We have to kill fossil fuels before they kill us

Fossil fuels have put us in a dilemma: how to stop using a dirty, obsolete technology riddled with side effects, but behind which are some of the biggest economic empires on the planet.

Last week, The Guardian announced its decision to ban advertising by fossil fuel companies, including their renewable energy initiatives, dubbing them greenwashing. The initiative, which will cost the newspaper, follows other decisions signaling that these companies are rapidly falling out of favor: BlackRock, the world’s largest investment fund, says the climate emergency is redefining the world of finance, and that it will no longer invest in companies that pose a high risk in terms of sustainability. But BlackRock is not alone: the European Investment Bank announced last July that it would end all funding for fossil fuel projects by 2020, which Ireland’s sovereign wealth fund has already done; Norway’s — the world’s largest — has also eliminated coal companies from its portfolio and is now considering doing the same for its oil and gas assets.

Read the Medium story by Enrique Dans - “We have to kill fossil fuels before they kill us.”

Using imagination to address climate change

by Robert McLean

Imagination will resolve climate change, or at least allow humanity to address the dilemma it has created.

Oddly and confusingly, it was that same imagination, that saw humans engineer the world in such a way that drove the changes that now bedevil us.

It was human ingenuity and persistence to achieve something better that ignited and drove changes to the slither like atmosphere that surrounds planet Earth and which plays a critical role in the maintenance of the Goldilocks-like conditions in which humanity has prospered.

And so here we are at the heart of the impasse understood by Albert Einstein when he said: “We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.”

Yes, it is imagination that will help us resolve this encompassing trouble, but it is a new imagination; an imagination that takes us beyond the ideologies, beliefs, values and fantasies in which humans are deeply embroiled.

In grappling with this “new imagination” we equally have to become new people; new people who better understand civility; new people who can see that for what we grasp is intricately implicated in failed economic system; an economic system that is drawing humanity closer to the abyss.

Much has been said about this being the critical decade in terms of addressing climate change and this being the eve of a new year, we are now nearing what might be described as “the pointy end” of that decade in that as of tomorrow we have just three years left to put right a set of circumstances that, depending upon which authority you adhere to, will bring outcomes varying from catastrophic to grim or not so bad to changes we can adapt to,

Implicated in most every scenario, from catastrophic to changes we can adapt to, is the death of people, ranging from millions (catastrophic) to a relative hand full (successful adaptation), with either outcome being sufficient, surely to drive our “new imagination”.

We live in a world in which the idea of “public” has been prostituted to private enterprise and the idea of the common good has been lost to individualism, taking along with it, our sense of community, our civility, and generally corrupting our morals.

And so for 2017 we need to reimagine how we should be living; examining our ideologies and searching for, and electing leaders with an empathy for what it is the enriches an entire community, rather than just a handful of people.

Yes, until we can again make the economy a servant of man, rather than vice-versa, then what we are now the nexus of climate change, will continue unabated.

Yes, we can only change it and stop the damage we are doing to the Earth’s atmosphere if we can imagine how we can live contentedly in what might be described as a “powered-down economy”.

Understanding social issues; understanding how we should respond to climate change

Most everything in life is resolved and dealt with through a social response and so the better we understand our social implications and complications, the move prepared we are for whatever dilemma confronts us.

And the king of all dilemmas, the most wicked problem facing humanity, and so communities at all levels is climate change; something that is both vastly misunderstood and underestimated, and for many people a dilemma not even on their personal radar.

Shepparton will soon have the chance to hear a fellow who is Australia’s pre-eminent social researcher, Hugh Mackay.

Beyond being a social researcher, Hugh has written extensively about his  findings in many books, including his latest, “Beyond Belief”, and he will discuss that, along with his earlier works on Friday, August 12.

He is being brought to Shepparton by Slap Tomorrow and the Shepparton event will support the Goulburn Valley Community Fund.

Tickets for the 7:00pm event, at the Go TAFE Harder Auditorium, are $10 each and will include a light supper and can be secured from The Community Fund at  (03) 5832 8221 or from Collins Booksellers in Maude St, Shepparton, at 5822 2679.

ARENA excited about WA wave power

Renewable energy is clearly critical to Australia finding its way through the climate change dilemma.

The Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA) today (February 18) joined Minister for Industry and Science Ian Macfarlane to officially switch on the Carnegie Perth Wave Energy Project’s onshore power station.

A full report on this first is on the ARENA website in a story headed: “Australia’s first renewable energy from a wave power array”.

ARENA CEO Ivor Frischknecht said the occasion marked an important point in the history of wave energy and is the culmination close to a decade of work.

Walking is an underrated solution to climate change.

Walking is an underrated solution to climate change.

The movement of people by machines, machines powered by fossil-fuels is one of the root causes of climate change, and so the switch simple human-powered movement would help ease the dilemma.

Walking, as opposed to using machines, is not only good for helping maintain the human-habitable state of the world, it is wonderful for an individual’s health and is helps save our communities money.

The benefit of ditching our cars and walking is explained today in the Melbourne Age in a story by Louise Almeida headed: “Health study: Melbourne walking commute could save lives and $30m”.

Should we walk more our health will improve, society will save money and the world’s environment will benefit.

A powerful personal philisophy will help us through climate change rigours

Many things will ensure we endure the rigours of climate change, but chief among them will be a personal philosophy we adhere to.

What that should be will be as different as those who confront the dilemma, but one worth considering is stoicism.

Stoicism, which is considered – when considered at all – a philosophy of grim endurance, of carrying on rather than getting over, of tolerating rather than transcending life’s agonies and adversities.

Lary Wallace has written about stoicism on Aeon in a story headed: “Indifference is a power”.

William B, Irvine's
"A Guide to the Good Life".

The sub-heading says: “As legions of warriors and prisoners can attest, Stoicism is not grim resolve but a way to wrest happiness from adversity”.

Writing about the famous stoic, Epictetus, and those who has learned from him, Wallace said: “One of these is the late US Navy Admiral James Stockdale. A prisoner of war in Vietnam for seven years during that conflict, he endured broken bones, starvation, solitary confinement, and all other manner of torture.

“His psychological companion through it all were the teachings of Epictetus, with which he had familiarised himself after graduating from college and joining the Navy, studying philosophy at Stanford University on the side.

“ He kept those teachings close by in Vietnam, never letting them leave his mind even when things were at their most dire. Especially then. He knew what they were about, those lessons, and he came to know their application much better than anyone should have to.”

Thoughtful discussion needed about climate change

Resolutions that are broadly accepted and welcomed usually evolve from thoughtful discussion.

In researching material for his book: “Don't Even Think About It - Why Our Brains Are Wired to Ignore Climate Change”, George Marshall found climate change was compartmentalized and frequently not discussed at all.

His book, published just this year, makes an important contribution to difficulties climate change activists face when talking about this world-changing dilemma.

In fact, as he points out even when the evidence of an event caused by climate change is all around them, many people don’t even make the connection between what has happened to them, their town, city or area and climate change.

Earlier this year the Harvard Book Store and Cambridge Energy Alliance welcomed climate change expert and founder of the Climate Outreach and Information Network, George Marshall, to talk about his book.

Progress depends upon de-legitimizing fossil fuel bodies

Little progress will be made on de-carbonizing society until the constituent parts of the fossil fuel industry are de-legitimized.

An example of our inability to see beyond the obvious is the giving of a “Climate Leadership Award” to the company behind the construction of pipeline integral to the worsening of the world’s carbon dioxide emissions.

The Huffington Post reports about this dilemma in a story headed: “Keystone XL Oil Pipeline Owner Wins Climate Leadership Award”.

It reports: “The company that wants to build the Keystone XL pipeline was recognized this week for leadership on climate change -– to the shock of environmental activists.”

We 'chatter' as our options continue to vanish

Options of avoiding catastrophic climate change are quickly becoming fewer.

Accurate measurements show the
 continual rise of Co2 levels.

We knew with near certainty in the late 1980s that human activities were loading the atmosphere up with carbon dioxide and so changing its chemical make-up, and yet we have done effectively nought.

Had we responded to the warning given to the U.S. Congress then by NASA’s James Hansen with the intent his advice warranted we would have been facing a decidedly different future.

Ideological and psychological differences fuelled, what those of Hansen’s ilk considered idle and time wasting chatter contributing nothing to resolving the dilemma facing humanity.

When Hansen talked with Congress the carbon dioxide content in the atmosphere was just over 340 parts per million (ppm) and then it was considered that the upper safe limit was 350ppm.

James Hansen.

We have now passed 400ppm; global temperatures have increase by about one degree Celsius and still the global chatter is drowning out the reality of what needs to be done.

Preindustrial age carbon dioxide concentrations were about 280ppm and at the turn of the century, they were closing in on 370ppm.

The present Abbott-led Coalition Government has set an unconditional target of reducing Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) to five per cent below 2000 levels by 2020 and 15 to 25 per cent, conditional on the extent of international action.

The Australian Government has also committed to a long-term target to cut pollution by 80 per cent below 2000 level by 2050.

The five per cent below 2000 levels by 2020 is absolutely inadequate and the likelihood to the 2050 goal being realised would be laughable if the lives of many were not at stake.

James Hansen has argued that a safe climate future for humans and all other life forms on earth rest with the achievement and maintenance of a GHG level of 350ppm. That’s gone and the likelihood of you or me ever seeing that again is not only gone, but barely a memory.

The business as usual world careers on largely unchecked and every indication at this point is that the world will see a four degrees Celsius, at least, increase by the end of this century.

Descriptions of what our world will be like by then are depressing and decidedly different.

It is however, not so much a matter of what do we do for what we have done to earth’s atmosphere will leave the instruction book in the hands of another – nature.

Climatologists of the world generally agree that for us to have any chance at all, we need to stop our GHG emissions right now, not by five per cent below 2000 levels in 2020, but by 100 per cent today.

Impossible, of course, but one step that would make a significant difference and begin our preparation to live in a world unlike anything ever seen in human history , begins with ending our seemingly insatiable list of wants and determining how we replace them with ways we can answer our needs.

The idea of a Four-Hour Work Day, not including public services or farmers, and not permitting overtime or double shifts, would substantially change societal dynamics, building stronger neighbourhoods, communities, towns and cities and within that create the resilience we will urgently need as our energy reserves become even more depleted and the climate changes to become hugely unpredictable, unreliable and foreign to the seasons most people now understand and depend upon to ensure their survival.

Our survival, literally, depends upon us understanding how economics have infiltrated every level of living and how we need to urgently dethrone it to replace it with broader, deeper and greater understanding that success is not about accumulation, rather in bonding with your fellows and sharing.

The Four-Hour Work Day is not about success as it is traditionally understood; it is about building resilience and adaptability.

Robert McLean.

 

The Cup's over, another challenge and climate change ignored, again

This year's America's Cup was
unquestionably spectacular,
but damnably expensive, both in
dollars and in cost to our
environment. 

On the same day the U.S. Government shut down it was announced that Australia’s Hamilton Island Yacht Club would challenge for the America’s Cup.

Unrelated? Yes, but both are about economics.

A dispute between America’s Democrat and Republican parties, that is ultimately ideological, but supposedly about giving the nod to president Obama’s belief in decent medical care for all Americans however, it has the potential to see the country default on its debts.

So as America was labouring under an economic cloud, the Hamilton Island Yacht club led by winemaker, Bob Oatley has successfully made a multi-million dollar challenge for the cup.

The cost of the remarkable yachts at about $10 million each is not the rump of the costs, rather it is the employment, training, maintenance and support of not just the actual crew of the yacht, but the more than 100 people needed to keep the project “afloat”.

In the midst of all this, America is struggling to understand its economy and facing default and just a handful of Americans and Australians are spending millions in what in reality is simply a frivolous pastime.

Does that matter? In the scheme of things probably not, except that it illustrates most people have not yet grasped that climate change is serious and rather than spend billions of dollars on a project that will only worsen the dilemma, it would be better for the world if they chose to spend that money helping us better understand how we can mitigate this worldwide cataclysm.

And while that is happening, many in the world are trying to understand how we can pay for the damage caused by significant weather events, including in America such as super-storm Sandy and the Colorado floods.

USA Today has reported in a story headed: “Report urges extreme weather superfund in wake of Sandy”, that a levy on carbon emissions would fund relief for future disasters.

It said: “Sandy cost the American economy about $70 billion, with more than half of that in New Jersey, where uninsured losses and unmet needs are estimated to between $8 billion and $13 billion in permanent losses – businesses property and public infrastructure costs that cannot be covered by government aid or private insurance.”

Oddly here in Australia, the Abbott led coalition government has just scrapped the colloquially named “carbon tax” ending any likelihood that we would have money in another fund to cover the costs of disruptive weather events.

Folk wisdom and religion may lead us out of trouble

It was once argued that we have “stone age emotions, medieval institutions and god-like technology” and the continued allowance of a behaviour that allows climate change to expand unabated confirms that.

B.F. Skinner was
prescient in his
thinking.

Beyond that fundamental inadequacy, human intelligence is questionable for we know broadly where we are going, but we are unable to change our behaviours with sufficient haste to slow, or stop, the damage we are causing to earth’s atmosphere.

Unbridle climate change has the capacity to end human life on earth, well in not end humanity’s reign at the top of the food chain, reduce it to a few cowering pockets of humanity eking our life in a precarious way, putting mankind among earth’s threatened species.

Writing in his 1971 book “Beyond Freedom and Dignity”, the late American psychologist, behaviourist, inventor and social philosopher, B.F Skinner, discussed our inability to position human understanding and technology in our lives.

He wrote that where human behaviour begins, technology stops and that we must carry on as we have in the past, with what we have learned from personal experience, or from those collections of personal experiences called “history”, or with the distillations of experience to be found in folk wisdom or practical rules of thumb.

“These have been available for centuries, and all we have to show for them it the state of the world today,” he wrote.

Skinner wrote that 2500 years ago it might have been said that man understood himself as well as any other part of his world, but “Today”, he wrote, “he is the thing he understands least.”

He was writing long before science understood the existence and causes of climate change, but his was prescient understanding why it is a dilemma to which we are unequal.

Skinner, who died in 1990, would have been dismayed (in truth probably not) that we continue to discount the importance of the environment, sacrificing it without apparent care or concern to ensure short-term gains are realised with little or no concern for or about our intergenerational responsibilities.

Religious practices may or may not appeal to you, but within them is a behaviour that could rescue humanity from itself.

Author John S. Schumacher, writing in “The Age of Insanity: Modernity and Mental Health”, encouraged his readers to consider the life of the Amish people whose lives are simple and yet loaded with rich tradition; tradition s that are contrary “to a worrying consensus of stupidity that is contributing to a number of contemporary and emotional ills”.

Emile Durkheim.

It was the late Emile Durkheim who said that Western culture had become a disorganized dust of individuals who have been freed from all genuine social bonds.

Should we fail to acknowledge and do something about climate change, then dust we will be.

In the midst of human behavioural dilemmas (read failures) we read in a story published in the Guardian headed: “Astronomer royal calls for ‘Plan B’ to stop runaway climate change”.

Lord Rees has appealed for research into geo-engineering technologies in case efforts to curb carbon emissions fail and considering the result of the September 7 Federal Elections in Australia that saw the election of a conservative government that about to cut a swathe through the country’s environmental controls, giving runaway climate change a leg-up.

Geo-engineering is loaded with risk and through unintended consequences could bring more trouble upon us, than climate change itself.

However, should whatever is implemented work, then it does naught except allow us to continue to plunder the earth’s resources and through that ensure the sustenance of a world structure that favours just a few and disadvantages billions.

Rat pioson takes priority ahead of climate change

The idea that is climate change, or global warming if you prefer, is so large, so complex and so threatening, that most people, wrestling with the detail of the day, such as their dog having eaten rat poison, simply push it to one side.

David Sirota.

Most don’t “need” the dilemma or the worry, of trying understand, or deal with, the idea that the world as they know it is slipping from their grasp.

Sadly the media, the “front line troops” when it comes to alerting people to the coming trials is failing in this important task.

In its story “Will anyone tell the truth about climate change?”, the online publication Salon explains how the media has lost interest in what will be the greatest calamity to ever confront its audience.

Take three minutes to watch the video by nationally syndicated newspaper columnist, magazine journalist, David Sirota.

Our future can be either "good" or "bad" says Ugo Bardi

Ugo Bardi.

Our future can be “good” or “bad” depending on how we react to the collision of events the world is presently experiencing.

The founder and president of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas, Italia, Ugo Bardi, has written about the past and possible alternatives that he sees for our future.

In a story on the Peal Oil website, Mr Bardi wrote in a story headed: “Ugo Bardi: The next ten billion years”, canvassed the dilemmas humanity face.

He takes what he describes as a “telescopic sweep of scenario building” in an attempt to help us understand what our future could be like, explaining it in both good and bad terms.

Looked at from the comfortable perspective of today neither is all that encouraging, but until we respond to the unfolding scenario in a way that illustrates that we put the welfare of people ahead of the short-termism of profit, the Bardi’s “bad” outcome appears inevitable.