Tag Archives: Capitalism vs. the Climate.

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S. IS 2023 GOING TO BE THE YEAR THAT HUMANITY FINDS OUT THAT IT IS NOT THE DOMINANT FORCE OF CHANGE ON PLANET EARTH?

Featured

Posted by in #whatif.com

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S. IS 2023 GOING TO BE THE YEAR THAT HUMANITY FINDS OUT THAT IT IS NOT THE DOMINANT FORCE OF CHANGE ON PLANET EARTH?

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

( Three minute read)

What can be achieved in this decade to put the world on a path to a more sustainable, more prosperous future for all of humanity?

Temptation is to say, that you may rest assured that it will be another year of unadulterated verbal dioramas diarrhoea.

With humanity waging war on nature the risks we are taking are astounding.

What did Earth look like from space in 2022?

It looked beautiful, it looked dangerous. It looked small and inconsequential, it looked incredible.iss066e109851

Nature always strikes back – and it is already doing so with growing force and fury.

About 96% of all mammals by weight are now humans and our livestock, like cattle, sheep and pigs. Just 4% are wild mammals like elephants, buffalo or dolphins. Seventy-five percent of Earth’s ice-free land is directly altered as a result of human activity, with nearly 90% of terrestrial net primary production and 80% of global tree cover under direct human influence.

We have grossly simplified the biosphere, a system of interactions between lifeforms and Earth that has evolved over 3.8 billion years. As the pressure of human activities accelerates on Earth, so, too, does the hope that technologies such as artificial intelligence will be able to help us deal with dangerous climate and environmental change. That will only happen, however, if we act forcefully in ways that redirects the direction of technological change towards planetary stewardship and responsible innovation.2022-05_geocolor_20220505180018_logos-1

Rising greenhouse gas emissions means that “within the coming 50 years, one to 3 billion people are projected to experience living conditions that are outside of the climate conditions that have served civilizations well over the past 6,000 years.

In this decade we must bend the curves of greenhouse gas emissions and shocking biodiversity loss. This means transforming what we eat and how we farm it, among many other transformations.

Nature has now become for us a kind of glossy cardboard, digitized and virtualized, increasingly distant from our lives.

The recent Covid-19 global pandemic is an Anthropocene phenomena. It has been caused by our intertwined relationship with nature and our hyper-connectivity. ( We order Pizza by sending messages into space.)

However our actions are making the biosphere more fragile, less resilient and more prone to shocks than before.

Humans use the majority of natural geo-resources, like minerals, rocks, soil and water.

Two of the biggest barriers are unsustainable levels of inequality and technology that undermines societal goals.

Inequality and environmental challenges are deeply linked. Reducing inequality will increase trust within societies.

It is time to flick the “green switch.   We have a chance to not simply reset the world economy but to transform it.

It is time to integrate the goal of carbon neutrality into all economic and fiscal policies and decisions. And to make climate-related financial risk disclosures mandatory.

It is time to transform humankind’s relationship with the natural world – and with each other. And we must do so together.

It’s is time to get off your smart phone and start to demand transparency of Algorithms that are plundering the world for profit. .

The state of the planet is much worse than most people understand and that humans face a grim.

Because as of yet there is no political or economic system, or leadership, is prepared to handle the predicted disasters, or even capable of such action

The problem is compounded by ignorance and short-term self-interest, with the pursuit of wealth and political interests stymying the action that is crucial for survival.

Most economies operate on the basis that counteraction now is too costly to be politically palatable. Combined with disinformation campaigns to protect short-term profits it is doubtful that the scale of changes we need will be made in time.

We need to be candid, accurate, and honest if humanity is to understand the enormity of the challenges we face in creating a sustainable future.

Without political will backed by tangible action that scales to the enormity of the problems facing us, the added stresses to human health, wealth, and well-being will perversely diminish our political capacity to mitigate the erosion of the Earth’s life-support system upon which we all depend.

Without fully appreciating and broadcasting the scale of the problems and the enormity of the solutions required, society will fail to achieve even modest sustainability goals, and catastrophe will surely follow.

So the Beady Eye wishes all a Happy New Year with the near certainty that the abovementioned problems will worsen over the coming decades, with negative impacts for centuries to come, if we dont now get our fingers out of where the sun does not shine.

No one has a right to pollute the air or the water, which are the common inheritance of all.

We have not inherited the Earth from our parents, we have borrowed it from our children.

The time has come to re-educate to nature and contact with it as a lever to ensure collective well-being, physical and mental; to restore beauty, kindness, ecosystem thinking, emotional intelligence and a formation of values, heritage inherited from the wisdom of the past but negligently neglected.

After all, this is what ecology is all about: looking at reality as it is, understanding its connections, accepting its complexity, and striving for harmony between all parts.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

Contact: bobdillon33@gmail.com

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: IS DATA DESTORYING THE WORLD?

29 Thursday Dec 2022

Posted by in IS DATA DESTORYING THE WORLD?, Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: IS DATA DESTORYING THE WORLD?

Tags

, , , , , ,

(Fifteen minute read)

The short answer: Yes, and it comes with a cost, we now have Apps you pay for to stop data collection

Technological advancements are difficult to forecast, but several models predict that data centre’s energy usage could engulf over 10% of the global electricity supply by 2030 if left unchecked.

There is no denying that the future of technology will continue to revolutionize our lives, but you’d be hard-pressed to find anyone who doesn’t care about their privacy. It’s human nature. You want control over what private information you share and who you share it with. Unfortunately, you can lose this control with a careless click.

Various entities handle your private data. The first among them is the government and its institutions. You can’t get public services (for example, electricity, a high school education, healthcare) without identifying yourself.

You can buy apples at a stand and remain a stranger to the fruit seller. But buy apples online, and you’ll give away private information about yourself. It may be a fact as simple as that you like apples. This information will be sold to an advertiser, and the next time you go online, an ad for apples will pop up on your screen.

Almost everything you do online leaves a data breadcrumb. You have little control over how these breadcrumbs are collected.

Usually, it works like this. Before you start using a new online service, you have to read a wall of fine print. You do not do so, because you don’t want to wade through paragraphs of jargon. You click that you agree, and that’s how you begin to give away your private data. You cannot change the agreement, and you cannot bargain — it’s take it or leave it and if you reject all, rest assured it is logged as data. 

There are countless technology advances in hospitals and medicine but as data penetrates deeper into biologically and culturally diverse corners of the world is technology a sustainability hero or villain?

Information privacy will become an even hotter topic once technologies create more invasive tools. You’ll be surrounded by facial-recognition cameras, smart speakers that listen to your conversations, e-textiles, wearable health monitors, and other data-gathering gadgets.

                                                                          ——————————–

All-together, this paints a challenging picture for the future of our environment. Many technology companies have yet come to grips with the environmental impact associated with their products and services.

Analysis by Veritas estimates that 5.8 million tonnes of CO2 will be pumped into the atmosphere this year as a result of storing unnecessary ‘dark data’ – this translates to more emissions than 80 individual countries.

Destroying our planet is no easy task. Sure, you could bomb us back to the stone age, introduce a plague to wipe out all complex life or whip up some sort of nanomachine to completely eliminate the entire biosphere. But in all those cases, the rock we stand on would still remain, lifelessly circling the sun for billions of years to come.

Getting a handle on wayward data is becoming as big a problem as Climate Change.

The list of significance of data analytics just goes on and on – you need data to pitch stocks, file financial reports and provide better service to your clients, arrive at projections, assess performance. Objects that use IoT today include driverless cars, fitness trackers like Fitbit, thermostats, and doorbells. Objects that use IoT are also commonly referred to as smart objects. smart thermostat online shopping.  voice assistants. integrate your voice assistant with any smart device. food delivery.

Who hasn’t heard of Facebook, Twitter, or Skype? They’ve become household names. Even if you don’t use these platforms, they’re a part of everyday life and not going away anytime soon.top reads of 2022

Communication tools offer one of the most significant examples of how quickly technology has evolved.

Technology has changed money

No more do you have to enter a bank to withdraw money or transfer it to someone. With your cell phone and a banking app, you can manage all of your necessary bill payments online.

The smartwatch is a relatively new technology that captures almost all the capabilities of smartphones in a convenient touch-screen watch. You can receive notifications, track your activity, set alarms, and even call and text directly through these wearable devices. Technology has changed how we watch television, what news we get.  More and more TVs these days are even designed for streaming. “Smart TVs” have Wi-Fi capability. Paper books aren’t going anywhere. We can access our music no matter where we are. For better or worse, technology has also made it possible for you to find other people’s personal information on the Internet through social media. You can gain access to the information you want to know about a particular person.

Medical Guardian Medical Alert System

So is Data screwing up the world?

Well, neither really but should we be steering technological innovation and deployment to drive social progress.

Technology encompasses a broad range of products and systems, some of which will help us live more sustainably and others that won’t.  The production and use of technology will always involve the consumption of energy and materials, but if that same technology helps us minimise our consumption in other ways or allows us to use more sustainable methods of production, then the net effect will be positive.

Over the years, technology has revolutionized our world and daily lives. The amount of active web users globally is now near 3.2 billion people. That is almost half of the world’s population adoption of new technologies, like smartphones and wearables, may have slowed down significantly in the last few years, but data usage is only continuing to grow—massively.

In 2012, there were only 500,000 data centres worldwide to handle global traffic, but today there are more than 8 million according to IDC.

As data becomes more siloed and fragmented, it gets increasingly harder to find and manage.

Take Bitcoin mining network which are now consumes more energy than the whole of Ireland. And it’s growing at about 30% a month.

Take Netflix binging. Storing and streaming all that digital content requires a lot of energy, and as consumers expect regular new content and ever better video quality, the energy demands spiral upwards.

It’s not just Netflix of course. In total, data centres consume roughly 3% of the world’s energy supply, and this amount is estimated to treble in the next decade.

Take that every year, millions of data centres worldwide are purging metric tons of hardware, draining country-sized amounts of electricity, and generating carbon emissions as much as the global airline industry. Data centres energy usage could engulf over 10% of the global electricity supply by 2030 if left unchecked. It is double every four years. Analysis by Veritas estimates that 5.8 million tonnes of CO2 will be pumped into the atmosphere this year as a result of storing unnecessary ‘dark data’ – this translates to more emissions than 80 individual countries.

All-together, this paints a challenging picture for the future of our environment because  it’s one of the largest and most unappreciated blind spots in the fight against climate change.

The most important next step right now is simply education – and getting companies to realize that the importance and benefits of more eco-friendly data centres, but the impact is also determined by how we, the consumers, use that technology.

Heading into 2023 the signals are mixed turning millions of us into remote-workers.

Perhaps the most concerning way that technology impacts our environment is through the mining of vast quantities of rare metals. Metals like lithium, cobalt and nickel are used to make critical hardware components – batteries in particular – for things like computers, smartphones and electric cars. Unfortunately, mining these metals is energy intensive and comes not just at an environmental cost, but often a terrible human cost too. Moreover, these rare metals are just that: rare. Without large investment in recycling facilities, using these limited natural resources is unsustainable. The planned obsolescence of consumer gadgets only exacerbates the problem.

We will not likely get through the coming year without some sort of catastrophic attack on a very strategic and important network or service provider like Gmail, WhatsApp, or Microsoft.

The revolutions that will surface in years to come will continue to make profound changes in our everyday lives.

In the end, the environmental impact will depend not only on choices that we make as consumers, but on the social and political choices that we make collectively as citizens.

Our data centres don’t have to harm the environment, if we take the proper actions today.

Only 12% of today’s data centres that are green. According to analyst firm IDC, in 2012, there were only 500,000 data centres worldwide that were handling global traffic, but today there are more than 8 million.

“The time for pure national interests has passed, internationalism has to be our approach and in doing so bring about a greater equality between what nations take from the world and what they give back. The wealthier nations have taken a lot and the time has now come to give.”

Why destroy the planet if we don’t have to.

Whole industries (think telemarketers, corporate law, private equity) whole lines of work (middle management, brand strategists, high-level hospital or school administrators, editors of in-house corporate magazines) exist primarily to convince us there is some reason for their existence.

It’s not our pleasures that are destroying the world. It’s our puritanism, our feeling that we have to suffer in order to deserve those pleasures. If we want to save the world, we’re going to have to stop working in bullshit jobs.

It is ironic that the technologies most responsible for the mood of today’s world are also best positioned to improve it.

AI must be programmed to enhance human life as opposed to imitating it.

From social media to the climate crisis, Big Data is helping to ruin everything. The total lack of legal data rights for individuals is a violation of autonomy, privacy, and even freedom of thought and speech.

Currently we have no rights at all to own our data, and it can be sold easily to the highest bidder to do with it as they please.

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

There are fantastic things that can be done with data, and it is absolutely essential to so much of modern scientific and engineering feats which we hope might save the world. Without data, none of our interventions in great problems like climate change would be able to do anything at all. In fact, without adequate data collection and analysis, we might never have noticed that climate change is happening at all.

Just remember these few things:

  • Data is not your ally — especially not when you are trying to convince somebody of something. Changing a whole mindset requires more than just statistics, and raw data is so abstract and such a broad category that there can easily be conflicting data sets that lead to impasses in conversation. Data is a crucial tool, but you need to build trusting mutual relationships, too.
  • Data is not your friend — it does not care whether you think you have a right to it or not. Data will be owned by and used by those who created the platform you are using, until the law changes. And the law will not change unless you start caring.
  • Data is not “things” — objects are totally separate from the data abstracted from them in a way that is metaphysically irreconcilable. There is no way to recreate an apple from mere data about an apple, nor to exhaust the nature of an apple by reducing it to data-form. This is an important principle that should be remembered whenever we deal with data: data is no more than what it is, and potentially much less.
  • Data is now just such a frontier — you are the product.

All human comments appreciated. all like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

Contact: bobdillon33@gmail.com

THE BEADY OVERVIEW OF WHAT THE COP15 BIODIVERSITY AGREEMENT COMPLEMENTS OF VERT.

19 Monday Dec 2022

Posted by in COP 15 BIODIVERSITY.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY OVERVIEW OF WHAT THE COP15 BIODIVERSITY AGREEMENT COMPLEMENTS OF VERT.

Tags

,

( TEN MINUTES READ)

COP15: an ambitious agreement to halt the collapse of life
After two weeks of negotiations, almost all the countries of the world reached an agreement, Monday morning, at the end of the 15th world conference (COP15) on biodiversity. The challenge was daunting: to set an international framework for the current decade capable of halting, and even reversing, the collapse of life.

“It is a historic text which has just been adopted, well I hope it has been adopted. The words of the European Commissioner for the Environment, Virginijus Sinkevičius, shortly after the final hammer blow of the COP15 on biodiversity, reflect the general incomprehension. A few moments earlier, China – which was co-organizing the summit with Canada – decided to adopt the agreement with forceps, ignoring the frank disagreement of the Congo. In principle, the decision had to be taken by consensus between the 196 States Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity present in Montreal.

Like others, the Central African country felt that several conditions were missing from the final document, the fruit of four years of work and two weeks of intense negotiations. Among these: the money needed to protect and restore biodiversity.

Chinese Environment Minister Huang Runqiu and members of the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity welcome the adoption of the new global biodiversity framework in Montreal, December 19, 2022 © UN biodiversity / Flickr
money for the living
The new “Kunming-Montreal Framework on Global Biodiversity” provides for funding dedicated to living organisms (public, private, national or international) to reach 200 billion dollars per year by 2030. However, certain high estimates of the amounts required fluctuate between 600 and 823 billion dollars per year, according to the Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations (IDDRI).

Another subject of tension: many countries of the South demanded support from the countries of the North to the tune of 100 billion dollars per year by 2030 for the preservation and restoration of biodiversity; the framework finally foresees 20 billion dollars per year by 2025, and 30 billion at the latest in 2030.

Finally, while developing countries demanded the creation of a dedicated biodiversity fund, which the countries of the North opposed, the biodiversity money will finally be managed within the Global Environment Facility (GEF) , as proposed by Colombia. At least initially.

End clap to everyone’s surprise when the Democratic Republic of Congo had not given its agreement. But the legal advice of the expert of the Convention validates the procedure. © Earth negotiations bulletin
For a true sharing of benefits from genetic resources
The key issue of this COP, the sharing of benefits from the genetic resources of developing countries exploited by companies from Northern countries, for example in cosmetics or medicines ( our article ), was the subject of an agreement . This formalizes the creation of a mechanism whose workings will be determined during COP16 in Turkey.

In addition to additional funding, subsidies harmful to life must be reduced by at least 500 billion dollars per year by 2030. Subsidies granted to conventional agriculture are particularly targeted, as this constitutes the main threat on biodiversity, according to the Convention on Biological Diversity .

The text “does not break the house, but it saves the furniture” , in the words of Pierre Cannet, director of advocacy and campaigns for WWF France. “There was something for everyone,” greets a European diplomat. Everyone agrees that the new framework contains real advancements over its predecessors.

Protect 30% of land and seas by 2030
The European Union had made this its flagship proposal: the text endorses the objective of ensuring the protection of at least 30% of land, seas, coasts and inland waters by 2030. By the same deadline, 30 % of degraded areas will require “effective” restoration to promote ecosystem integrity, functions and services.

The agreement says nothing about the quality of these protections, which can range from putting the areas “under cover” to accommodating human activities – fishing, hunting, logging, etc. This point has provoked the ire of certain NGOs, including Bloom, who accuses the French government of having maneuvered so that there is no mention of an objective of 10% of areas under “strong” protection – which denies the executive.

This map shows the land areas (in green) and the marine areas (in blue) which have the status of protected areas in December 2022. Click to go directly to the site which lists them. © Protected Planet
Agriculture: no mention of meat or livestock
Alas, the final text contains no mention of animal husbandry or meat diets , while meat still requires more agricultural land. These are often borrowed from natural environments, aggravating the climate crisis and the collapse of life.

The agreement pleads weakly for a “sustainable management” of spaces dedicated to agriculture, aquaculture, fishing or forestry, through the use of practices that respect biodiversity. Among these: agroecology, “sustainable intensification” (producing more on the same land and using fewer inputs while increasing yields, according to the FAO) and “other innovative approaches” . Enough to allow everyone to see noon at their doorstep.

The planned reduction of pesticides
Notable fact and applauded by many European observers : by 2030, the new framework plans to reduce by at least 50% the “ pesticide risks » ; a more effective formulation than tackling the volumes spread alone. As Paul Leadly, a researcher specializing in population and community ecology at Paris-Saclay, tells us, while the use of pesticides has fallen by 40% in the United States, the risks have been multiplied by four due to a greater product toxicity. Some large emerging countries such as Brazil or Argentina have tried to influence to obtain a soft agreement with their agro-industrial sector and have scrapped in vain, in particular with the European Union, to remove the mention of pesticides.

Excessive discharges of nutrients into the environment – ​​such as nitrates from pig manure which destroy waterways and create green tides in Brittany – will also have to be halved in eight years. The parties also pledged to “work towards the elimination of plastic pollution” . In addition, the text encourages, without requiring, companies to report on their impact on biodiversity and the actions implemented to limit it.

Equity, rights of indigenous peoples and gender recognized
Indigenous peoples are the best stewards of biodiversity ( Green ) and their role in ecosystem conservation is recognized in this new global biodiversity framework. The text calls for balance and harmony with “Mother Earth”, as demanded by several Latin American countries.

A representative of indigenous people in the premises of the Palais des Congrès de Montréal, where COP15 biodiversity took place. © UN Biodiversity
Finally, the framework recognizes the need to take into account women, young people and people with disabilities in decision-making and to ensure the protection of environmental defenders, who are increasingly victims of abuse and even Assassination ( Green ).

And after ?
“What is not quantified and dated is not accomplished, we know it from Aichi” , remarks Pierre Cannet, of WWF France. The 20 objectives (known as from Aichi ”) of the previous global framework decided in 2010 all failed ( Green ), in particular because the text only provided for a few implementation indicators. An analysis of all national targets is planned at each of the COPs, which are held every two years. Then, the first assessment of the implementation of the national roadmaps will take place in four years.

The countries are now responsible for putting this new framework to music in their domestic policies. From 2023, France must write its new national biodiversity roadmap. It will also have to find a way to stop subsidizing harmful agricultural practices, seriously reduce the use of pesticides or the artificialization of soils, etc. “Everyone will have to live up to this Montreal agreement so that we can show that it is not a paper agreement” , explains the French Minister of Ecology, Christophe Béchu, who also applauds a “historical” text.

The text “does not break the house, but it saves the furniture” , in the words of Pierre Cannet, director of advocacy and campaigns for WWF France. “There was something for everyone,” greets a European diplomat. If the living isn’t out of the woods, everyone agrees that the new framework contains real advances over its predecessors.

ALL HUMAN COMMENTS APPRICIATED. ALL LIKE CLICKS AND ABUSE CHUCKED IN THE BIN.

CONTACT: BOBDILLON33@GMAIL.COM

THE BEADY EYE SAYS. WE ARE ALL BEING HOODWINKED WHEN IT COMES TO CONTROLLING CLIMATE CHANGE EMMISSIONS.

06 Tuesday Dec 2022

Posted by in Carbon Emissions., Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAYS. WE ARE ALL BEING HOODWINKED WHEN IT COMES TO CONTROLLING CLIMATE CHANGE EMMISSIONS.

Tags

, ,

(FOUR MINUTE READ)

I recently came across this app that sums up where we are with – CLIMATE CHANGE.

Let’s calculate your Carbon Footprint. Climate Hero.  Pay x to offset your climate foot print.

God knows how many meeting we now have had of world leaders when it comes to Climate Change. From the UN to the Gs’ and Climate Summits, and it still remains beyond their comprehension that to reduce Carbon Emissions we must put a halt to producing energy with fossil and gas resources.

Instead:

We have are unenforceable Promises,  Declarations,  Proposals Agreement,  Accords, Groups and Organisations under ever letter of the alphabet turning a blind eye to the raw fact that carbon has being turned into a product to be traded.

This is a trading system through which countries / corporations can buy or sell units of greenhouse-gas emissions in an effort to  either meet their national limits on emissions or off set their emission’s  while they continue will – nilly to pump carbon into the atmosphere.

. The Kyoto Protocol assigned a unit of emissions payment to equal to 1 metric tonne of CO2 equivalent.

This TRADING comes with labels like Carbon Free, Net Zero, Offset, Mitigation

All ways of  (COP) out of  doing any think.

Like REDD:  Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation with Cop 27introduced Sovereign Carbon Credits paving the way for private trading and financing of nature.

You dont have to be a genius to understand that temperature rise is only the beginning of the story.

The consequences of climate change now include, among others, intense droughts, water scarcity, severe fires, rising sea levels, flooding, melting polar ice, catastrophic storms and declining biodiversity, mass migration by both animals and humans  that will eventually led to more wars.  Because the Earth is a system, where everything is connected, changes in one area can influence changes in all others.

There is no doubt that  Climate action requires significant financial investments by governments and businesses. But climate inaction is vastly more expensive.

So instead of worthless invisible funds why not give non repayable grants to every house hold to install solar panels.

To get to net zero emissions by 2050 it is not by giving Earth Shot millions to projects that deserve recognition in their innovative  to tackle Climate Change but to arm the peoples of the world to do something positive by converting to Green energy,  starting now.

Why not because the capitalist system is still between two stool profit for profit sake or profit for sustainability.

Progress is a metaphor

For benefitting man;

We know exactly what it’s for

But wonder if it can.

The next best thing to knowing a fact is said to be where to find it;

But more than that, its how to act, once you have truly defined it.

SO WE ALL KNOW THAT it is critical that all mitigation and adaptation policy are underpinned by not burning fossil fuels that are generating greenhouse gas emissions and methane even it there are offset by paying a few dollars more for your Flight or breathing.

Of course one would be naïve to think that Government’s who’s revenue comes from the use of energy are going to cut themselves off from this revenue by converting the production of energy to free for all. The primary source of revenue is taxation.

THIS IS WHERE THE  PANDORA  BOX.OPENS.

The problem is that these renewable sources aren’t super reliable and at present there is no way of storing the energy other than directing it into the Grid or private batteries that need to be attached to the grid.

There is no problem (in principle) with building enough solar panel arrays, wind farms, tidal, wave and geothermal energy plants to power our planet. There is nothing here that we don’t already know how to do. The only problem is with funding it and getting people to accept it.

We at the moment except.

Nuclear power plants: Highly stable and reliable. They are “dirty” because of the nuclear waste hype. There is also problem with uranium mining and processing as well.

Coal power plants: Operable and reliable. Their huge footsteps are mining processes, CO2 emissions, NOx, SOx, dust pollution, heavy metal pollution…

Gas/oil powerplants: Operable, reliable. Their drawbacks are mining process, CO2 emissions and political compromises.

Biomass powerplants: Low scale source. Extremely low power density (MW output per km2 needed for supply).

Water powerplants: very fast, reliable. Their drawbacks are huge or humongous dams for high-power ones or low power output; disruption of the stream.

Wind turbines: Power-grid disruptor #1, unpredictable source. Unrecyclable blades. High risk in bad weather (too windy)

Solar heat powerplants: Huge area consumption for mirror fields plus tower in the sky. Suitable only for scarcely populated areas.

Photovoltaics: Power-grid disruptor #2 (only because it does not disrupt after sunset). Unpredictable power source. Extremely low power density (MW per km2 of ground consumed). Extremely toxic production. Unrecyclable.

HOWEVER ITS NAIVE TO THINK THAT WE CAN HAVE GREEN ENGERY TOTAL FREE OF EMMISIONS.

Where are we?

World Climate Summits have become a key platform for connecting investment markets not policies to avert disaster.

With the last one in Egyptian promising trillions to countries that can claim Punch’s Pilot absolution that its not their fault.

07.11.2022_WCS_Logocloud.jpg

Energy is there and all we can do about it is change the forms. It is a direct follow of the conservation of energy.

There is no thermal engine that produces more (mechanical) energy than it consumes. Even solar and wind need raw materials.

Solar panel takes a little less than a decade to produce as much energy as was used to make it.

Anytime one is using energy, they are using it on the environment’s behalf.

IN A IDEAL WORLD WE COULD CONVERT tracts of unusable desert that has no significant ecological value and which gets uninterrupted sunshine for 300+ days of the year that could be covered in solar panels.

I have advocated that to tackle Climate change Governments must impower their people to do so.

Non Repayable grants to insulate their homes and install solar power would be a good start.

You have to start on time as nothing in the universe will produce more energy.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

Contact: bobdillon33@gmail.com

THE BEADY EYE ANALYSIS THE OUTCOME OF COP27.

23 Wednesday Nov 2022

Posted by in Climate Change., Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ANALYSIS THE OUTCOME OF COP27.

Tags

, ,

( Four minute read)

ONCE MORE ITS A JOKE.

Carbon budgets and climate catastrophe will not wait for the 2050 ‘net-zero’ goals of governments around the world because climate does not warm in a gradual and linear fashion, but with tripping feedback loops that will lead to rapidly escalating effects. There can be no more hiding, and no more denying.An illuminated sign in the plenary hall at the COP27 climate conference in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, on Nov. 7.

Cop 27 concluded with a historic decision to establish and operationalize a loss and damage fund.

Now comes the difficult part – the fund must be set up, and filled with cash. There is no agreement yet on how the finance should be provided and where it should come from.

In fact, the agreement that emerged from Sharm el-Sheikh barely improved on the Glasgow Climate Pact.

More than 100 Heads of State and Governments, over 35,000 participants took twelve  days to produce a ten paged Sharm el-Sheikh Implementation Plan document full of – Encourages, Recognizes, Invites, Notes, Highlights,  Calls on, Urges ,Expresses serious concern,  Affirms , Welcomes the establishment, with no actually plan to solve the problem of global warming, rather than just paying for the destruction caused by it.

The demands for climate reparations from wealthy countries are so absurd, so unscientific, and so offensive to natural justice that it is difficult to know where the criticism should begin.

First, the claims are rooted in indignation rather than science.

Developing countries have been seeking financial assistance for loss and damage – money needed to rescue and rebuild the physical and social infrastructure of countries devastated by extreme weather – for nearly three decades.

Secondly of the $100bn a year rich countries promised they would receive from 2020 – a promise still not fulfilled – only about $20bn goes to adaptation.

Finally achieving agreement on a fund is a major milestone. Now comes the difficult part – the fund must be set up, and filled with cash. There is no agreement yet on how the finance should be provided and where it should come from.

Reform of the kind widely discussed at Cop27 could involve a recapitalisation of the development banks to allow them to provide far more assistance to the developing world.

Nicholas Stern, a climate economist and peer, has calculated the developing world will need $2.4tn (£2tn) a year from 2030. But this is only about 5% more than the investment they would require anyway, much of which would go into high-carbon infrastructure. The World Bank could provide about half of those funds, he estimates.

On the mean time the effects of human-caused global warming are happening now, are irreversible for people alive today, and will worsen as long as humans add greenhouse gases to the atmosphere.A triptych image showing from left to right: a firefighter in front of a fire; dry, cracked ground; and a hurricane near Florida, U.S.

Heat-trapping greenhouse gases are already having widespread effects on the environment: glaciers and ice sheets are shrinking, river and lake ice is breaking up earlier, plant and animal geographic ranges are shifting, and plants and trees are blooming sooner.

Increasing magnitudes of warming increase the likelihood of severe, pervasive, and irreversible impacts.

With such a huge crisis facing the entire planet, the international response should be swift and decisive. Yet progress by world governments has been achingly slow. Many commitments to reduce carbon emissions have been set, but few are binding and targets are often missed.

We all know what is needed – instead of leprechauns  pots of gold at the end of the rainbow  Keep fossil fuels in the ground. Invest in renewable energy. Switch to sustainable transport. Improve farming. Restore nature. Protect forests. Protect the oceans. Reduce how much people consume. Reduce plastic.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

Contact : bobdillon33@gamil.com

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. 1.5 CELSIUS IS NOT AN OBJECTIVE BUT A LIMIT.

14 Monday Nov 2022

Posted by in #whatif.com, A solution to Climate change., Climate Change., COP27., HUMAN ABILITIES.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. 1.5 CELSIUS IS NOT AN OBJECTIVE BUT A LIMIT.

Tags

, , , ,

 

( Four minute read)

We are 1.1 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels now.

1.5 degrees C is not a cliff; civilization does not automatically expire if temperatures exceed that threshold.

Humanity has nearly all the knowledge and tools needed to limit temperature rise to 1.5 degrees C.

The challenges are not primarily technological; they are political and economic.

What are these challenges?

World economy, which currently relies on fossil fuels for 80% of its energy, from collapsing in the process, the demand for these fuels must be radically reduced.

A major reason the world’s forests are felled at such catastrophic rates is to grow more food products, especially beef, soy, and palm oil.

Climate greenwashing that is, rhetorical promises by governments, corporations, or banks that claim to solve the crisis but may or may not measure up in practice.

The concept of “net zero emissions” demands special attention.

“Net zero”  is not necessarily a dodge, but offsets have a spotty record of achievement.

Many net-zero commitments by governments and businesses cite 2050 as the year when net zero will be reached. Indeed, roughly 80% of the world economy is now covered by commitments of net zero by 2050.

However “Net zero ”at the moment means giving a country or company that reduce emissions ( not to absolute zero;) rather, some emissions will continue, but they will be “offset” by countervailing measures that extract carbon from the atmosphere so the net result is zero emissions.

Promising that emissions will end by 2050 is easy for today’s politicians and corporate leaders, but that goal is only reachable if actual emissions fall by half in the next decade. Climate delay is just as lethal, precisely because 40 years of failing to act has left zero time for further delay.

2050 is far enough off that bold claims might seem possible, but those claims are only credible if they include real (i.e., non-offsets), substantial emissions reductions during the next 10 years, so whether such commitments carry an action plan that credibly cuts emissions in half by 2030 we will have to wait and see. 

Why is that humanity waited so long to start the job.

No one wants to pay or to carry the can.

Money is at the heart of the climate emergency and its solutions.

At the moment, the world’s governments provide roughly $5.9 trillion a year in subsidies for fossil fuels, according to the International Monetary Fund. Meanwhile, the vast majority of governments’ stimulus spending to revive Covid-battered economies has reinforced the fossil fuel status quo rather than boosted the zero-carbon activities needed for a climate-safe future.

The challenge going forward is to halt spending that harms the climate and redirect spending to actions that help it.

This requires leaving most of fossil fuel reserves in the ground. But those reserves were (and still are) counted as wealth in the stock holdings of investors; leaving them unburned would render trillions of dollars of invested wealth worthless.

The main reason we waited so long is that some very rich and powerful economic and political interests knew climate action would interfere with their profits and privilege.

Fossil fuel companies now face dozens of lawsuits from governments and civil society groups demanding compensation for the climate damages the companies’ lying helped cause.

As the extreme weather in recent years has shown, climate impacts are punishing even after “only” 1.1 degrees C of temperature rise. This is especially so for the roughly two billion people who live in the (usually poorer) countries most vulnerable to climate change. Temperatures and impacts are bound to increase in the years ahead, if only because humanity can’t halt emissions overnight. Hence, the need for what climate experts call “adaptation”: actions to reduce one’s vulnerability to the impacts of climate change. Adaptation has never gotten the attention mitigation gets, perhaps because it was assumed, wrongly, that the rich could adapt relatively easily to rising temperatures

Now that smart money is abandoning fossil fuels, two big questions are coming into focus: How much of the rest of the market will follow the same course? And will enough of the money that’s leaving fossil fuels now flow to the technologies and practices needed to defuse the climate emergency?

The key is what governments will do to encourage private banks and investors to stop funding climate destruction and instead finance climate solutions.

Finally:  In the end we will all pay.

So here is a suggestion.

Rather than begging;

Why not create a perpetual World Aid Fund, funded by all of us, which is both transparent and fair and above corruption. 

How could this be achieved:

Instead of private bankers, central banks, country governments etc,  making financial promises they underwrite the issue and interest returns on  (Non Tradable)  GREEN BONDS that are eligible to enter a Lotto style monthly draw.   

These Bonds could be purchased on line from 5 euros (with no interest) to 500 euros and up paying x% amount of interest. 

In the meantime we have the technology to place 0.05% on all economic activities that are for Profit sake only.  Example Profit Seeking Algorithms, Currency transactions over $50,000 , Sovereign Wealth Funds Acquisition, Gambling, etc. 

Who would Control the Distribute these funds: 

The United Nations out side any Veto influence. 

What would the funds to use for.  Sustainability Projects. Green energy transformation, Reduction of inequality. 

Who would monitor there effects:  The Earth. 

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

Contact. bobdillon33@gmail.com.     

 

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: WHAT CAN THE WORLD OF SPORT DO TO COMBAT CO2 EMMISSIONS.

06 Sunday Nov 2022

Posted by in #whatif.com, 2022: The year we need to change.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS: WHAT CAN THE WORLD OF SPORT DO TO COMBAT CO2 EMMISSIONS.

Tags

, ,

( Six minute read)

Most of the world’s governments agree by now that global warming poses a serious threat to the future well-being of all people and they agree that it is desirable to reduce the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere by lowering our emissions of CO2.

But it would appear that we have given up with the emphases how moving to Adaptation. Another words prepare for the consequences rather then trying to prevent them. The problem isn’t how to convert the world but it remains and will remain just who will pay for the conversion to keep global temperature rise below 2C.

( About 20 billion tonnes of CO2 would need to be removed from the atmosphere every year by 2100.)

Cop26 – Glasgow

Most of the world ( at least 84% now have some sort of adaptation plan but there is plenty of variation across these plans.

The Disparity between the money needed to meet an adaptation targets and the money actually available is laudable as the funds needed will not keep up as the impact of climate intensify and most of this kind of finance is in the form of loans trapping poorer countries in long cycles of debt.

A simple “carbon tax” approach does not guarantee any particular total emissions amount and if a country wanted to use such a tax to meet specific goals, the tax would have to be adjusted frequently, which businesses would have a hard time dealing with (they like predictability in things like taxes).

Electrical cars won’t do it because it take 80,000 miles for the carbon of a new EV to balance out with a new gasoline car.

Planting billion of trees won’t do it in time.

Climate change is not an American, a Chinese, an Oil industry, problem it is a species thriving problem.

What’s is needed out of the forthcoming COP Summit in Egypt is to stop tearing each other apart and instead fund adaptation to the changes we are now all facing.

What we will get is two weeks of the usual verbal without any world financial commitment’s

—————————-

We could regulate our way to zero carbon emissions, but this will not solve the problem because once China comes out of Covid lockdown its admission will dwarf any regulations.

What is needed (as I have said in many previous post)  is to create a perpetual non begging world fund

So why not ask Sport the biggest industry (with its associated to the gambling Industry  and media Sponsorship) to give a helping hand.

Sport is not just about participation. It is also part of the commercial world, managed and marketed to make money. Sponsorship and the media are now significant influences on sport.

With the advent and overwhelming popularity of social media—including Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram—Sky Sports apps.

So what could sport do?

One only has to look at the carbon emissions generated by the forthcoming World Football Cup.

The World Cup is very important and it is bound to have a carbon footprint.

There will be a direct human cost to this tournament. This is a huge amount of emissions for one sporting event.

FIFA says the Qatar World Cup will have a footprint of 3.6 million tonnes of equivalent carbon waste it will be ten times this.

The offset scheme the World Cup has chosen doesn’t remove carbon from the atmosphere, so it’s a bogus term. It’s very misleading to call this a carbon neutral World Cup. They’re not even removing carbon to compensate.””

FIFA’s claim this is the greenest World Cup ever doesn’t make any sense.

The Tokyo Olympics also made a bold offset claim before the Games.

After confirming that Tokyo 2020 was carbon-negative.

(According to the report, the Games generated around 1.96 million tonnes of CO2e. This figure would have been around 2.76 million tonnes if domestic spectators were able to attend thanks to Covid. ) It’s an impressive feat, given that the event’s estimated carbon footprint—2.3 million metric tons of CO2—is equal to the annual emissions from about half a million cars. The highlighted of the Games was the fact that the athletes’ medals in Tokyo were made from metals extracted from recycled electronic and electrical devices.

Even setting aside the carbon footprint question, the Tokyo Games are representative of an overall declining level of sustainability in the Olympics over time. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) has mandated that all Olympic Games from 2030 will need to be certified as carbon-neutral or carbon-negative.

This can only be achieve by stopping the Olympic circus and ask the world to build a permanent Olympic stadium in Greece where the games originated.

The circus of Formal One could also do the same by  build a permanent racing track.

Indeed the great majority of world sporting events could take place in permanent position.

Of course the chances of this happing is zero.

We now have over two hundred countries attending the Cop27 conference which marks the 30th anniversary of the adoption of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change A  Reason for hope or doomed to disappoint?

As we once more witness countries across the world fail to meet climate commitments to keep global temperatures below a fateful 2 degrees Celsius, can this year’s COP27 in Egypt rise above the failures of the past — or is it destined to disappoint?

It’s a matter of defining what criteria will be used to measure the progress. Only 79.6 billion dollars’ worth of climate finance have been provided, far less than the 340 billion per year needed for adaptation by 2030, according to the UN.

With out a world Aid Fund COP conferences have served very little or no purpose at all other then helping prepare the ground for future conferences.

We all know that Climate change leads to population displacement, tensions over natural resources and challenges powerful interests,”

SPORT COULD AGREED TO PLACING A 0.005% COMMISSION, ON ALL GAMBLING, ON ALL PRIZE MONEY, ON ALL SPONSORSHIPS ON ALL MEDIIA  AND SPONCERSHIPS DEALS, ON ALL TRANSFER FEES, ON ALL TICKETS TO WORLD EVENTS.

Without a world perpetual aid fund  the alternative is war and power struggles at the international level.

Cop27 is now all about money: ( See previous post. How to create a perpetual World Aid Fund – fair and transparent)

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin

Contact: bobdillon33@gmail.com

,

THE BEADY EYE’S. OPEN LETTER TO THE DELEGATES OF THE NEXT COP-OUT CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE IN EGYPT.

28 Friday Oct 2022

Posted by in 2022: The year we need to change., Beady Eyes: Open Letters., Climate Change., Open Letter., Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE’S. OPEN LETTER TO THE DELEGATES OF THE NEXT COP-OUT CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE IN EGYPT.

Tags

, , ,

Dear Delegate,

When it comes to climate change the verbal diarrhoea,    must be stopped. Picture of the Earth

Is is no longer up to scientists to bear the mental burden on the climate?

No, it’s up to the decision-makers, and the more action levers we have, the stronger this charge must be.

It’s now a race against time and it is critical that business leaders and states embrace it.

“States are in the process of bending the emissions curve downwards.” but their reduction must be much (much) more radical.

Nearly half of humanity is living in the danger zone – now.

Many ecosystems are at the point of no return – now.

Unchecked carbon pollution is forcing the world’s most vulnerable on a frog march to destruction – now.”

Half measures are no longer an option.

Secretary General António Guterres

“This is the defining issue of our time, nobody has the right to sacrifice international action on climate change for any reason,”

Its just over 100 days since the UN climate action summit in Glasgow, COP26, and no doubt you have seen the second in a series of three reports from the the UN’s top climate scientists, a damning indictment of failed global leadership on climate.

Prioritise climate or face catastrophe.

The world is now about 1.2C warmer than it was in the 19th Century – and the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has risen by 50%.

Scientists believe at least 550 species could be lost this century if action is not taken.

Current global problems such as inflation, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the high prices of energy and food are distracting governments, but the core problem remains the same no one wants to pay.

This is the main problem no one wants to pay.

Climate finance is critical to addressing climate change because large-scale investments are required to significantly reduce emissions, notably in sectors that emit large quantities of greenhouse gases. Climate finance is equally important for adaptation, for which significant financial resources will be similarly required to allow societies and economies to adapt to the adverse effects and reduce the impacts of climate change.

Developing nations are calling for payments for “loss and damage” – the impacts faced now.

An option for making payments was excluded from the Bonn climate talks, after pushback from wealthier nations who feared they would be forced to pay compensation for decades.

Financial institutions might be  taking an increasing number of mitigation actions to prepare for a low-carbon future, the biggest investment opportunity of this generation but financial system governance bodies need to incentivize opportunities to invest in adaptation and resilience.

There are many papers of reference on this subject, most are so complicated that one would need a life time to read them.

Mobilizing all sources of finance toward adaptation and resilience requires all of us to have the opportunity to invest, because  there are limitations on public balance sheets to finance the level of investment needed to meet adaptation and resilience needs.

Integrating climate considerations—both risks and opportunities—will be fundamentally important for aligning the financial system toward low-carbon, climate-resilient investments, and ensuring there is at least as much attention given to investment in adaptation and resilience as to mitigation.

Promoting greater use of blended finance approaches will drive  Finance Today for the Climate Resilient Society of Tomorrow.

So here again are a few suggestion to spread the cost, to create a preputial fund to tackle the problem in both fair and transparent way.

APPLY A 0.05%  WORLD AID COMMISSION ON ALL TRANSACTIONS THAT ARE FOR PROFIT FOR PROFIT SAKE.

IE.  ALL FOREGINE EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS OVER 50,000$, ON ALL SOVEREIGHTY WEALTH FUNDS ACQUISITIONS ,  ALL GAMBLING WINS OVER 500$.

THE UNITED NATIONS TO ISSUE GREEN BOND ON THE STOCK MARKET WITH GUARANTEED RETURNS BACK BY THE CENTRAL BANKS OF THE WORLD . THESE BONDS ARE ALSO ELIGIBLE FOR  ENTER TO A LOTTO TYPE WEEKLY  DRAW.

Currently, 17 million people are estimated to be facing food insecurity in east Africa because of drought.

Some scientists believe world leaders have left it too late and no matter what is agreed at COP27, 1.5C will not be achieved.

Instead of slowing down the decarbonization of the global economy, now is the time to accelerate the energy transition to a renewable energy future, declaring fossil fuels a “dead end for our planet, for humanity, and yes, for economies,” and calling for developed countries, multilateral Development Banks, private financiers, and others to form coalitions to help major emerging economies end the use of  verbal green.

We need to tackle the issue in a less confrontational way. Either everybody wins, or everybody losses.

It’s not so much that climate will end the human race or life on earth as we know it.

The result will be mass migration, wars, and barbarism.

All human support appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

Contact: bobdillon33@gmail’com

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. TO SECURE A FUTURE ALL OF US MUST FIGHT THE RIGHT WAR RIGHT NOW.

19 Wednesday Oct 2022

Posted by in 2022: The year we need to change., Climate Change., Disconnection., Earth, Education., Energy, Environment, Evolution, Extermination., Human Collective Stupidity., Human Exploration., Human values., Humanity., Life., Modern day life., Natural World Disasters, Nuclear power., Our Common Values., Profiteering., Purpose of life., Real life experience's, Reality., Renewable Energy., State of the world, Sustaniability, Technology v Humanity, The common good., The essence of our humanity., The Future, The Obvious., The state of the World., THE WORLD YOU LIVE IN., THIS IS THE STATE OF THE WORLD.  , Truth, Unanswered Questions., Uncategorized, VALUES, We can leave a legacy worthwhile., What is shaping our world., WHAT IS TRUTH, What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. TO SECURE A FUTURE ALL OF US MUST FIGHT THE RIGHT WAR RIGHT NOW.

Tags

, , ,

If humanity wants to hope to contain global warming below 1.5°C – Governments must close the gap between net zero rhetoric and reality.

There can be no more hiding, and no more denying deluding yourself with a lot of greenwashing.

Political leaders, blinded by capital and powerful private interests, have long decided Earth is a small price to pay for the yachts, mansions, private jets and record profits of the one percent.

In Glasgow at the COP26 climate conference we watched as world leaders came up with new excuses, symbolic targets and new ways to silence the progressive voices who opposed them.

Global heating is supercharging extreme weather at an astonishing speed, this life-altering issue which we are NOW all witnessing daily – Somalia, Nigeria, Pakistan, is not getting the urgency and attention it demands.

Exploitation and development of new oil and gas fields must stop this year.

If governments are serious about the climate crisis, there can be no new investments in oil, gas and coal, from now – from this year.

It’s Now or Never.

A huge part can be done with existing technologies.

These technologies can and will create billions of jobs to drive a sustainable world, but it remains a fight of David against Goliath, because of how we measure our well being.

How we evaluate what we are doing needs to change.

GDP is a totally numbers-driven index that does not produce the true picture.

There are growing calls to find GDP alternatives to measure countries’ wealth and welfare.

GDP can’t accurately represent the wealth of a country when it ignores how money is divvied up.

Considering GDP alone, a rich country where 10% of the population controls 75% of the wealth (looking at you, United States) may rank higher than a poorer country with a more even distribution of wealth.

One of GDP’s biggest flaws is that it counts tragedies as economic bonuses. If a hurricane or tornado hits and a country spends millions of dollars rebuilding, those expenses boost GDP, even though people lost their homes, jobs, and lives.

GDP ignores many crucial ways to measure the wealth of a country: clean air, health, life span, gender equality, opportunity, education, and more. This is understandable – GDP wasn’t developed to rank countries’ welfare, but simply to measure money as the world recovered from the Great Depression.

Of course GDP cant be replaced over night, but it can be complemented by a Thriving Places Index (TPI) and this index could easily be expanded to other parts of the world.

TPI’s primary focuses are sustainability, equality, and local conditions. Unlike GDP, this index measures equality by investigating how evenly distributed life expectancy and wellbeing are across a country.

Interestingly, the U.N. encourages nations to use it alongside their gross national income data. They say that it can help governments assess national policy by “asking how two countries with the same level of GNI per capita can end up with different human development outcomes.”

By factoring in the ecological footprint, inequality, wellbeing, and life expectancy of a country, it provides a simple but rounded glance at the wealth of a country.

This alone will not however solve the problems that are now on the horizon.

We must implement measurements by monetising environmental damage factors to help countries better understand exactly where they stand environmentally.

The Green GDP is a noble effort to factor in the cost of climate change in a way that people whose focus is money can appreciate. While subjective data can immediately turn some financially conservative parties off, putting a number on the impact of environmental negligence could potentially hit home.

Our Profit driven societies focused too much on an idea that futuristic technologies will save the world from climate chaos, rather than focusing on what can be done today. If cuts to carbon are left to the future and not made in this decade, it will be too late to stay within the 1.5C limit.

What are the crucial new technologies in development for combatting Climate Change?

Clean energy is perhaps the biggest issue to tackle.

Convert carbon dioxide into a usable energy source using sunlight.

There are numerous projects trying to achieve this, but most of the hydrogen used today is extracted from natural gas NG00, -3.93% in a process that emits carbon dioxide as well as the more-fleeting, but more-potent, methane.

Electrical transport and advanced batteries?

Particularly for use in electric vehicles; hydrogen; and carbon capture appears to be the miracle solution to reduce the heavy ecological impact of transport. This technology is not all green under the hood. Even before having driven a single kilometre, the electric vehicle has emissions almost twice as high as those of a thermal vehicle.

Big data has big implications in creating awareness about the consequences of climate change but it’s harvesting with the use of non transparent and unregulated algorithms.

Crowdsourcing for environmental solutions by gathering journalists, scientists, technologists, and people passionate about sustainability is creating a new wave of environmentalism.

Mobile apps such as Oroeco is an app that tracks your carbon footprint by placing a carbon value on everything you buy, eat, and do. However most Apps are profit seeking and like Big data they remain un -transparent and unregulated.

Interactive maps really drive home the point of climate change.

All of these technologies use microchips in order to operate and these are made from rare finite resources.

For the first time, a mining company is preparing to mine the seabed to collect rocks rich in metals for the batteries of electric cars. A practice that promises to destroy ecosystems that are still unexplored and that could constitute a ticking “climate bomb”. Poisoning of fresh water reserves, artificialization and loss of biodiversity, toxicity for humans, radioactive pollution, occupation of agricultural land… The extraction and transformation of raw materials are much more polluting than for the fossil car.

In the end here is where we are.

Some of the highlights included a prediction of violent conflicts and civil wars, extreme poverty and the loss of several points of gross domestic product in some developing nations, mass extinctions, and an intense, regular pattern of natural disasters.

The average decline of the species analysed was 68% in 2020, and 60% in 2018, revealing an accelerating collapse of biodiversity around the world. “We can tell ourselves that 1% is not much, but losing 1% in two years is absolutely colossal. The mere fact that this index is not improving is a disaster in itself

Taking into account a global population rise of about 2 billion people, as well as the need to supply electricity to 785 million people who do not have access to it, and clean cooking to the 2.6 billion people who currently lack it there is no more time for multinationals to obtain justice.

Governments must fine them.

Instead we see governments like the UK licensing new oil and gas fields in the North Sea and has also mooted a new coalmine for coking coal alongside introducing fracking.

Instead we see Energy being use a a weapon of war.

We all know what is necessary for life however in the age of instant gratification, we have little appreciation of where it all come from and we remain unwilling to pay for a future that only exists on the planet we all inhabit.

A large-scale nuclear war would, by all scientific projections, be a planetary disaster of the highest order.

A large -scale climate event would be far worse. Here to day gone to morrow against watch our demise over a few generations.

So every one of us must engage now. ( See previous posts as how this can be achieved)

The simplest thing you can do is educate others.

Tell people there are other ways to measure a country’s wealth.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

Contact: bobdillo33@bobdillon33

THE BEADY EYE HAS A FEW QUESTIONS FOR YOU. OUR FINITE EARTH CANNOT FULFILL THE RESOURCES – PROFIGATE DREAMS OF SO MANY PEOPLE.

17 Saturday Sep 2022

Posted by in #whatif.com, 2022: The year we need to change., Inflation.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE HAS A FEW QUESTIONS FOR YOU. OUR FINITE EARTH CANNOT FULFILL THE RESOURCES – PROFIGATE DREAMS OF SO MANY PEOPLE.

Tags

, , , , ,

Ten minute read.

THE MAIN QUESTION IS WHERE WILL THE CURVE OF EARTHS TEMPERATURE INFLATIONS TAKE US FROM HERE?

Right now the scientific consensus is that the population of the world will reach a peak some time later this century. The world population is projected to reach 10.4 billion people sometime in the 2080s and remain there until 2100, according to the United Nations Population Division.A 3D illustration of a woman watching a climate change simulation of Earth.

How many people can the earth support?  What is it carrying capacity?

When it comes to carrying capacity, it’s a matter of mode of production, mode of consumption, who has access to what and how.

Not all human activities have to be environmentally costly but the future of the world population is driven by a mixture of survival and reproduction. As a result more and more countries, once they reach a certain stage of socioeconomic cultural development, tend to converge towards about two children [per couple] or fewer.

In 1679, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, a scientist and inventor of the microscope, predicted that Earth could support 13.4 billion people.

From 1930 to 1974, the Earth‘s population doubled again, in just 44 years.

Everybody knows that environmental changes, such as pollution or disease, and climate change can increase or decrease a habitat’s carrying capacity but there is little consensus in how many Homo sapiens our planet can support.

But is the human population expected to continue growing at this rate?

Is there an upper limit to how many humans our planet can support?

Before the twentieth century no one ever lived through a doubling of the entire human population and the enormity of this and our predicament is now prevenient in climate change.

For instance, natural constraints include food scarcity and inhospitable environments.

If the Earth System gets into the region of chaotic behaviour, we will lose all hope of somehow fixing the problem. The result will be the inflationary economic paradigm itself will be the long term disaster.

If we want to affect how many people planet Earth can support, we will need to decide how many people want Jaguars with four wheels and how many want jaguars with four legs.

————————-

Here is a broad sketch of what is in store and where we’re heading. if we don’t curtail climate change and our unchecked use of fossil fuels.

Where is Earth’s climate headed?

That depends significantly on exactly what our activity is over the next few decades.

For example, the human population can only grow so large and can only have so many carbon-emitting activities; and pollution will eventually degrade the environment. At some point in the future, carbon output will reach a maximum limit.

In the worst cases, the researchers found that Earth’s climate leads to chaos. True, mathematical chaos. In a chaotic system, there is no equilibrium and no repeatable patterns. A chaotic climate would have seasons that change wildly from decade to decade (or even year to year). Above a certain critical threshold temperature for Earth’s atmosphere, a feedback cycle can kick in where a chaotic result would become unavoidable. There are some signs that we may have already passed that tipping point, but it’s not too late to avert climate disaster.

We are now entering a new phase, one driven by human activity. As humans pump more carbon into the atmosphere, we are creating a new Anthropocene era, a period of human-influenced climate systems, something our planet has never experienced before.

We will see mass migration, with one war after another for resources.

Animals can keep giving birth, increasing their numbers, but they reach a limit when they consume all the food in their environment (or their predators get too hungry and consume them). Put another way, climate change impacts might not directly cause humans to go extinct, but it could lead to events that seriously endanger hundreds of millions, if not billions, of lives.

There’s no reason to exaggerate the climate threat. The truth is bad enough, and reason enough to take dramatic action because today, we live in a global, interconnected civilization, so there’s is every reason to believe our species will not survive its collapse.

Despite massive landscapes and endless blue, our planet is limited in its resources and capabilities to support its inhabitants. According to the Global Footprint Network, “Humanity uses the equivalent of 1.5 planets to provide the resources we use and absorb our waste.

It now takes the Earth one year and six months to regenerate what we use in a year.

All over the world we are witnessing the effects of using more resources than the Earth can provide in the form of diminishing forest cover, disappearing coral reefs, collapsing fisheries, biodiversity decline, increasing greenhouse gases, depleting fresh water systems, acidifying oceans, disease, famine, mass migrations, depleting arable land, resource conflicts and wars, just to name some of the more noticeable effects.

So we are left to cope with limited resources or pursue unconventional methods, which can create a disproportionate impact on the poor, and the ones that can are finding that even the furthest and deepest corners of the Earth are being exploited, leaving fewer and fewer resources for future generations.

A sustainable future cannot be achieved without conserving biological diversity – animal and plant species, their habitats and their genes – not only for nature itself, but also for all  people who depend on.

Our moral obligation is to support both ourselves and our planet. it.

Our old solutions – which address only environmental conservation or short-term human gains – are no longer enough.

We need innovative approaches to guide our civilization toward a sustainable future and the only way this can be done  this requires a substantial behavioural modification of the most impactful species on Earth—humans.

I think it is becoming increasingly important for us to be conscious of our consumption. If we can see through products on the shelves, and understand that human labour, sacrifice and resources have gone into anything and everything we consume, we can begin to empathize with and work for the well-being of populations around the world.

Technology is distancing our relationship from global issues, often perceived as too large to concern our own respective lives.

How can we begin this personalization in the midst of a global crisis of endless dimensions and stakeholders?

We can begin by making profit seeking algorithms be transparent. By removing all media advertising that prompts consumption. By focused efforts and productivity within our own communities. By fostering the rights and access to medical care universally.

Finally. Government should enable individuals to see their own capabilities in organizing and protecting the environment, instead of simply reporting on the problems. Media coverage, literature, and written discussion in any capacity should lean towards a definitive—within scientific bounds—attribution of our existing catastrophes to our own actions. We must try to stray from merely stating that a given problem exists, and rather begin our discussions and postulations with the probable causes of that problem.

By getting communities, urban or rural, to visualize and feel the influence of their actions on water, soil, and air would be to enliven a group solely based on protecting and preserving life itself. We must work to re-associate with the resources of the environment that have long been exploited, and communicate across a global spectrum regarding how we have and will succeed in creating a sustainable future existence.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin

Contact: bobdillon33@gmail.com

A photo of a male Neanderthal replicate at the​ Natural​ History​ Museum, London.