Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 22

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 22

Unread postby dohboi » Sat 06 Jun 2020, 06:25:10

We (the earth) just had the hottest May on record

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/06/earth- ... on-record/
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 19492
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 04:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 22

Unread postby REAL Green » Sat 06 Jun 2020, 06:54:57

dohboi wrote:We (the earth) just had the hottest May on record

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/06/earth- ... on-record/


It was cool and wet here late winter and early spring. This new climate regime is setting up patterns around the Midwest with what appears to be a rainy winter season. This means wet, cool, and grey. I am glad I have a hybrid solar system becuase we had hardly any good solar power days. I use grid power along with my solar. May, which should have been a good month was among the worst
realgreenadaptation.blog
User avatar
REAL Green
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 587
Joined: Thu 09 Apr 2020, 05:29:28
Location: MO Ozarks

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 22

Unread postby jedrider » Sat 06 Jun 2020, 11:13:24

REAL Green wrote:
dohboi wrote:We (the earth) just had the hottest May on record

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/06/earth- ... on-record/


It was cool and wet here late winter and early spring. This new climate regime is setting up patterns around the Midwest with what appears to be a rainy winter season. This means wet, cool, and grey. I am glad I have a hybrid solar system becuase we had hardly any good solar power days. I use grid power along with my solar. May, which should have been a good month was among the worst


The weather patterns have changed greatly around the world. I find it unpleasant. The winters are too mild and the summers are just unsettled being windy and changing from day to day living not far from the coast, which is a very good recipe for an active fire season. I think my daughter is finding the change near the North Sea in France pleasant though, welcoming the warmer weather.
User avatar
jedrider
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2188
Joined: Thu 28 May 2009, 10:10:44

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 22

Unread postby dohboi » Tue 09 Jun 2020, 10:53:35

https://www.resilience.org/stories/2020 ... cientists/

Australia’s top climate scientist says “we are already deep into the trajectory towards collapse” of civilisation, which may now be inevitable because 9 of the 15 known global climate tipping points that regulate the state of the planet have been activated...

User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 19492
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 04:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 22

Unread postby dohboi » Sat 13 Jun 2020, 15:31:33

Guardian

Climate worst-case scenarios may not go far enough, cloud data shows

Modelling suggests climate is considerably more sensitive to carbon emissions than thought
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 19492
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 04:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 22

Unread postby Ibon » Sat 13 Jun 2020, 16:14:33

dohboi wrote:https://www.resilience.org/stories/2020-06-08/collapse-of-civilisation-is-the-most-likely-outcome-top-climate-scientists/

Australia’s top climate scientist says “we are already deep into the trajectory towards collapse” of civilisation, which may now be inevitable because 9 of the 15 known global climate tipping points that regulate the state of the planet have been activated...



The consequences of human overshoot is like when you get a strike while bowling. All ten pins fall.. The first pin was Covid19. There are 9 more to go.
Patiently awaiting the pathogens. Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 8788
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 22

Unread postby Tanada » Sun 14 Jun 2020, 14:42:31

dohboi wrote:Guardian

Climate worst-case scenarios may not go far enough, cloud data shows

Modelling suggests climate is considerably more sensitive to carbon emissions than thought


Oh for pity's sake! How many times on this thread and its prior sections have I pointed out that the climate changes in step wise fashion, not a smooth integral? Also in those discussions I have pointed out that we know roughly where two of those step points are, around 540 ppmv CO2 and around 820 ppmv CO2. We know these specific sections of the rise or fall are critical points where the climate behavior changes on a hemispherical scale over the entire globe.

In the Paleoclimate record above 540 ppmv there was no ice at all in the northern hemisphere in the current continental distribution.

In the Paleoclimate record ice first appeared in Antarctica below 820 ppmv CO2, above that level there was no ice sheet anywhere on earth outside of extremely high mountain peaks.

Therefore al this constant nattering about 1000 ppmv is meaningless and the additional nattering of 3 degrees C per doubling is equally meaningless. When we hit 540 ppmv or the accumulated equivalent from the additional greenhouse gasses we have artificially released the earth will tip into the state where the region south of 62 North is semi tropical like Georgia and north Florida. When that happens palm trees will once again be able to grow on the south coast of Alaska and Greenland and deciduous forest will grow to the shores of the Arctic Ocean in several places with pine forest growing in the remainder. The Arctic Ocean will be ice free every summer and likely most winters as well because of all the additional heat brought north by the altered weather patterns.

In Other Words, WE KNOW the world does not behave in the simplistic lock step used in most modeling where the two hemispheres north and south are presumed to behave identically to the same change. The alteration for those of us in the northern hemisphere is far advanced at this point and at a tipping point which most people are either ignorant of, or refuse to accept as scientific probability of high order. Declining Arctic sea ice is a bellwether and warning sign but it is just a signpost along the way, not the end point in the journey.

Image
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15875
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 22

Unread postby jedrider » Sun 14 Jun 2020, 15:03:55

Tanada, what is your point? Step-wise, another name for tipping point, perhaps, or continuous, but we're all cooked in the end. So, I didn't see the point, but that's 'nice' to know anyway.
User avatar
jedrider
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2188
Joined: Thu 28 May 2009, 10:10:44

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 22

Unread postby Tanada » Sun 14 Jun 2020, 15:21:28

jedrider wrote:Tanada, what is your point? Step-wise, another name for tipping point, perhaps, or continuous, but we're all cooked in the end. So, I didn't see the point, but that's 'nice' to know anyway.


The main point is I find all the blathering about "1.5C" vs "2.0C" vs "3.0C per doubling" incredibly frustrating because it is meaningless for describing how the climate actually reacts to increasing CO2 levels. These descriptive claims date back nearly 50 years and have long since been superseded by more accurate knowledge of how climate behaves, but the media and politicians and the science they fund and encourage remains stuck in the paradigm of using these highly inaccurate descriptive statements of climate behavior.

We have known for at least 25 years that the Northern Hemisphere and Southern Hemisphere react at very different points to CO2 forcing, yet reports and reporters are still acting as if this is a global phenomenon and not a hemispherical one. When they say "Global average temperature goes up 3C per doubling" that gives the impression it goes up a like amount everywhere, but it has long been demonstrated that in reality the change at "3C globally" is more like 0.5C in South America and 5.5C in North America and the equivalent in the eastern continents with Southern Africa and Australia barely effected while Europe+Siberia and northern hemisphere Asia undergo extreme change.

Pretending those living in the far south are about to experience the same effects as those in the north is nonsensical. IMO the likely outcome will be some very significant wars as northern populations will desire to migrate south to get back into a climate they are comfortable living in.

I do not doubt the modest temperature increases in the southern hemisphere will cause climate changes, but the scale of change is incomparable with what is about to happen in the north. How will Brazil and Argentina react when Spain and Portugal are filled with people wishing to move to their countries to escape the climate effects in Iberia? What will New Zealand and Australia be able to say or do when the UK wants to shift a few million people to their former colonies which are realistically very sparsely populated compared to European standards? What about Columbia and Venezuela when Central Americans and Mexicans en masse decide moving south is a better bet than moving into the USA?
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15875
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 22

Unread postby JuanP » Sun 14 Jun 2020, 15:55:23

Tanada, While I was not aware of the CO2 ppmv step changes, I have been considering the differences between the Northern and Southern Hemispheres regarding GW and CC for around three decades. I decided to buy land in Uruguay, my native country, several years ago to build my bug out shelter there. This was not an easy choice for me because I never want to live in Uruguay again, but I did it for my wife and her nephews. There is no doubt in my mind that most of the ice in Antarctica will last much longer than most of the ice in the Arctic. I believe this will make the Southern Hemisphere a better place to live in than the Northern one for some time, at least for the rest of our lives.

Very rich foreigners have been buying farmland in Uruguay for over a decade as a backup plan. Uruguayans are already resenting this because farmland has become so expensive that it doesn't make any sense to buy land to farm for a living as a consequence. So far Uruguay remains an open country that welcomes anyone willing to go there, but I wonder how long that will last. In the last decades we have received immigrants from all over the world, but particularly from Europe, North America, East Asia, Latin America, and the Arab countries. Most of them are multimillionaires, but not all.

By the way, Colombia and Venezuela are essentially Northern Hemisphere countries and right on the Equator, so I don't think many people will want to move there. The best bug out locations in South America are in southern Brazil, Argentina, Chile, and Uruguay.
Only Americans can hurt America.
Dwight D. Eisenhower
JuanP
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 760
Joined: Sat 16 Aug 2014, 15:06:32

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 22

Unread postby jedrider » Mon 15 Jun 2020, 15:51:04

Tanada wrote:"Global average temperature goes up 3C per doubling" that gives the impression it goes up a like amount everywhere.


It does and the layman perhaps has a very skewed interpretation of what that means. But, it says what it says, which is 'average'. Once you say 'per doubling' I think you've left the realm of the average person.

Yes, Southern hemisphere might be best. I'm wondering about Central America. It appears they won't escape the droughts and the deluges in succession. What about the Brazilian rainforest? That is suppose to turn into a desert sometime, but I don't know when.

Maybe, Argentina will be a good place. Not everyone will be able to fit in Uruguay.
User avatar
jedrider
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2188
Joined: Thu 28 May 2009, 10:10:44

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 22

Unread postby JuanP » Mon 15 Jun 2020, 16:50:25

jedrider wrote:Yes, Southern hemisphere might be best. I'm wondering about Central America. It appears they won't escape the droughts and the deluges in succession. What about the Brazilian rainforest? That is suppose to turn into a desert sometime, but I don't know when.

Maybe, Argentina will be a good place. Not everyone will be able to fit in Uruguay.


I agree. A lot of the Amazon almost died in one go a couple of years ago after a five year mega drought. If that had happened precipitation patterns across South America would have been drastically altered for the rest of our lives. The evaporation from the Amazon jungle feeds most of the rainfall East of the Andes in the continent.

I think droughts and heat probably make Australia a bad choice as a bug out location, too, though Tazmania might be okay. New Zealand may be the best bug out location in the world, IMO. If Uruguay was an island it would probably be as good, too.

Mega droughts and safety are my two biggest concerns when thinking about bugging out to Uruguay. I built concrete underground cisterns at my place and have long shelf life food supplies, too. Our little cabin is a monolithic reinforced concrete structure with a basement/bunker.
Only Americans can hurt America.
Dwight D. Eisenhower
JuanP
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 760
Joined: Sat 16 Aug 2014, 15:06:32

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 22

Unread postby REAL Green » Tue 16 Jun 2020, 12:47:33

JuanP wrote:
jedrider wrote:Yes, Southern hemisphere might be best.

I think droughts and heat probably make Australia a bad choice as a bug out location, too, though Tazmania might be okay. New Zealand may be the best bug out location in the world, IMO. If Uruguay was an island it would probably be as good, too. Mega droughts and safety are my two biggest concerns when thinking about bugging out to Uruguay. I built concrete underground cisterns at my place and have long shelf life food supplies, too. Our little cabin is a monolithic reinforced concrete structure with a basement/bunker.


“Extreme waves set to get bigger and more frequent due to climate change”
https://phys.org/news/2020-06-extreme-b ... imate.html

“A warming planet will cause stronger storm winds triggering larger and more frequent extreme waves over the next 80 years, with largest increases shown in the Southern Ocean, according to new research… The study found that if global emissions are not curbed there will be an increase of up to 10 percent in the frequency and magnitude of extreme waves in extensive ocean regions… "Around 290 million people across the world already live in regions where there is a one percent probability of flood every year," Professor Young said. "An increase in the risk of extreme wave events may be catastrophic, as larger and more frequent storms will cause more flooding and coastline erosion." University of Melbourne Postdoctoral Fellow in Ocean Wave Modelling and lead researcher Alberto Meucci said the study shows that the Southern Ocean region is significantly more prone to extreme wave increases with potential impact to Australian, Pacific and South American coastlines by the end of 21st century.”
realgreenadaptation.blog
User avatar
REAL Green
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 587
Joined: Thu 09 Apr 2020, 05:29:28
Location: MO Ozarks

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 22

Unread postby dohboi » Tue 16 Jun 2020, 12:56:12

Good points, RG

A lot of people look at predictions of a few millimeters of sea level rise for the coming years and decades and think that this means it is so incremental that cities etc can easily adapt.

But that is not going to be the case in many/most places. Shifts in currents, along the US Eastern Seaboard for example, will likely lead to much faster rates of slr.

And as you point out here, more and more extreme weather means that bigger and bigger waves will be rising off of that ever rising platform to inundate lands far further inland than previously whenever there are major storms.

Keep the science, coming, RG, and ignore any trolls that try to silence you!
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 19492
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 04:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 22

Unread postby Tanada » Tue 16 Jun 2020, 22:52:21

Another thing frequently pointed out is that a responsible government would be using eminent domain to seize all land within say 3 meters of mean seal level, pay the current owners a reasonable value, and strip it of all man made structures and other problematic constructions.

Any roads, railroads and utility right of ways in the 3 meter zone would need to be relocated up slope. Also the standard would need to be more or less permanent with additional land creeping into the zone as sea levels rise probably resetting once a decade to capture the new land in the 30mm average rise zone. Even if sea level rise accelerates significantly there should be ample buffer because 3 meters a decade would far exceed all known prior rise events even when compared to the massive ice sheets at the end of the last major glaciation melting away in Europe/Siberia/North America. In our near future Greenland may melt away, but it is going to take centuries in all likelihood and a minimum of several decades in the worst case scenario. All of Greenland Ice sheet is only estimated to add 7 meters to world sea level maximum. Spread over 70 years that would only be a meter a decade worst case and much more likely to be maybe 5 cm a year or half a meter a decade or less.

Of course neither major American political party supports such legislation and no other country threatened by sea level rise is taking such action either. The closest we have is China building "ghost cities" at higher altitude where current port city and lowland residents could easily relocate if flooding starts taking place at a faster pace. Can you imagine the reaction if the US Government started buying up Manhattan and telling people to move up slope into the hills on the west side of the Hudson River Valley? Without a proper preparation campaign to convince building owners such measures would never pass and be enforced, but our government is not even talking about it, let alone trying to accomplish it.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15875
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 22

Unread postby REAL Green » Wed 17 Jun 2020, 06:28:53

Tanada wrote:Of course neither major American political party supports such legislation and no other country threatened by sea level rise is taking such action either. The closest we have is China building "ghost cities" at higher altitude where current port city and lowland residents could easily relocate if flooding starts taking place at a faster pace. Can you imagine the reaction if the US Government started buying up Manhattan and telling people to move up slope into the hills on the west side of the Hudson River Valley? Without a proper preparation campaign to convince building owners such measures would never pass and be enforced, but our government is not even talking about it, let alone trying to accomplish it.


It is my opinion and something I elaborate on in my REALGREENADAPTATION.BLOG, the world is unable and is unwilling to adapt to climate issues but also energy and social issues. We are a car culture of growth or in other words technically and economically devoted to growing to increase prosperity and comfort. We address a myriad of problems with techno economic solution that in many cases create more problems and so forth. So, my point is climate science is real and solid on many levels but the solution science is flawed by the social narrative of growth both economic and techno.

Managed degrowth with a new narrative of decline and inevitable failure of the status quo is called for. This is a life boat and hospice narrative with the life boat being the physical and technical effort and the hospice the palliative effort of embracing, adapting, and mitigating to broad based decline. Decline is simply poverty with pain and suffering. There is no sugar coating this and trying to is a lie. This can be managed and can be offset with spiritual wealth.

It is unclear how long or if even for a short time this managed degrowth would be effective at the macro level even if the world could. The effort would have to be global. The reason I say this is threasholds of required activity supporting our society in population and consumption overshoot means a collpase threasholds may be near even with the optimum effort to mitigate it. We went too far and there are consequences. If efforts were well designed it would require critical stakeholders in society on board in unanimity like with Hollywood earth killing asteroid movies. These would be are best, brightest, and most skilled dedicated to formulating a retreat socially, economically, and technically. This is because the degree and duration of a managed decline will influence success at least near term.

It is likely eventually no effort can stave off collpase. If we go into a degrowth of managed decline which is really just a slower collapse the collpase situations are present until the condition of overshoot is passed through. This is in the best case because the problem is with blowing past a stable level from unorderly retreats like armies suffer. Retreats in force are always sought by generals. In any case this is just musing because the trap is with behavior so no platform will sell degrowth to the smart and not smart alike. Even in the green areas of debate, I visit many, the debate is about success not failure of degrowth. It is about more affluence from degrowth not less.

This means with climate change we will battle on into higher sea levels and worsening climatic conditions making living and growing food progressively more difficult. The degrowth will come but in a chaotic way of abandonment, dysfunction, and irrational policy. If climate were the only problem but society also has many other problems converging and enhancing into one big problem like a wave that builds by other influences. I suspect society will adapt around the margins where the car culture of growth will allow it. Where politics and social acceptance allows needed change some of which will have to be destructive change like evacuating coastlines because it is not technically nor economically feasible.

We are unable to admit failure as a society and what is more unable to do much even if we did. This is a trap that is carbon based because of the car culture and also path dependent because of the habituation of growth from generations of a building social narrative and physical structures.

This then is about palliative care not a cure. This is where I propose decentralized adaptation of individuals and small groups. It can be done at these levels to a degree but mostly with behavior. The status quo limits the material aspects of change through economic returns. This does not offer success of the human project but instead greater resilience and sustainability of the individual and small group in the local of people and place. If enough of these small group coalesce then a region is made more secure.

Generally proper prepping is green because true resilience and sustainability is a lower footprint with localism and low carbon capture in lives that are less energetic. Redundancies and stockpiling of critical goods requires less playtime. Modern playtime is generally more destructive to the planetary system. I am not saying renewables and policies on adapting to climate change are not vital what I am saying is diminishing returns to these efforts hits quickly as they pass threasholds of effectiveness. I am not smart enough to know the threasholds but honest science points to them in an obvious way.

The problem is with the underlying behavior of the car culture of growth. It is behavior so we can say the ultimate problem is human which is you and me. This is a process that involves time and it is possible even with all the predicament of converging problems, we have years left to slow boil into collapse. So immediate angst is not called for but if you are like me, I want to call into question a false narrative at least from the theoretical. I am also a green prepper so this narrative is the basis of my writings.
realgreenadaptation.blog
User avatar
REAL Green
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 587
Joined: Thu 09 Apr 2020, 05:29:28
Location: MO Ozarks

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 22

Unread postby evilgenius » Wed 17 Jun 2020, 06:59:14

Degrowth is interesting because it hits upon two spheres, the local and the societal. Locally, it hits everyone as they live in their own micro-economic reality. Socially, it hits us all together as we live in our macro-economic reality. Ramping something down always comes with a cost to someone. In a complex economy, the lack of things can be made up for with marketing. Marketing can replace the former opportunities by creating new ones for people to create value. That's what has happened as internet influencers have introduced a new way to make money. In many ways this new way is a result of pressures that existed trying to make money doing old things.

So, we could use degrowth, or we could fold what is going on digitally into the complexity of our economy. I've been against degrowth because I don't think it has the answers. I think it promises a return of feudalism, at some point. I think only progressing forward will maintain the suffrage. That sort of advancement has certainly been the key to the advancement of the suffrage up to this point. I do not think that we can say that we have reached some kind of "end of history" moment regarding the development of our society. Some people may say that. They have to come to grips with reality every time it shows them they are wrong. Sometimes, how they deal with it causes riots. I do not think that we can take what we have for granted.
User avatar
evilgenius
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2980
Joined: Tue 06 Dec 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Stopped at the border.

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 22

Unread postby REAL Green » Wed 17 Jun 2020, 07:27:00

evilgenius wrote:I've been against degrowth because I don't think it has the answers. I think it promises a return of feudalism, at some point. I think only progressing forward will maintain the suffrage. That sort of advancement has certainly been the key to the advancement of the suffrage up to this point. I do not think that we can say that we have reached some kind of "end of history" moment regarding the development of our society. Some people may say that. They have to come to grips with reality every time it shows them they are wrong. Sometimes, how they deal with it causes riots. I do not think that we can take what we have for granted.


The answers are likely beyond understanding becuase of the complexity of the system and the complicated networks and machinery of modern life. The answers are likely somewhere in between meaning location is a key factor. Some places may collpase others may have a Byzantium renaissance. One thing is certain the planet does not agree with POV of growth in the realm of planetary systems and the web of life. This is clearly in succession in regards to the stability of the Holocene. It is my POV tech has no power to change this. Geoengineering is a farce. The planet is in decline and my POV is to emulate the planet with at a minimum of behavioral changes that call for a wisdom gate keeper for more growth and tech. At some point more is not more it is less and this is a dangerous inversion point with a planet in decline and a species in overshoot. Diminishing returns can go negative and we not know it and the trap gets worse. It is my POV we are trapped and path dependent with pro-growth of tech and economy regardless so my discussions are only theoretical in regards to meaning and the truth. So lets get on with the reality of digging the hole deeper in delusions.
realgreenadaptation.blog
User avatar
REAL Green
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 587
Joined: Thu 09 Apr 2020, 05:29:28
Location: MO Ozarks

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 22

Unread postby dohboi » Wed 17 Jun 2020, 11:23:31

Good points, T. But as RG pointed out, even if there is little to no chance of sea level rising faster than a meter a decade (for quite a while at least), storm surges are in many/most places going to rise much faster. But generally I like your plan, even tho, as you say, no party is considering anything like it at this point.

RG, thanks for mentioning your blog. I plan to visit it soon.

Have you considered how, if it were possible, you would enact this degrowth, as far as were degrowth would have the biggest impacts the quickest?

Consumption generally and roughly tracks wealth, so I would propose that degrowth should start with the wealthiest and hit there the hardest. Ideally, this would also provide some of the funds needed for the resilience you rightly encourage (super-insulating homes and businesses as well as investments in alternative energies being the most obvious and lowest hanging fruit).

This of course gets into realms that certain folks, especially on the supposedly more 'conservative' ends of the spectrum can get quite exercised about.
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 19492
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 04:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 22

Unread postby REAL Green » Wed 17 Jun 2020, 11:48:04

dohboi wrote:Have you considered how, if it were possible, you would enact this degrowth, as far as were degrowth would have the biggest impacts the quickest?


I am very busy at the moment making hay so I will offer this post that I plan on putting on my blog in what I call a REAL Green New Deal. Keep in mind this would require a growth of sorts becuase a new system would be added to the existing but this could be more than made up for by degrowthing (triage) (prioritization) of other areas of the status quo. A big one that comes to mind is the military. Another degrowth area is leisure and travel. This approach could shrink industrial agriculture too becuase it focuses on moving lots of people back to the land. Of course, this is just a theoretical approach that has no chance of being platformed:



At the risk of getting off topic and wordy I wanted to mention a different system as a beacon. It is not so much a concrete proposal but instead an alternative pathway. I mention it because there is so much talk about techno green solutions. Green New Deal platforms are mostly techno development on huge scales that compromise green quality. Their construction endangers economics because of how dramatic the change is. They endanger the environment because of the amount of development proposed. You can’t have both high-quality green and high energetic. There is a tradeoff and to deal with tradeoffs a balance needs to be found.

Idealism that sprouts a direction is needed as an adapted pathway of committed support to populations who live rural and local in seasonality and embracing intermittency. These populations would be buffers for the more energetic urban areas that are rooted in high energy and complicated tech. Instead of trying to bring everyone up to a high standard of techno affluence, commit and support populations that return to rural low carbon ways. Basic support for human services and goods would be offered to these locals that would have a difficult time producing without the delocalizing effects of economies of scale. These places would have to be protected from the excesses of capitalism that involve the competition of the profit motive a local cannot win.

These places would have basic of power that would be low tech home systems and micro grids of renewables. These would have grid backup for emergency services and basic needs but could also sell excess power to the grid supporting energetic areas. This power system would also promote biomass of wood heating with sustainable wood harvests where applicable. These areas would live with the intermittency of renewables and biomass so they would have reduced power needs. Transport would be limited and also sponsored for required services of doing business and basic human services. These places would focus on providing energy in the low carbon form both with the gathering of solar and wind energy and food calories from raising animals and crops. Small communities would be reemerged to service these homesteading areas that would likewise be focused on a localism of seasonality and intermittency. Food would be sourced as much as possible locally with surplus sold to the more energetic urban areas. Local goods would be produced where possible locally with craft industry and the old-style retail small towns used to have. These functions have been destroyed by online and big box stores.

The energetic urban areas would focus on the production of the modern goods that people are now accustomed to. Consumer and durable goods would be produced in these energetic locations where delocalizing economies of scale are possible without damaging the way of life. These areas of localism could be made into something like a national park system of enclaves of localism. The key is support with those items and services that require economies of scale and a degree of financialization that a local cannot produce without losing its local flavor. These local areas become buffers or batteries for the more energetic urban areas that cannot slow down by being able to slow down. The energetic areas require high energy networking that is limited because of planetary limits. High energy networking is what kills low carbon localized efforts if they are made to compete. Instead of pushing the traditional sustainable development approach that usually ends with a capitalistic domination, a protected localized area could be developed. Movement between these two areas would have to be regulated because localized areas by definition have to have a stability of people and place.

The reason society may want to consider this type of arrangement is because of limits of growth and the diminishing returns of tech. A significant amount of this effort is behavior limiting and channeling of tech. It is my opinion renewables cannot power the world at the levels fossil fuels do today but they could power something less energetic. Taking populations off this higher energetic level and putting them on seasonal and intermittency of low carbon living is one option to segregate activity and needs taking pressure off energetic areas. If a population is acclimated to lower energetic living and in low carbon capture grounded in a low footprint localism this allows the high energetic areas greater stability.

If the world is at limits and suffering failures because of the inability to maintain high energetic levels then move people to lower energetic levels but with commitment and support. I propose this instead of Green New Deals that seek to green wash the high energetic living of modern civilization. This also helps answers the needs for preserving fragile ecosystems damaged and destroyed by high energetic living. It is clear industrial agriculture cannot go away with 7BIL people but some of the 1BIL that are high consumers not by choice but by need might be moved to lower consumption lifestyles that would actually support and buffer the high energetic areas by being a governor of activity. This is basically human ecosystem engineering. It creates a niche for localism to prosper and this prospering would support energetic areas.
realgreenadaptation.blog
User avatar
REAL Green
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 587
Joined: Thu 09 Apr 2020, 05:29:28
Location: MO Ozarks

PreviousNext

Return to Environment, Weather & Climate

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 34 guests