Our Path to Sustainability
After I published my third book (Renewable Energy – Following the Money) in 2013, I took a break from efforts like this, as, frankly, I had run out of ideas. But just last week I twigged on something that I believe needs to be said, which I summarize here:
Most people who study the big issues facing our civilization believe that we’re teetering on the edge of destruction. Yes, there are many different individual threats, e.g., climate change, but all this is complicated by the fact that these threats really can’t be understood as “individual”; they interact with one another in ways that no one can accurately predict. For instance, runaway climate change and the resultant loss of farmland from sea level rise, salt incursion, and severe droughts might team up with ocean acidification and loss of biodiversity to cause food and water shortages, which will promote hostility among nations over the remaining scarce resources. Is this scenario likely? Sadly, yes it is. Is it the only one that’s at all likely? Unfortunately, no.
But regardless of how these threats blend together, how many overall “scenarios” exist, how probable each one is, and how we measure all this, it’s increasingly clear that this is a game that our civilization cannot afford to lose. Failure is not an option, if you’ll pardon the cliché.
And, in truth, there are many reasons to believe that our society will, in fact, pull all of its ever-expanding list of human and technological resources together before it’s too late. Indeed, this is a book of hope, of encouragement. It’s a book that acknowledges that:
• anthropogenic climate change and numerous other environmental threats are quite real – and encroaching on us by the day……while pointing to a variety of pragmatic solutions
• there are “bad guys,” e.g., powerful and greedy people and groups…….while explaining how these forces of selfishness may be in the process of losing the battle against the 200,000+ groups on Earth whose missions are environmental and social justice
• world economies face tough challenges and the middle class continues to shrink…….while examining the role of the cleantech industry as a dynamic and empowering change-agent in the 21st Century
The purpose of the project is to examine the idea that the world is full of thoughtful and decent people who are behaving rationally in the face of crisis, and that, correspondingly, our civilization has an excellent chance of avoiding the disasters that are speeding its way.
I’m hoping that I can count on each of the folks who participated in any of the first three books to grant me the pleasure of another interview. I’m also hoping that readers will point me in the direction of exciting new people with whom I can speak. Keep in mind that, while the theme of the book is optimism, I’m more than willing to entertain dissenting viewpoints.
Again, I’m asking you to open up your “mental Rolodex” and think about people who would make good interview subjects for me here. Thanks very much.
Self directed, GPS guided electric “pods” will eliminate urban pollution, the need for parking lots,the need for shopping cart jockeys, grid lock, serve the elderly and special needs population. The pods will arrive when called on a smart phone and deliver by command. GM and Google have developed such devices. They or comparable units will be operating in Milton Keynes. I’ve alerted you to this before and can send further information on receipt of an email address.
Of course. I’m craig at 2GreenEnergy dot com.
Hello Craig- An alternative to the present satus quo of energy use must be provided and must be competitive. Simply cheaper and easier to use as well as socially acceptable. 47% of the energy used globally is in buildings- residential, office, and industrial. The amount of energy consumed is expected to increase.Therefore , Bs”d, with Heaven’s help we are attempting to develop clean tech centers whose goal is be “off grid” and rely totally on alternative energy including advanced solar cars. At the same time our clean tech industrial parks will strive to revolutionize various aspects of clean-tech including water & waste management, energy efficient devices and structures and more. We need peoples support and encouragement, we can’t do this alone.
Florine
GismaBracha
Supply and demand of resources are known to always reach an equilibrium in the last resort. Consumption must reduce to meet anticipated supply. We can start with birth control before famine and disease takes over as control mechanisms and the cry of the not so innocent victims become deafening.. The digital pill !
Here is a link some might find worth their time. http://hpjmh.com/2014/03/27/food-math-101-saving-our-civilization-made-simple/
One of our most underutilized opportunity is the rural electric cooperatives by encouraging Trustees of these utilities to be adventuresome and forward thinking individuals can make progress
I too are an optimistic person, too a fault I might add. However, I insist that while having faults, this fuel of optimism is what propels me into the future. Optimism drives solution and is in a sense, life it’s self. A double edge sword has the other downside. One downside is many people may think someone else will save the day. Super heros are becoming a popular theme… My fear is this image of Gotham City and a super hero is all too real between 3 D and THX and super theaters shaking out hearts out… Where is reality? I generally dislike “Hollywood” or at least some of the over stimulation, but maybe this can be played out in Hollywood before reality strikes and we all end up in Gotham City
Hi..Joel Fogel told me at least 10 years ago that water was going to be the most important issue of our life time. He has worked tirelessly around the world to communities obtain fresh water, and to talk to who ever will listen about water conservation. I think he could really give you some positive thoughts about the environment. Take a look…
http://www.captainfogel.com/
The single most important global crises is the lack of unlimited clean energy resources. Solar and wind equals too much fossil fueled backup. Yet more solar and wind will cause problems with nuclear baseload because of ramping issues such as the caiso duck curve http://www.caiso.com/Documents/FlexibleResourcesHelpRenewables_FastFacts.pdf
Therefore, the integration of various different non CO2 and CO2 neutral energy sources becomes a problem unless nuclear can be made variable, and the renewables less variable.
I imagine millions of floating ocean wind turbines each converting electricity via electrode to high temperatures which convert air and water into ammonia (or other fuel) to backup all the inland renewables. I also imagine whatever baseload requirement left to be powered by some kind of molten salt reactor and that the only problem with that is having to wait many months or years to properly isolate the fission products…
I believe as people grow older, they become less immersed in their own Hollywood versions of reality concerning these issues and try to understand the energy math. Now, I need to understand what exactly are the cost differences between ocean wind to clean fuels compared to whatever safest nuclear.
I would love to share you optimism that we can solve climate change, but in truth, I think it will be at best a very close run thing.
Few people realise how much inertia there is
a. In the physical climate system.
b. In already invested infrastructure
c. In political and economic systems.
a. We have not yet seen and will not fully see for decades the climate change which will be triggered by emissions already in the atmosphere. (The scenario in which humans instantly bring a total stop to actions which change the climate)
My guess (from various information I have read) that global climate will warm by around 1 degree centigrade due to forcing already in place. This may not seem like much, but the effects will be disproportionately experienced at the poles potentially destabilising the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets bringing sea level rises measured in metres or tens of metres over the next few centuries. There may also be destabilisation of the climate, weather systems, ocean currents, and ecosystems potentially triggering feedbacks such as large scale methane emissions from thawing permafrost and methane hydrates.
This is with NO further anthropogenic CO2 emissions
b. Invested infrastructure – everything from cars to power stations as well as roads, buildings, agricultural systems etc. which is currently in use or under construction. The vast majority of this existing infrastructure will continue in use for years or even decades.
CO2 emissions will not stop but will continue at or above current levels for possibly 10 to 20 years with CO2 levels in the atmosphere rising to perhaps 450 parts per million by around 2034 – based on already invested infrastructure. We are therefore unlikely to contain warming within the current 2 degree centigrade targets.
The chance of substantial sudden feedback mechanisms being triggered is significantly increased by this factor.
c. Political / economic inertia – with the best of intentions, politicians, businesses and the global public still expect to see economic growth and substantial investment in upgraded infrastructure – particularly in the developing world over the coming decades much of which will depend on increased consumption of fossil fuels and other raw materials from unsustainable sources.
This force will not only see CO2 emissions maintained at current levels, but will see annual emissions rising for some years possibly until around 2030 before accelerated use of renewables, nuclear, carbon capture and storage, and energy efficiency finally begin to cut the amount of CO2 we are pouring into the atmosphere.
This ongoing investment in emitting infrastructure seems to me likely to push atmospheric CO2 levels into the 500 to 550 parts per million range before emissions peak.
Adverse feedbacks are I think almost certain at CO2 levels of 500 to 550 parts per million.
It should be remembered that b and c will of course result in further inertia feeding into climate systems which could in a fairly conservative estimate result in 3 to 5 degrees of global warming and very substantial changes to natural ecosystems and sea levels over the next 1000+ years.
GaryT63 is essentially correct on all counts IMO. As part of the largest & longest running thread on LinkedIn under the sub called Sustainability Professionals, I have seen this analysis repeated many times from many angles. So what to do?
Our best. Regenerate the land and community where we are. Live creative, intrinsically rewarding, lives.
Remain politically engaged against war, Fracking & all economic, environmental and social injustice (this is how we tell the good guys from the bad guys). Remain engaged in favour of multiple distributed renewable energy sources, natural building, local sourcing of everything.
Re-engage with the natural world in natural settings (if you can find them). Even a vacant lot has a surprising amount of “nature” in it after a few years left to itself.
Recognize spirit. Hang out with like minded people, but remain willing to constructively engage those holding differing views.
Non of the above will solve the over-arching socio-economic & environmental situation caused by humanities over-reaching. However, leading a rewarding life will remain a possibility even as we dig in (literally) for the long-short-term and commence building the arks for the long-long-term.
I have become convinced that our housing model needs to be re-worked so that people can use clean energy, clean water, modern fresh vegetable production, and fishing to build new
sustainable communities for people to live in. One example I have suggested at this link: http://www.tilapiavillage.com. “Give a man a fish and feed him for a day – teach a man to fish and feed him for a lifetime”. (Chinese Proverb)
Craig, I share your “what’s possible” approach and that’s why I’ve been so excited about finding companies that are actually regenerative – that is their business model creates a healthy Earth! Check out the STIA-Now conference. It’s an online systems thinking conference running from Aug 5-Sept 5. Full disclosure I’m presenting Aug 20 at 10 AM EST.
You most certainly have been at this for a long while, Kathryn; well done to you.
Thanks Craig!
A reader suggests the following:
Craig, have a look @ the LinkedIn Sustainability threads, including Sustainability Professionals & Permaculture. Look for Neil Davidson, John Strohl, Tom Slabe, Andrew Gaines, Thomas Pascoe, Klaus Mager, Kerry Mitchell, Howard Switzer, Gayle Bowers, Gary Bowen, Harrison Quigley in the Sust Prof thread.
Permaculture is the most positive trend for our future along with ecovillage creation and to a lesser extent, but larger audience participation, transition towns.
Few people understand that one good (meaning some vegetated soil & lots of sunlight & some water) unfrozen acre of solid land, almost anywhere, can raise organically enough really good food to provide 80%
+ of the food needed for 20 people. Just doing THAT would balance our
carbon situation and feed the whole world’s population AND leave large swathes of “nature” to itself. Doing THAT would also regenerate rural communities and create thousands & thousands of “good jobs”.
Another person to connect with might be Dirk van Loon, of DVL Publishing here in Nova Scotia. See his story in a fairly recent newspaper article here:
http://thechronicleherald.ca/artslife/1134817-grant-van-loon-s-fluke-turns-into-publishing-miracle
What seems missing in both article and comments is the idea that culture (culture of tolerance in particular) and attitudes (toward work, reproduction, consumption and collective responsibility for our fellow man) impact the practical aspects of sustainability. After all, the world’s billions need to be fed, clothed and housed – and those of us in the US need to be fed, clothed and housed very well or the peasants get restless. Yes, there are “bad guys” (and girls), but in the immortal words of Pogo, “We have met the enemy and he is us.” It’s now time for Mr. and Mrs. America to stop grasping for more, and start asking “What can I give?” What I give in dollars and time to my church is important. Equally – if not more – important is what I give to the elective process. Do I support and vote for those who value the “have mores” or those who value those who have little by way of either worldly goods or prospects for the future? Two millennia ago, Christ observed that it is harder to pass a camel through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich person to enter the kingdom of heaven. Has something profound to say to Mr. and Mrs. America – and our young people – today. Listen up!
The specifics of green building, renewable energy, perma-culture, Eco-villages… are all things that sell themselves to those who bother to learn about them. Just eat some fresh picked organic produce that was picked minutes before eating it and you will know how different fresh and local food is. Growing your own food or paying a neighbor to grow your food is connecting you to your local economy and society in a very different way than going to the local grocery chain store.
The will to use the tools at our disposal to live more holistically is tied into our cultural or societal systems and values.
We need to visualize a solution in order to attain one, we need to believe that that vision is attainable and we need to empower people to realize that a healthy society puts the long term greater good ahead of individual profit.
Rather than enriching the energy, agribusiness and multinational companies we need to invest in ourselves and become more independent, and interdependent.
When we care about the earth, we do not frack, or use petrochemicals or waste energy.
We need to network with others who believe in a better way to create a sustainable future.
“… are all things that sell themselves to those who bother to learn about them.” Somehow I have trouble believing this has any relevance to a child who has not eaten in a week or a young person who is without food, without shelter, and without hope. It is that young person who I really worry anout, and that child who needs our feeding – whether the food is prstinely organic or not. And I do resent being preached to about petrochemicals by someone writing on a PC built mostly with petrochemicals and non-organics produced using petrochemicals.