire throughput, chances are the debt incurred can be greatly reduced or eliminated altogether. For example, if one takes out a 30-year mortgage for 100,000 dollars they can end up paying 200,000 dollars back to the banks. That means the low income person must work to earn 100,000 dollars to pay the banks. If we can collectively cut throughput resources would be freed up to create more jobs. If you think about it there is no job that doesn’t need the input of resources.
If our educational system began enculturating our young students into a low throughput lifestyle we would start to reduce the release of greenhouse gases. (Refer to Immovable Belief). This would include more bicycles coupled with mass transit. There are many small shops producing bicycles locally and if local production was increased, local employment would increase. If students were responsible for their transportation, and they began using bicycles, obesity would decrease and they would feel a sense of empowerment instead of disillusionment. Schools imparting this vision, this education, would certainly reduce their dependency on the global stream of resources and this would lessen the pressure on budgets and taxpayers. (Refer to Economy Part 1 and Economy Part 2). Our present educational system ensures that graduates can fit into the workforce and this economic system depends on a continued rise in the GDP. Since 2008 our GDP has inched along and economists point out although the economy is not growing at a pace we would like, at least it is growing. What they fail to mention is the huge effect on the economy that climate change has. Let’s just take a quick look at California, which has gone through four years of drought and now is experiencing wildfires. California now needs firefighting equipment whose manufacturing adds to the GDP. Buildings and infrastructure have been destroyed and have to be rebuilt, again adding to the GDP. If you start thinking of all the goods that are now needed because of flooding, fires, and other weather related events that add to the GDP, and if we add them all up, can we actually count this part of the GDP as positive growth? What kind of a number would we get if we subtracted these numbers? Could this be a truer GDP?
An important point to consider in planning for the future is resource availability. (Refer to History of the Yurt – chapter 2). It is commonly thought that the availability of resources will be limited because of resource drawdown or depletion; however, there are many other factors to consider. Let me mention a few of these limits. In our fast paced world the computer is essential to keeping resources moving quickly throughout the system. Mining machinery, processing plants, including refineries, factories to produce goods and places to purchase goods, including the internet, all depend on the computer. Cyber-attacks have increased in recent years making the system vulnerable. The way this is countered adds to the resource stream to stem these cyber-attacks. Computers rely on rare earth elements, 95% of which come from China. The relationship between China and the United States must stay strong, regardless of different morals or viewpoints, to keep our high throughput system going. It turns out that rare earth elements are not so rare, they are found all over the world including the US. However, they occur in small amounts and mining wastes can be up to 90% of material mined, adding greatly to the whole problem. Straight-up terrorism, including piracy, adds vulnerability to the stream of resources. As the need for the resource stream to keep flowing in order for the system to function, we can expect more acts of terrorism from those who want to bring down the Western world. Again, we will need more technology (rare earth elements) to insure this does not happen. As the throughput increases, climate change increases, which in itself can disrupt resource availability due to weather conditions and other factors.
As a nation we are now facing budget cuts due to the huge debt we have created. Many are calling for cuts in the military, yet it is the military’s job is to protect our national interests. These interests include what we consider our resources, the resources needed to keep our system running. Since it takes more resources to mine and refine the resources, limits to the resources increases. It becomes a simple math problem our culture has to face, and if we don’t we are relegated to unmanageable weather situations and disillusioned people saddled with debt and paying for throughput and war (including economic warfare) over the resources needed.
Think of a program that you personally deem very important. Are the issues facing this program increasing or decreasing in intensity, while at the same time the budget is in question? If so, the programs are forced to face challenges by increasing efficiency, however, there is a limit to efficiency where results start to diminish.
In the past decade wealth in the US has migrated to the top 1% of the population. Many agree that this is not socially sustainable and have plans to remediate this problem through tax relief, closing loop holes, job creation, etc., hoping that this would in turn stimulate the economy. Without looking at Jevons Paradox and discussing the similarities to this issue, added efficiency will only add to environmental degradation. William Stanley Jevons was an economist who observed in the mid 1800’s that when the coal industry became more efficient in its uses, extraction and processing, the amount of coal used per capita was greatly reduced. Yet, since more people could now afford to use coal the total amount of coal burned increased. The effect of redistributing the wealth is similar to the Jevons effect whereas now a small amount of the population uses a large amount of resources per capita, however if we redistribute the wealth, again without investigating throughput, the total amount of resource use will skyrocket, increasing the problems. On the other hand, if we don’t redistribute the wealth, social unrest is a plausible outcome. If instead our culture had a direction of a low cost, low impact society, one that on every level strives to lower its throughput, everyone, no matter what gender, religion, or race could collectively offer new ideas while at the same time increasing the average standard of living.
If we look at efficiency instead of throughput for solutions I believe we will miss our window of opportunity. In the works of Joseph Tainter in The Collapse of Complex Societies and Jared Diamond’s Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed there was a repeated theme that threaded its way through past societies that had collapsed. They all depended on certain resources to operate their system. When the resource availability diminished the system failed to operate. The resource availability as stated can change due to many factors such as overextending, climate change, war and trading affiliations. With what we know about paradigm change it is very hard for the population to see what is apparent (refer to paradigm articles). For the first time in the history of humanity we have this knowledge of what is to come and we can proactively do something to divert this direction.
|
|
This graph illustrates the rise of a society: A) the rise in standard of living, B) the society reaches the peak of standard of living, C) resource availability for cultural enhancement such as education, art, etc. decreases and are used to keep the system going, D) the decline continues and E) resulting in collapse.
What if instead we used our available resources to set up a new culture based on low throughput? Instead of using our valuable resources to set up our global culture at point C and D and continue the fall, we could plan to set up for E and start building the new paradigm. If we started to have the discussion we would indeed have to transition strategies based on our present societal needs, but overall the direction would change. Resources would be freed up for scientific research, education, and many other disciplines that add to flourishing societies. This discussion is occurring in small circles but in order to move ahead the concept of throughput needs to be understood by all of humanity.
Can we as a global society make such a shift? In order to even consider the possibility, both efficiency and throughput need to be part of the change, and right now throughput is absent. The familiarization of the concept of throughput can be brought about by advertising. Through many different sources of media we can educate society in many of the problems we are now facing and start to reach logical conclusions and solutions. The solutions would be made by everyone, not just a few, increasing the possibility of success.
