Picking at the threads of climate activist assumptions

Apologies – this is being extensively revised – update to follow.

Replacement post – https://watertechbyrie.com/2017/02/11/a-primer-for-climate-science-deniers/

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Picking at the threads of climate activist assumptions

  1. “Those who say what won’t be are probably right. Those who say what will be are most certainly wrong.” Isaac Asimov

    I disagree that decoupling is the “only choice.”

    Degrowth is also a choice. Accommodation to existing conditions is also a choice. A steady state economy is also a choice.

    “Decoupling,” if it were possible, ignores the finite nature of the planet we inhabit. Growth is growth, consumption is consumption, 2 X 7 billion = 7 billion times two. In a growing population, per capita efficiency is trumped by growing population.

  2. The singularity occurs on January 26th 2065 when an automated IKEA factory becomes self-aware and commences converting all global resources to flat pack furniture. Until then – endless innovation on information technology and cybernetics will accelerate and continue to push the limits of what it is to be human and to challenge the adaptability of social structures. New movements, fads, music, designer drugs, cat videos and dance moves will sweep the planet like Mexican waves in the zeitgeist. Materials will be stronger and lighter. Life will be cluttered with holographic TV’s, waterless washing machines, ultrasonic blenders, quantum computers, hover cars and artificially intelligent phones. Annoying phones that cry when you don’t charge them – taking on that role from cars that beep when you don’t put a seat belt on. Space capable flying cars will have seat belts that lock and tension without any intervention of your part. All this will use vastly more energy and materials this century as populations grow and wealth increases. Welcome to the cyberpunk future.

    Extreme poverty comes with extreme environmental degradation. The only choice is to actively decouple.

    http://www.unep.org/resourcepanel-old/Portals/24102/PDFs/Decoupling_Presentation.pdf

  3. “I was told recently that even if my nuclear fantasy was possible that cheap and abundant energy would increase resource use and be globally damaging. I think I’ll disagree.”

    Availability of cheap energy in an economy based on consumption would increase overall resource throughput (not just for energy), which would be globally damaging. Think mining, transportation, manufacturing, plus accompanying industrial growth and development.

    We live on a finite world, totally dependent on intact and functioning natural habitats and ecosystems. An economic philosophy of unbridled growth and consumption is not only impossible, it’s insane.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s