Return to the Welcome Page

      Google and Sustainability

          PyPsychoanalysis of Google's sustainability and invitation to the people at Google to review how they can help us all better conserve the potential of our prime symbols.          


Return to Update Page

Sustainability Principle of Energy


Link here

 for examples of the application of Sustainability Principle. 
(List of symbol uses that promote acceptance/denial of stewardship amidst change.)

Link here
 for deeper discussion of key symbols - including

energy energy efficiency
global warming

Peak Oil
Exponential change







last update June 2010


Invitation to Google (May 2010)

Dear Google  

I am writing to invite you all to join in a call for national and international reviews of how we use our prime symbols. These are the ones that express and shape our worldview such as energy, power, electricity, greenhouse, market, conserve, carbon, science, energy efficiency, warming, cooling, etc. Typically they are used in the popular discourse of how our universe works in general and how our climate systems work in particular. There are also vital symbols such as trace, use, exponential, conservation principle of energy and atmosphere that are rarely used in the discourse. 

This list of prime symbols is not exclusive, for clearly our uses of symbols such God, love and compassion also play a powerful role in determining whether our society is sustained. However the symbols in the above list are sufficiently potent that their misuse could easily destroy humanity. For instance, physics explains much better than does economics the Stockmarket crash and credit collapse of 2008. Perform a search on “cause” and Google provides pages of fiscal, finance risk management and similar explanations. The economic explanations fail to provide the real reason: the popular confusion of the energy symbol with a couple of forms – mineral oil and gas.  

Analysis using physics indicates this confusion of energy with forms is non-science and thus very high risk. This is because such denial of the real nature of these potent minerals results in the vast and dangerous undervaluation of these resources. This undervaluation in turn enables very wasteful and polluting uses of them.  

US and similar systems are thus based on a valuation of about $US20 a barrel or 0.1 cents per man-hour of the energy equivalent. When the price rose to $US100 the physics of the situation triggered an enormous credit implosion in such countries.

Gross behaviour patterns remain largely unaltered in the US and similar economies since 2008. Physics suggests there now exists the high probability of a catastrophic collapse by about 2013 if current trends continue.  

Google and the global Green Movement form the most potent agents of degradation of our prime symbols and thus constitute the greatest threat to humanity at present. 

The Green Movement is most potent because it has privileged status and is accorded frontline access into our communities and educations systems. Unfortunately, on balance, it promotes unsustainable uses of our prime symbols and destroys the communal state of science. 

Google is most potent because it dominates global searches on these symbols. Its algorithms are fundamentally reactive and give greatest credence to links to agencies and institutions that generate the most unsustainable uses of these prime symbols. The algorithms have no cognisance of the physics of reality. They actively discriminate against symbol uses based on the great principles of physics because in an unsustainable culture such as ours is these uses are minority, radical and revolutionary.

Thus, like the Green Movement in general, Google works directly against its proclaimed Green aspirations. 

Below is a brief analysis of a sample Google website. The short Google video illustrates the fundamentally well-meaning and unsustainable nature of the contemporary corporate ethos.  

The Sustainability Principle of Energy suggests our current use of our prime symbols as a certain recipe for escalating misery for all. However I believe such an escalation is avoidable. Indeed I believe the review I invite all at Google to participate in has the potential to bring much more joy, awe and fun to our lives. This is because our conservation of our prime symbols is the ultimate source of our wealth and enables us to reflect the wonders of the universe more truly.  

I hope you respond to the invite and welcome all comments and inquiries. You can see more details of the invitation at 

In hope 

Dave McArthur


Analysis of Google Powermeter video 
(May 2010)



“If you cannot measure it you cannot improve it”. -Lord Kelvin 

Ed Lu Google Engineer

Ed: “Here at Google, we think that having energy information, telling you how much energy you’re using in your house will help you make smart choices and save energy and money.” 

Karen Taylor Program Manager

Karen: “Here at Google we’re building a software tool that will enable you to monitor your home energy use in real time. I’ve been using an early version of this software that lets me track my electricity use on my computer. Seeing this information every day really helps me reduce the amount of energy wasted in my house.” 

Russ Mirov Google Engineer

Russ. “Over the last year, I’ve reduced my energy consumption by about 64%. I’ve done it without making any significant changes in my lifestyle and I’ve saved about $3000 so far.”  


“You CAN measure it.

You CAN improve it.”



Psychoanalysis of this video using the Sustainability Principle of Energy suggests Google is in profound denial of stewardship/change and thus puts humanity at greater risk.  

In brief the Sustainability Principle suggests energy is the potential of the universe(s), which is manifest as constant change/transformation. Power is the measure of the rate at which this potential is manifest i.e. the rate of change over time (KWh, Horse Power etc) It also suggests electricity does not exist, rather a wide range of electrical phenomena with completely variant properties exist. Thus each phenomenon needs be associated with a unique symbol if it is to be known. 

Google’s use of the “power” symbol, as in “power meter”. 

This is complete non-science. Power is a measure and the “meter” symbol derives from metron, Greek for measure and means an instrument or apparatus for measuring.  Two possibilities occur. One is that Google refers to a measuring device that measures measures, which makes no sense in this context. The second very dangerous possibility is that Google is confusing with power with a form or forms of energy. In this case it appears the forms are Bulk-generated electrical products. If so this is a grand denial of physics and stewardship/change.  

To say power is energy, as Google does, is also doubly confusing. This is non-science because it confuses the measure with the object being measured. It also denies change because power is the rate or measure of the change or transformation of energy. In other words, Google denies transformation. 

To say power is one or some of the forms energy can be manifest in, for instance, Bulk-generated electrical products, is to deny the Conservation Principle of Energy. It denies the essence of the Principle, which includes the messages that energy is bounteous as the universe(s), continually transforms and is manifest in all forms. This denial is perhaps the most fatal error humans can make for we tend as a consequence to use those forms as though they are as bounteous as energy. This is a recipe for misery and Google betrays both its own mission statement to “do no evil” and the overt objective of this project of promoting wise uses of resources – sometimes known as energy efficiency. 

Ed, Karen and Russ all reveal similar denial and compound this confusion in their statements.  

What is this energy that Ed speaks of when he speaks of “energy information” and “energy use”?  Is it information how to grow food and measuring our food consumption? Is it information of how many of our windows face the sun and how much you can use sunlight to keep warm? Is it wisdom of the value of insulation and how to install it correctly? Is it about knowing the volume and frequency of our breath and the wisdom with which we use it? Or is Ed associating the energy symbol with a particular group of Bulk-generated electrical products? Whatever use he might intend Ed is failing to conserve the potential of the energy symbol – one of our most vital symbols. 

The Conservation Principle of Energy states that energy cannot be created or destroyed. In other words energy, by its very nature, is conserved. To suggest, as Ed does, that human beings can save energy is to suggest the Conservation Principle does not hold. His suggestion forms the ultimate denial of the reality of universal change. Humans can only conserve and save some forms of energy for a finite period. 

Similarly Karen equates “home energy use” with “electricity use”. This is meaningless. Certainly all phenomena can be viewed from an electrical perspective. Is she speaking of the electrical charges that connect and bind the atoms of a home? Does she refer to the electrical radiation of the sunlight in our homes? Or is she just measuring her use of Bulk-generated electrical products. She does not say so we cannot know. 

Russ speaks about his “energy consumption”. Again the Sustainability Principle of Energy suggests this is evidence of a grand denial of stewardship/change.  Consume derives the Latin consumere “to use up” and the Conservation Principle suggests energy is so bounteous it can be considered a constant. Humans can only transform and consume resources. 

Even if energy consumption were possible it is hard to imagine how Russ reduced his “energy consumption by about 64%” without making any significant changes in his lifestyle. The majority of people in the world do not use $3000 of resources such as Bulk-generated electrical products and so they would have had to cease all heating, cooling, moving and other activities derived from their use of such products.  

Implicit in Russ’s statement is an association of energy efficiency with deprivation. Most people cannot imagine how they can reduce the consumption of resources by 64% without a significant loss of their lifestyle and thus they will tend to default to associations of energy efficiency with loss and doing without. His statement has to be understood in our cultural context, which is dominated by very powerful psychopathic corporations. These corporations first work to ensure people associate the energy and power symbols with their products. By this means they can promote the addictive use of the products. Periodically demand outstrips supply in ways that threaten the short-term profits of the corporations and put at risk their investment in addictive behaviour. So they transfer the blame for the situation by describing the situation as an “energy crisis” or a “power crisis”.  

At such times they also promote campaigns encouraging the consumers of their products to deprive themselves of the products in the name of “civics” and “energy efficiency”. Thus the consumers, not the merchant bankers, pay the costs of short-term supply-demand imbalances while their addictive behaviour is maintained. The “energy efficiency” symbol is degraded and associated with “using less energy” and increased costs.  

The Sustainability Principle of Energy suggests energy efficiency is not about using less or more energy but rather it is about conserving resources and living in harmony with the flows and balances that sustain humanity. It is quite possible to, for instance, conserve heating resources and use more energy by making wise uses of windows as generators. 


This video is unsustainable. It is effectively a commercial for Google and the merchant bankers who control the production and distribution of Bulk-generated electrical products.  

These statements have to be seen in the context of our Anglo-American culture in which energy, power and electricity are equated with each other and all are equated with Bulk-generated electrical products. The advertising of the merchant bankers promoting the sale of these products is now so intense and pervasive that it is probable most people in our culture default to these products when these symbols are used. There is no indication that Google comprehends that there is a critical difference between “smart grid systems” (which can easily be Fascist) and “intelligent grid systems” (which are inherently democratic). Psychoanalysis of the language of this promotion indicates it contains powerful elements of the psychosis and psychopathy that enable Fascism. In practice this is a recipe for wasteful uses of resources and misery in general. 

This is not a personal attack on Google. Analysis of our wider culture using the Sustainability Principle of Energy indicates this denial of stewardship/change is endemic, including in Greenpeace – the agency that brought the video to my attention. 

There is huge irony in the Google use and adaption of Lord Kelvin’s quote “If you cannot measure it you cannot improve it.”

There is enormous wisdom in this quote that perhaps Lord Kelvin may not have been fully aware of. It describes in essence all that enables the arts, languages, civics and all we know as civilisation to exist. It is a description of the learning process that underpins our experience of the state of science. Ultimately it is a description of the experience of compassion whereby we learn to connect and communicate in most harmonious way with the universe(s). As Lord Kelvin also said, “The measure is to know”. 

I have shown how this video actively destroys the state of science in our communities by degrading our prime symbols and their knowledge potential. It evidences major denial of stewardship/change and promotes an unsustainable industry that is inherently hostile to intelligent uses of our electrical potential interests. Perhaps Google is imitating Barack Obama’s campaign call “Yes we CAN” when it says “You CAN measure it. You CAN improve it.”

Psychoanalysis of Barack’s use of the energy symbol in his speeches indicates he too disempowers people. It is also becoming very apparent that he too is very disempowered and is beholden to a few unsustainable merchant bankers. They control many of our essential measures and until we acknowledge this fact we CANNOT improve our use of our electrical potential or communicate about it in a sustainable way.


More on the Sustainability Principle of Energy

Link here  for examples of the application of Sustainability Principle. 
(List of symbol uses that promote acceptance/denial of stewardship amidst change.)


Return to Update Page

Return to the Welcome Page

Up to top