The Future Laid Bare.

Scientific research and climate events over the last 2 years paint a different picture to the one the I.P.C.C. provides for COP21 in Paris this November. The U.N. and governments, have championed economic growth and technological development as necessary for a warming world. Sir Nicholas Stern (an economist), speaks as an ‘authority’ on the future “compatibility” of earth systems and economic growth.

“There is no conflict between economic growth and action on climate change.” (1)

The increase of research/data in 2006, compared to 2015, is staggering, as is what the reports say.   The UNFCCC has overseen 20 years of COP meetings to limit warming to “under 2 degrees C”. This is not legally binding. (2) There was no penalty when Canada, Russia and Japan withdrew from the “legally binding” Kyoto Protocol.

JHScientists such as James Hansen, Michael Mann (3) and Kevin Anderson (4), have since 2006 consistently been critical of the official climate change “doublespeak”, which, with climate denial, has allowed apathy, disinterest and confusion to develop at a grass roots community level towards climate change.

The I.P.C.C. “language” now explains we are “likely to achieve 2C with a 60% probability”(5), even though it now knows 2C is a marker between “dangerous” and “very dangerous” impacts. The IPCC knows that at a 90% “certainty” of staying under 2 degrees there is no carbon budget left, and reduces the “risk” from 90% “must stay under”, to a 60% “probability”. (RCP2.6). (6)

The IPCC announced a “carbon budget” which “allows” us to continue contributing to a cumulative emissions total that is “dangerous” now. (7)

The underlying economic concerns since 2007/8, and a considerably weakened environment movement since the 2009 Copenhagen fiasco, provided a vacuum now filled by Ecomodernism.   New age economic “winners”, such as Gates (8), Branson bransonspacesuitand Musk have thrown their support behind the Ecomodernist movement with heavy research funding, whilst paying lip service to what is left of “the environment”. The centre of the climate denial industry, the Heartland Institute, and the Koch brothers, have recently given support to the Ecomodernist Manifesto, strange bedfellows. (9)

 

The manifesto’s geo-engineered, “virtual” climate future (business as usual), is nuclear fuelled, negative emissioned, GMO fed, Apple inspired and technologically spellbound by ideas of recreating extinct species and living on Mars. (10)

The recent announcement by the head of the I.E.A. that “decoupling” carbon emissions from growth is hailed as being “on the right track”, came after 46 billion metric tons-e of carbon was emitted. (11)

Along with prosperity, growth and a safe climate through technology, the I.P.C.C.’s “low/zero/no carbon” (RCP 2.6 /4.5 A.R.5), vision of negative emissions technology, “sometime between 2070 and 2100” (12, 13), is completely untried at scale, (or still theory), has unknown consequences and is far too late.

Ecomodernism has wide appeal, wait for technology and the markets, and do nothing for 70 years. The Anthropocene is here. This is the future Christiana Figueres is taking to Paris.

Governments, the I.P.C.C. and neoliberalism cannot control nature and time. Try as they may to control the science, the weight and consistency of proof over time, and nature’s response in the form of climate “events”, is becoming overwhelming, and exposing the doublespeak and lies up to now passed as “information”.

“Earth Will Cross the Climate Danger Threshold by 2036” is a paper by Dr Michael Mann that contains a dire warning. (14)

In Brief

  • The rate at which the earth’s temperature has been rising eased slightly in the past decade, but temperature is still increasing; calling the slowdown a “pause” is false.
  • New calculations by the author indicate that if the world continues to burn fossil fuels at the current rate, global warming will rise to two degrees Celsius by 2036, crossing a threshold that will harm human civilization.
  • To avoid the threshold, nations will have to keep carbon dioxide levels below 405 parts per million.

 

As the carbon content of the atmosphere is above 400 ppm now, this research indicates that there are 2 or 3 years at most, until we reach the atmospheric carbon content equivalent of 2 degrees of warming above pre-industrial times.

Relevant factors, not publicised in a Murdoch world, include Mann’s “cooling effect” of particles (from coal burning particularly), preventing temperature increases relative to emissions generated. As coal use declines, temperatures rise to equilibrium.

Thermal lag/inertia. Recent research from Katherine Rike and Ken Caldeira, give a 10 year “cause/effect” time, between emissions generation and heat increase. This indicates there is already “built in”, a further 0.5C warming, supported by Dr Mann’s research. (15)

Cryosphere “tipping points” are being reached far in advance (75 years) of IPCC projections at the north and south poles. (16) RCP 8.5 is the do nothing scenario the Arctic is heading for soon.

arctic-ice-1

…………………………………………………..

…………………………………………………..

In an attempt to activate negotiators at the Paris COP21, James Hansen has published a paper open for public comment called “Climate Danger in the Hyper-Anthropocene” and reopens the debate which the IPCC avoided about ice melt and rapid sea level rise over decadal periods. (17)

Climate scientist Paul Beckwith in conversation with Alec Smith examines many of these issues and suggests Arctic summer ice melts could see ice free summers in 5 years. (18)

Slide1Author David Spratt, following research by Dr Mann, says the temperature “now”, from pre 1880 modelling, and observations, is 1.17C above pre-industrial times. (19)

Given the “thermal lag” of 0.5C “built in”, we are very close to the 2 degree limit and the 405 ppm stated by Dr Mann.

Spratt also observes the “El Nino” event “brewing” in the central Pacific Ocean, as big at present as the 1998 EN which began a new level and regime of temperature increases.

These points lead us to an uncomfortable conclusion: we are already at risk of failing to meet a target that is itself inadequate to avoid dangerous climate change”(20). and ;

“The world needs to understand the plausible worst-case scenario for climate change this century and beyond — something that the media and the IPCC have utterly failed to deliver.”(21)

 

  1.   http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/aug/26/lord-stern-hits-out-at-claims-about-cost-of-climate-cuts
  2.    http://www.mrfcj.org/our-work/unfccc/cop-timeline.html
  3.    http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/01/michael-mann-climategate-court-victory
  4.    http://www.whatnext.org/resources/Publications/Volume-III/Single-articles/wnv3_andersson_144.pdf
  5.   I.P.C.C. 2013 WG1AR5 report p. 27.
  6.   I.P.C.C. 2013 WG1AR5 report “The Physical Science Basis”, slide 5.
  7.    Ibid.
  8.    http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/02/26/how-bill-gates-is-engineering-the-earth-to-resist-climate-change/
  9.    http://clivehamilton.com/the-technofix-is-in-a-critique-of-an-ecomodernist-manifesto/
  10.    http://www.ecomodernism.org/espanol/
  11.   http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/globalwarming/11486432/The-lights-are-going-out-for-coal-and-humans-may-be-starting-to-fight-back-against-global-warming.html
  12.    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/nov/19/co2-emissions-zero-by-2070-prevent-climate-disaster-un
  13.    http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/leading-scientists-call-for-long-term-climate-vision/
  14.    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/earth-will-cross-the-climate-danger-threshold-by-2036/
  15.    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBe60pVAePY
  16.    http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2014/12may_noturningback/
  17.    http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/07/27/3684564/james-hansen-climate-danger-hyper-anthropocene/
  18.    http://www.ecoshock.info/2015/09/are-we-already-in-abrupt-climate-change.html
  19.    http://www.climatecodered.org/2015/08/as-2015-smashes-temperature-records-its.html
  20.   http://www.carbontrust.com/news/2013/06/negative-emissions-technologies-climate-necessity-or-technical-distraction
  21.   http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/07/27/3684564/james-hansen-climate-danger-hyper-anthropocene/

 

 

Advertisements

“JUST DO IT” – new age film.

“JUST DO IT” is a film about the direct action taking place in the U.K. and all over the world. It is a great relief and a sense of hope to see a new generation of climate change activists taking peaceful protest to new levels. Emily James’ film follows a lineage of independent film makers such as Franny Armstrong (The Age of Stupid),  Annie Leonard (The Story of Stuff) and the thousands of filmakers all over the world who are chrystallising events and providing a community memory of efforts to save the planet despite governments and vested interests.

………………………….

……………………………

The film is part of the “ INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL FILM FESTIVAL ” being held in Barcelona from the 5th – 11th November. It is being screened in many locations but can be downloaded from the website at http://justdoitfilm.com/

End of Year message from Occupy Wall St…

OWS Thanks Our Supporters!

Posted 16 hours ago on Dec. 22, 2011, 6:15 p.m. EST on http://occupywallst.org/

‎2011 was a revolutionary year for a new movement that is changing the world. From NYC to Cairo, we are just getting started. We are still busy building this amazing movement, and we couldn’t do it without you — our supporters! Let’s make next year even better!

…………………..

…………………..

Naomi Klein on Occupy and Climate Change.

OCCUPY VANCOUVER interviews NAOMI KLEIN

In this interview with Occupy Vancouver, Naomi Klein gives an appraisal of the Occupy movement and it’s value in redetermining values, communicating and ethics. She offers the opinion that solutions to the economic crisis are the same solutions that are needed for the ecological crisis of climate change, and the political crisis which is advocated by the Tar Sands.

………………………

………………………………………………………………………………..

Naomi Klein’s advocacy is gaining important discussion space as the following post from New York Times columnist Andrew Revkin shows. The discussion centres around her article “Capitalism v Climate” (see below) and her call for a realistic approach to climate change and the massive change that must occur to return to a safe climate.

Andrew Rivkin and the New York Times have acknowledging global warming but staying very close to the “American Way.”

Revkin, although disagreeing with some key aspects of Naomi Kleins essay, welcomes the discussion ;

She challenges the environmental left to embrace this reality instead of implying that modest changes in lifestyle and shopping habits and the like can decarbonize human endeavors on a crowding planet.

Andrew Rivkin. (AR)

First, I was happy to see you dive into the belly of the many-headed beast challenging the need for greenhouse-gas cuts (as was clear from your piece, you recognize that there’s no single species called “deniers”). There are lots of slings and arrows awaiting anyone exploring this terrain, as was the case with the Heartland meeting in 2008. What prompted you to do an in-depth look at global warming stances and the issues underlying this “crisis”?

Naomi Klein (NK)

I got interested after attending the UN climate summit in Copenhagen in 2009. Like a lot of people who watched that train wreck up close, I came away wanting to understand the massive gap between the euphoric expectations of the environmental movement and the real political outcomes. When I got home, I was stunned by a new Harris poll that showed that the percentage of Americans who believed in anthropogenic climate change had plummeted from 71 per cent to 51 per cent in just two years. So here we were thinking that the world was on the verge of some kind of climate breakthrough while a large segment of the U.S. population was rejecting the science altogether. I wanted to understand how that could have happened.

I had a bit of an “a-ha” moment reading a paper by the excellent Australian political scientist Clive Hamilton, in which he argues that a great many American conservatives have come to see climate science as a threat to their core ideological identity. Then I read Merchants of Doubt by Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway, which explains that many of the key scientists behind the denier movement hold a similar point of view – they are old-school Cold Warriors who came to see fighting environmentalism as a battle to protect “freedom” and the American way of life.

But as I read all this, I found myself thinking that from within the hard-right worldview, these responses were entirely rational. If you really do believe that freedom means governments getting out of the way of corporations and that any regulation leads us down Hayek’s road to serfdom, then climate science is going to be kryptonite to you. After all, the reality that humans are causing the climate to warm, with potentially catastrophic results, really does demand radical government intervention in the market, as well as collective action on an unprecedented scale. So you can understand why many conservatives see climate change as a threat to their identity. Too often the liberal climate movement runs away from the deep political and economic implications of climate science, which is why I wrote the piece. I think we need to admit that climate change really does demand a profound interrogation of the ideology that currently governs our economy. And that’s not bad news, since our current economic model is failing millions of people on multiple fronts.

Continue reading

OCCUPY DURBAN – PATRICK BOND – BRILLIANT ANALYSIS.

I’VE NEVER HEARD OF PATRICK BOND BEFORE, he is involved with Occupy Durban ROOTS, but he is professor ay Kwa Zulu Natal and South African govt advisor, social activist and OCCUPY participant. Early Saturday morning Patrick gave his impressions of the conference.

Bond points to the positive victories on TAR SANDS thro’ mass opposition, and is critical of the vested interests that have prevented a legally binding agreement. Bond’s optimism uses the “wins” that are being made, Occupy, and the connectivity of the global climate/social justice network as a basis for the future.

Just one of the many individuals involved that give hope for the future.

………………………..

………………………..

Occupy Melbourne, Police move in again.

All praise to the dogged Occupy Melbourne, who, despite suffering extreme police harrassment and violence, have returned to Occupy sites again and again only to be moved on. This is the latest update, more violence, pepper spray ?

………………………..

……………………….

OCCUPY BARCELONA UPDATE.

This film clip from Brandon Jourdan on how the Acampada has devolved from Placa Catalunya into the Barrio’s (suburbs). although the election result didn’t fully explain the absentee/spoil vote issue well, they do have polled support of 70%+, THIS WAS an election though, one that was selected by Zapatero to co-incide with the anniversary of the death of Generalisimo Franco, November 20th. Did Zapatero give some thought to the possible re-emergence of new fascist philosophy, based on “market fundamentalism” ?

Anyway the “Occupy” movement is alive and well, and will grow when further austerity measures are announced. Spain isn’t done with the financial shocks to its banks just at present.

………………………………

Ixpieth comment; Having read an article in the Guardian by fellow 15M author/journalist Katherine Ainger called “The Spanish election is a mandate for the indignados” , many comments were lodged stating this was a misinterpretation of the result. Katherine did “adjust” her comment and admit the absentee were part of claimed 15M “swing”. The absentee vote was, in fact, almost the same as the last election, and the “spoiled” vote had barely changed.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/nov/21/spanish-election-mandate-indignados

Accepting that in the last election many conservatives did not vote, and the enthusiastic socialist vote was Zapatero’d out, and possibly DID accept the advice from 15M to “absentee or spoil” it is feasible that there was strong electoral support. But this was an election which should be considered in that light. 15M is  the basis of a global movement and has progressed, and is as impressive now as then, ON 15M.

It’s claims will be subject to heated debate and their arguments must be solid.          “WE ARE GOING SLOW BECAUSE WE ARE GOING FAR”..

Naomi Klein described Occupy as a global “state of mind”, Eduardo Galeano described it as the “birth of another world”. It has been a totally unexpected and great beginning, who knows what the future will turn up.

……………………………….

Naomi Wolfe on her experiences being arrested in New York after speaking with demonstrators.

The shocking truth about the crackdown on Occupy

The violent police assaults across the US are no coincidence. Occupy has touched the third rail of our political class’s venality

 Naomi Wolf

Continue reading

Capitalism vs the Climate – Naomi Klein

This article appears in the November edition of :The Nation”, http://www.thenation.com/article/164497/capitalism-vs-climate?page=0,0

There is a question from a gentleman in the fourth row.

He introduces himself as Richard Rothschild. He tells the crowd that he ran for county commissioner in Maryland’s Carroll County because he had come to the conclusion that policies to combat global warming were actually “an attack on middle-class American capitalism.” His question for the panelists, gathered in a Washington, DC, Marriott Hotel in late June, is this: “To what extent is this entire movement simply a green Trojan horse, whose belly is full with red Marxist socioeconomic doctrine?”

Here at the Heartland Institute’s Sixth International Conference on Climate Change, the premier gathering for those dedicated to denying the overwhelming scientific consensus that human activity is warming the planet, this qualifies as a rhetorical question. Like asking a meeting of German central bankers if Greeks are untrustworthy. Still, the panelists aren’t going to pass up an opportunity to tell the questioner just how right he is.

Chris Horner, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute who specializes in harassing climate scientists with nuisance lawsuits and Freedom of Information fishing expeditions, angles the table mic over to his mouth. “You can believe this is about the climate,” he says darkly, “and many people do, but it’s not a reasonable belief.” Horner, whose prematurely silver hair makes him look like a right-wing Anderson Cooper, likes to invoke Saul Alinsky: “The issue isn’t the issue.” The issue, apparently, is that “no free society would do to itself what this agenda requires…. The first step to that is to remove these nagging freedoms that keep getting in the way.”

Continue reading

Naomi Klein, Occupy and Wombat.

Naomi Klein gave an inspiring acceptance speech when she was given the  “Challenging Business as Usual Award” at the Rainforest Action Network Conference   in San Francisco. She portrayed the “Occupy” movement as a “state of mind” which was based on “sharing”. This is something the current economic fundamentalism knows nothing about, and given the projected population increase to 10 billion by 2050, we are all going to have to learn.

………………..

………………….

One of Naomi’s major points was the need to change the system, unlock the radical imagination, and share. WOMBAT explains it as no human being could. Jason ABles made this clip in 2005 perhaps realising that it was the pnly hope for humanity.      Thanks Jason.

…………………..

………………….

Jason Ables  http://www.bumpercars.com

Doyle and the 1%

Robert Doyle is a bitter, twisted, failed State politician determined to make his mark amongst a gutless bunch of yes men representing the City of Melbourne. Only one,  Cr Oke said she had been saddened by Cr Doyle’s response to the protest.

According to Doyle, those who occupied the City Square were a “self-righteous, narcissistic, self-indulgent rabble”; lying, violent, thugs, both comically-amateurish malcontents and–simultaneously–professionally-trained vandals, acting under the influence of sinister forces of strange and exotic origin.

To date his efforts to “brand” Melbourne with a $5 million “logo” is as much a joke as the neo-conservative Mayor.

Can’t see much difference myself. His stance is reminiscent of the abject hipocracy within the 1% in America. Whilst paying “lip” service to democracy on behalf of the 1% and failing to realise that this democracy which must be violently maintained is the root cause of the problem. It does NOT represent the 99%.

Continue reading