Everyday, new inventions and innovations are being made: ways to drill deeper for oil, cut down more trees, mine for more coal. Whatever the case, the continuing efficiency of all nations is leading to increasingly faster depletion of our natural resources.
Consider the man who lives relatively near a stream. To bathe himself he needs to carry water from the stream to his home. He only has a bucket, so he needs to take several trips, back and forth, to get the necessary amount of water. It is for this reason that he may only take a bath once a week, maybe only once every two weeks. Now consider that he has built a pipe system from the system so that the water can be taken to his home much more efficiently. Now that it is not such a hassle to bathe, he may take a bath every other day, maybe even every day. With this increased water activity, the level of the stream will decrease much more rapidly and to the point that it cannot replenish itself in time to the man's baths. Soon enough, the stream will be sucked dry.
A newer form of mining called strip mining does exactly what its name says. Instead of digging down and using manual labor to extract the coal, these miners use dynamite to remove the top of the mountain, making the coal much more exposed. Now, since 52% of U.S energy is powered by coal, I can see how this form of mining can be beneficial. But what toll has it taken on the surrounding environment? Over 1000 miles of streams and 300,000 acres of forest have been buried in the West Virginia area since this destructive force began, not to mention the fact our coal resources have been seriously reduced.
Unless more breakthroughs are discovered that will use less or even renewable resources, there will be no more Earth for use to take.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
High demand for a commodity spurs innovative new ways to better fulfill that demand. This includes demand for clean water, air, etc. The "static wealth" arguments ala Marx and Malthus have been thoroughly refuted by many economists, but they continue to get a hearing as each new generation of socialists cloaks the rhetoric in the new lingo of the times. (It's all about "the environment" these days.) More info here.
I would have to disagree with you on the title of your topic, "Efficiency will Destroy our World". Efficiency is what drives everything we do from the food you eat to the bath example that you gave earlier. Being able to do more in less time is what have made humans the dominating species on this planet. I do realize though that not all inventions and new techniques are good: the striping of forests and "strip mining" are real environmental threats, however if directed in the right direction a lot of our inventions can do more good than bad.
New energy resources are being found every day and have some what cut the total output of pollution. Wind energy, solar energy and even the regular coal plant could curb the pollution output. The only problem is that no one is willing to invest in a this new market when oil is so readily available.
Agriculture is also some thing that is in drastic need for innovation. If the huge fields of corn, wheat, potatoes, etc. where used more efficiently they would all be used on the same field to utilize the different soil depths. It would not only save land but allow for the extra products form this production to be sold through out the world saving millions of lives every year.
So yes efficiency can be a bad thing but it can also be a good thing. In time people will realize what some of the mass production technique's have caused. But to blame efficiency for it is completely misguided.
More efficiency in the long run could yield a new resource for us to use. Think about it, haha.
Efficiency is not a problem, it helps us develop and expand our capabilities. Take this blog for example which is made possible because our government developed the internet as an information channel for national defense and then made it public. True, the internet has A LOT of problems, but it can't be denied that it has made information resources much more readily available. It is now much easier to find useful information than it used to be (though books should never be underrated and you have to use internet resources with discretion)
The problem is when efficiency is the main and only focus on a project. As an engineer, creating any type of design is an in depth process which requires evaluating not only the efficiency of a project but its safety and renewability as well as cost and materials. Engineering today especially, has become much more focused on renewability and enviornmental issues than ever before. This is why we are constantly looking for alternative fuels. I do agree, strip mining from an engineering prospective is not the best solution. It is a quick and effective method but it doesn't consider the enviornment or renewing resources. However, I am certain that even now there are engineers who are working on this problem to develop cheap ways of getting to the coal without so much destruction but again there is so much focus on alternative fuels for just this reason, to eliminate the need for coal altogether.
And now these three remain: Faith, Hope and Love. But the greatest of these is love.
1 Corinthians 13:13
Which is better: waiting for our natural recourses to deplete and then finding alternatives, or finding alternatives now ans not using our other recourses? I wonder if efficiency will really destroy us. perhaps we can use these recourses to find alternatives. they will run out one day and i think that efficiency is what we need right now.
I believe everyone who has posted has made an excellent point: being more efficient helps us look for alternative resources. The orginal post states however, that our efficiency has created environmental problems. It is our refusal to use alternative resources efficiently that has created environmental problems. In order for governments throughout the world to conserve our remaining resources and to save the beauty of planet Earth, there need to be political agreements. The EU has recently passed a law that caps carbon emissions by 20 percent by 2020. Also, the 27 nation bloc has to devote 20 percent of its energy to alternative resources. This is the sort of the political agreement that should set a precedent for nations like the US and China.