The Energy–Complexity Spiral

  • Joseph A. Tainter
  • Tadeusz W. Patzek


Engineers build many wonderful things that few of us would choose to live without. Yet, as we have seen, some structures are of such complexity and magnitude that an unforeseen failure can kill nearly a dozen men, ruin thousands of livelihoods, and pollute a valuable ecosystem. Failure on this scale is obviously undesirable, yet it happens to bridges, space shuttles, and giant drilling rigs. In response, our instinct is to seek proximate causes, which include such factors as mistakes, oversights, and technical failures, the very things on which most attention has been concentrated in the news media. By applying some fixes – better training, better oversight, a different corporate culture – we assume that the accident could have been prevented and that we can avoid future ones. Engineers must examine and learn from these proximate causes of failure, but as a society we are bound to seek the ultimate cause of tragedies such as the Deepwater Horizon’s blowout. The alternative is to lurch from failure to failure of increasing magnitude. We will find that the ultimate cause lies deep within humanity’s history, and in the very essence of what it means to be a civilization. A civilization is a complex society, and complexity is a phenomenon that we must understand in order to comprehend our potential futures and shaping events such as the Gulf tragedy.

Further Reading

Energy Slaves

  1. 1.

Energy and Cultural Complexity

  1. 2.
    Allen, T.F.H., Tainter, J.A., Hoekstra, T.W.: Supply-Side Sustainability. Columbia University Press, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 3.
    Angela, A.: A Day in the Live of Ancient Rome, translated by Gregory Conti. Europe Editions, Milan (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 4.
    Boulding, K.E.: Foreward. In: Malthus, T.R. (ed.) Population: The First Essay, pp. v–xii. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor (1959)Google Scholar
  4. 5.
    Brown, J.H., Burnside, W.R., Davidson, A.N., DeLong, J.P., Dunn, W.C., Hamilton, M.J., Mercado-Silva, N., Nekola, J.C., Okie, J.G., Woodruff, W.H., Zuo, W.: Energetic limits to economic growth. Bioscience 61, 19–26 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 6.
    Cleveland, C.J., Costanza, R., Hall, C.A.S., Kaufmann, R.: Energy and the U.S. economy: a biophysical perspective. Science 225, 890–897 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 7.
    Jevons, W.S.: The Coal Question: An Inquiry Concerning the Progress of the Nation and the Probably Exhaustion of Our Coal-Mines, 2nd edn. Macmillan, London (1866)Google Scholar
  7. 8.
    Smil, V.: Energy in World History. Westview, Boulder (1994)Google Scholar
  8. 9.
    Tainter, J.A.: The Collapse of Complex Societies. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1988)Google Scholar
  9. 10.
    Tainter, J.A., Allen, T.F.H., Little, A., Hoekstra, T.W.: Resource transitions and energy gain: contexts of organization. Conserv. Ecol. 7(3), 4 (2003), Google Scholar


  1. 11.
    Hart, H.: Logistic social trends. American Journal of Sociology 50, 337–352 (1945)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 12.
    Huebner, J.: A possible declining trend for worldwide innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change72, 980–986 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 13.
    Jones, B.F., Wuchty, S., Uzzi, B.: Multi-university research teams: shifting impact, geography, and stratification in science. Science 322, 1259–1262 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 14.
    McCain, G., Segal, E.M.: The Game of Science, 2nd edn. Brooks/Cole, Monterey (1973)Google Scholar
  5. 15.
    Price, D. de Solla.: Little Science, Big Science. Columbia University Press, New York (1963)Google Scholar
  6. 16.
    Rescher, N.: Scientific Progress: A Philosophical Essay on the Economics of Research in Natural Science. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh (1978)Google Scholar
  7. 17.
    Rescher, N.: Unpopular Essays on Technological Progress. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh (1980)Google Scholar
  8. 18.
    Strumsky, D., Lobo, J., Tainter, J.A.: Complexity and the productivity of innovation. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 27, 496–509 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 19.
    Wuchty, S., Jones, B.F., Uzzi, B.: The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science 316, 1036–1039 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joseph A. Tainter
    • 1
  • Tadeusz W. Patzek
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Environment and SocietyUtah State UniversityLoganUSA
  2. 2.Department of Petroleum and Geosystems EngineeringThe University of Texas at AustinAustinUSA

Personalised recommendations