Theory, also known as the Hubbert Peak Theory. Hubbert
stated that the discovery of new energy reserves and their production would
be outstripped by usage, thereby eventually causing economic and social
havoc. Many modern followers of Peak Oil Theory believe that the 2007-2009
global recession was exacerbated in part by record oil prices that reflected
validity of the theory.
Hubbert received all of his higher education at the University of Chicago,
graduating with a PhD in 1937, and later taught geophysics at Columbia
University. He was highly acclaimed throughout his career, receiving many
honors such as the Rockefeller Public Service Award in 1977.
In
1933, Hubbert and Howard Scott formed an organization called Technocracy,
Inc. Technocracy is derived from the Greek words “techne” meaning skill and
“kratos”, meaning rule. Thus, it is government by skilled engineers,
scientists and technicians as opposed to elected officials. It was opposed
to all other forms of government, including communism, socialism and
fascism, all of which function with a price-based economy.
As
founders of the organization and political movement called Technocracy,
Inc., Hubbert and Scott also co-authored Technocracy Study Course in
1934. This book serves as the “bible” of Technocracy and is the root
document to which most all modern technocratic thinking can be traced.
Technocracy postulated that only scientists and engineers were capable of
running a complex, technology-based society. Because technology, they
reasoned, changed the social nature of societies, previous methods of
government and economy were made obsolete. They disdained politicians and
bureaucrats, who they viewed as incompetent. By utilizing the scientific
method and scientific management techniques, Technocrats hoped to squeeze
the massive inefficiencies out of running a society, thereby providing more
benefits for all members of society while consuming less resources.
The
other integral part of Technocracy was to implement an economic system based
on energy allocation rather than price. They proposed to replace traditional
money with Energy Credits. Their keen focus on the efficient use of energy
is likely the first hint of a sustained ecological / environmental movement
in the United States. Technocracy Study Course stated, for instance,
Although it (the earth) is not an isolated system the changes in the
configuration of matter on the earth, such as the erosion of soil, the
making of mountains, the burning of coal and oil, and the mining of metals
are all typical and characteristic examples of irreversible processes,
involving in each case an increase of entropy. (Technocracy
Study Course, Hubbert & Scott, p. 49)
Modern emphasis on curtailing carbon fuel consumption that causes global
warming and CO2 emissions is essentially a product of early Technocratic
thinking. As scientists, Hubbert and Scott tried to explain (or justify)
their arguments in terms of physics and the law of thermodynamics, which is
the study of energy conversion between heat and mechanical work.
Entropy is a concept
within thermodynamics that represents the amount of energy in a system that
is no longer available for doing mechanical work. Entropy thus increases as
matter and energy in the system degrade toward the ultimate state of inert
uniformity. In layman’s terms, entropy means once you use it, you lose it
for good. Furthermore, the end state of entropy is “inert uniformity” where
nothing takes place. Thus, if man uses up all the available energy and/or
destroys the ecology, it cannot be repeated or restored ever again.
The
Technocrat’s avoidance of social entropy is to increase the efficiency of
society by the careful allocation of available energy and measuring
subsequent output in order to find a state of “equilibrium,” or balance.
Hubbert’s focus on entropy is evidenced by
Technocracy, Inc.’s logo,
the well-known Yin Yang symbol that depicts balance.
To
facilitate this equilibrium between man and nature, Technocracy proposed
that citizens would receive Energy Certificates in order to operate the
economy:
“Energy Certificates are issued individually to every adult
of the entire population… The record of one’s income and its rate of
expenditure is kept by the Distribution Sequence, so that it is a simple
matter at any time for the Distribution Sequence to ascertain the state of
a given customer’s balance... When making purchases of either goods or
services an individual surrenders the Energy Certificates properly
identified and signed.
“The significance of this, from the point of view of
knowledge of what is going on in the social system, and of social control,
can best be appreciated when one surveys the whole system in perspective.
First, one single organization is manning and operating the whole social
mechanism. The same organization not only produces but also distributes
all goods and services. “With this information clearing continuously to a
central headquarters we have a case exactly analogous to the control panel
of a power plant, or the bridge of an ocean liner…”
[Technocracy
Study Course,
Hubbert & Scott,p. 238-239]
Two
key differences between price-based money and Energy Certificates are that
a) money is generic to the holder while Certificates are individually
registered to each citizen and b) money persists while Certificates expire.
The latter facet would greatly hinder, if not altogether prevent, the
accumulation of wealth and property.
Transition
At
the start of WWII, Technocracy’s popularity dwindled as economic prosperity
returned, however both the organization and its philosophy survived. Today,
there are two principal websites representing Technocracy in North America:
Technocracy, Inc.,
located in Ferndale, Washington, is represented at
www.technocracy.org.
A sister organization in Vancouver, British Columbia is Technocracy
Vancouver, can be found at
www.technocracyvan.ca.
While Technocracy’s original focus was exclusively on the North American
continent, it is now growing rapidly in Europe and other industrialized
nations. For instance, the
Network of European Technocrats
was formed in 2005 as “an
autonomous
research and social movement that aims to explore and develop both the
theory and design of technocracy.”
The NET website claims to have members around the world.
Of
course, a few minor league organizations and their websites cannot hope to
create or implement a global energy policy, but it’s not because the ideas
aren’t still alive and well.
A
more likely influence on modern thinking is due to Hubbert’s Peak Oil Theory
introduced in 1954. It has figured prominently in the
ecological/environmental movement. In fact, the entire global warming
movement indirectly sits on top of the Hubbert Peak Theory. As the Canadian
Association for the Club of Rome recently stated, “The issue of peak oil
impinges directly on the climate change question.” (see John H. Walsh, “The
Impending Twin Crisis – One Set of Solutions?, p.5.)
The Modern Proposal
Because of the connection between the environmental movement, global warming
and the Technocratic concept of Energy Certificates, one would expect that a
Carbon Currency would be suggested from that particular community, and in
fact, this is the case. In 1995, Judith Hanna wrote in New Scientist,
“Toward
a single carbon currency”,
“My
proposal is to set a global quota for fossil fuel combustion
every year, and to share it equally between all the adults in the world.”
In
2004, the prestigious Harvard International Review published “A
New Currency” and
stated,
“For those keen to slow global warming, the most effective actions are in
the creation of strong
national carbon currencies…
For scholars and policymakers, the key task is to mine history for guides
that are more useful. Global warming is considered an environmental issue,
but its best solutions are not to be found in the canon of environmental
law. Carbon’s ubiquity in the world economy demands that cost be a
consideration in any regime to limit emissions. Indeed, emissions trading
has been anointed king because it is the most responsive to cost. And
since trading
emissions for carbon is more akin to trading currency
than eliminating a pollutant,
policymakers should be looking at trade and finance with an eye to how
carbon markets should be governed. We must anticipate the policy
challenges that will arise as this bottom-up
system
emerges,
including the governance of seams between each of the nascent trading
systems, liability rules for bogus permits, and judicial cooperation.
[Emphasis added]
HIR
concludes that “after seven years of spinning
wheels and wrong analogies, the
international regime to control
carbon is
headed, albeit tentatively, down a productive path.”
In
2006, UK Environment Secretary David Miliband spoke to the
Audit Commission Annual Lecture
and flatly stated,
"Imagine a country where carbon becomes a new currency.
We carry bankcards that store both pounds and carbon points. When we buy
electricity, gas and fuel, we use our carbon points, as well as pounds. To
help reduce carbon emissions, the Government would set limits on the
amount of carbon that could be used."
[Emphasis
added]
In
2007, New York Times published “When
Carbon Is Currency”
by Hannah Fairfield. She pointedly stated
“To build a carbon market, its originators must create a
currency of carbon
credits
that participants can trade.”
PointCarbon, a leading global consultancy, is partnered with Bank of New
York Mellon to assess rapidly growing carbon markets. In 2008 they published
“Towards a Common
Carbon Currency: Exploring the prospects for integrated global carbon
markets.”
This report discusses
both environmental and economic efficiency in a similar context as
originally seen with Hubbert in 1933.
Finally, on November 9 2009, the Telegraph (UK) presented an article “Everyone
in Britain could be given a personal ‘carbon allowance.’”
“… implementing individual carbon allowances for every person will
be the most effective way of meeting the targets for cutting greenhouse
gas emissions. It would involve people being issued with a unique
number which they would hand over when purchasing products that
contribute to their carbon footprint, such as fuel, airline tickets and
electricity. Like with a bank account, a statement would be sent
out each month to help people keep track of what they are using. If their
"carbon account" hits zero, they would have to pay to get more credits”.
[Emphasis added]
As
you can see, these references are hardly minor league in terms of either
authorship or content. The undercurrent of early Technocratic thought has
finally reached the shore where the waves are lapping at the beach.
Technocracy’s Energy Card Prototype
In
July 1937 an article
by Howard Scott in Technocracy Magazine
described an Energy Distribution
Card in great detail. It declared that using such an instrument as a
“means of
accounting is a part of Technocracy’s proposed change in the
course of how our socioeconomic system can be organized.”
Scott further wrote,
“The certificate will be issued directly to the individual. It is
nontransferable and nonnegotiable; therefore, it cannot be stolen, lost,
loaned, borrowed, or given away. It is noncumulative; therefore, it cannot
be saved, and it does not accrue or bear interest. It need not be spent
but loses its validity after a designated time period.”
This may have seemed like science fiction in 1937, but today it is wholly
achievable. In 2010 Technocracy, Inc. offers an updated idea of what such an
Energy Distribution
Card might look like.
Their website states,
“It is now possible to use a plastic card similar to today’s credit card
embedded with a microchip. This chip could contain all the information
needed to create an energy distribution card as described in this booklet.
Since the same information would be provided in whatever forms best suits
the latest technology, however, the concept of an ‘Energy Distribution
Card’ is what is explained here.”
If
you study the card above, you will also note that is serves as a
universal identity card and contains a microchip. This reflects
Technocracy’s philosophy that each person in society must be meticulously
monitored and accounted for in order to track what they consume in terms of
energy, and also what they contribute to the manufacturing process.
Carbon Market Players
The
modern system of carbon credits was an invention of the Kyoto Protocol and
started to gain momentum in 2002 with the establishment of the first
domestic economy-wide trading scheme in the U.K. After becoming
international law in 2005, the trading market is now predicted to reach $3
trillion by 2020 or earlier. Graciela Chichilnisky, director of the Columbia
Consortium for Risk Management and a designer of the carbon credit text of
the Kyoto Protocol, states that the carbon market “is therefore all about
cash and trading – but it is also a way to a profitable and greener future.”
(See Who Needs a
Carbon Market?)
Who
are the “traders” that provide the open door to all this profit? Currently
leading the pack are JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs and
Morgan Stanley. Bloomberg noted in
Carbon Capitalists
on December 4, 2009 that
“The banks are preparing to do with carbon what they’ve done before:
design and market derivatives contracts that will help client companies
hedge their price risk over the long term. They’re also ready to sell
carbon-related financial products to outside investors.”
At
JP Morgan, the woman who originally invented Credit Default Swaps, Blythe
Masters, is now head of the department that will trade carbon credits for
the bank. Considering the sheer force of global banking giants behind carbon
trading, it’s no wonder analysts are already predicting that the carbon
market will soon dwarf all other commodities trading.
Conclusion
Where there is smoke, there is fire. Where there is talk, there is action.
If M. King Hubbert and other early architects of Technocracy were alive
today, they would be very pleased to see the seeds of their ideas on energy
allocation grow to bear fruit on such a large scale. In 1933, the technology
didn’t exist to implement a system of Energy Certificates. However, with
today’s ever-advancing computer technology, the entire world could easily be
managed on a single computer.
This article intended to show that
•
Carbon Currency is not a new
idea, but has deep roots in Technocracy
• Carbon Currency has grown
from a continental proposal to a global proposal
• It has been consistently
discussed over a long period of time
• The participants include
many prominent global leaders, banks and think-tanks
• The context of these
discussions have been very consistent
• Today’s goals for
implementing Carbon Currency are virtually identical to Technocracy’s
original Energy Certificates goals.
Of
course, a currency is merely a means to an end. Whoever controls the
currency also controls the economy and the political structure that goes
with it. Inquiry into what such a system might look like will be a future
topic. Technocracy and energy-based accounting are not idle or theoretical
issues. If the global elite intends for Carbon Currency to supplant national
currencies, then the world economic and political systems will also be
fundamentally changed forever.
What Technocracy could not achieve during the Great Depression appears to
have finally found traction in the Great Recession.
[Editor's note: Read an international review of this article on
The Daily Bell
of Appenzell,
Switzerland.]
Bibliography & Resources
Scott & Hubbert,
Technocracy Study Course,
Technocracy,
Inc., 1934
Hanna,
Toward a single carbon currency,
New Scientist,
1995
Victor & House,
A New Currency,
Harvard
International Review, Summer 2004
Hannah Fairfield, When
Carbon Is Currency,
New York Times, May 6, 2007
M. King Hubbert & The Technocracy Technate Design
– Historical blog
Everyone in Britain could be given a personal ‘carbon allowance’,
Telegraph (UK)
Network of European Technocrats
–
website for Europe
Technocracy, Inc.
– website for U.S.
Technocracy Vancouver
– website for Canada
Association for the study of Peak Oil & Gas
– website for Peak Oil
