This is a good article. One of very few that I have come across that really scratches the surface of what needs to be done, what sacrifices will have to be made, what the future might look like etc. I think the entire world, including me, is hoping that if they keep on working, earning money, and saving, that in future they will be able to have (at least) security, maybe more material comfort, and maybe escape the treadmill they have to run on day after day. This ponzi hope is all pervasive.
I really struggle to imagine the future for the west, except to recall visits developing countries based around peasant agriculture, and worry slightly as I am not very good with either oxen or buffaloes.
Something extraordinary, unplanned and unexpected has to happen if we're to get out of this predicament. I don't know what that will be, but I know it's possible. More and more of us are living in the post - transition paradigm in one way or another. There is an inner tipping point, both individually and collectively. The process is underway, moving very rapidly. Who knows what will happen?
Good question. I wonder about tapping into the very human needs of all of us that are being denied right now: community, connection, trust. One of the things I'm thinking of is an activist peace choir that prints the words to songs of peace and transition on flyers and invites people to join in singing. Could build and show up at events. Here's an example of one peace choir: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKKRVeCdX7I&ab_channel=ThriveEastBay I know this isn't a direct action, but it could bring people together so we can get more people involved in taking action.
Well THAT hits the nail on the head! My only quibble is that I think it's silly to name a specific number of years we have to turn things around. Obviously, we've already blown past the limits that could have stopped major destruction (from climate change AND biodiversity loss etc), and on the other hand even if we continue to do nothing real through 2032, it will still be better to act at that point than to keep our collective foot on the gas pedal till we go over the cliff. I suppose it's helpful in galvanizing people to give them a deadline, but it's arbitrary. Also--I use the word "fracked" as my substitute word--it names an ugly, destructive act whereas the censored word arguably names a pleasurable and loving one.
"I suppose it's helpful in galvanizing people to give them a deadline, but it's arbitrary."
Point taken about putting a 'deadline' on it. But the way I see it is that the scientists are calculating an estimate of how much emissions reductions must happen in the very near term if we are to avoid blowing past international agreements on limiting those emissions. So it does make sense to state it clearly and boldly, as they have done.
However, I personally believe we don't really have any more 'carbon budget' to spend. I think current concentrations of greenhouse gases are already well past anything we could call safe. Any more emissions are too much. But to continue business usual, without at least trying to rapidly and dramatically reduce those emissions, would clearly a collective crime of humanity.
I don't believe there will be an arrival of some sort of Galactic Federation of Living Planets from some far-off galaxy. So it would seem it is up to us to find a means of catalyzing rapid cultural (which includes economic) transformation. And we really don't have any time to waste in getting started, which is why I'm going to publish yet another (short-ish) article today on one proposal which might exhibit a viable, sound, and intelligent approach to getting started. My basic idea is that schools and universities are likely going to need to serve, again, as a major locus of political and social engagement. My upcoming article will propose that we need to organize campuses everywhere as sites of ... real and profound education of the public about the necessity of energy descent as the principal piece of any real energy transition and climate response.
Well--I have a piece of advice. Not about choosing universities--but about the idea of trying to massively get out a reality check about the need for degrowth rather than the notion that some combination of efficiency improvements ("decoupling") and technical magic wands will allow us to reduce emissions sufficiently without a change of lifestyle. And my advice is--another thing you must tackle is inequality, because across the political spectrum people resent the rich and powerful, and if they think the rich will be able to buy their way out of the restrictions the rest of us are expected to accept, it will be that much harder to get buy-in.
After writing what I did in this little essay, I realized that Wikipedia's article on philosophy of culture was extraordinarily bad -- to the point of uselessness. So I added an "Afternote" to the original article. Please see that note for explanation.
This is a good article. One of very few that I have come across that really scratches the surface of what needs to be done, what sacrifices will have to be made, what the future might look like etc. I think the entire world, including me, is hoping that if they keep on working, earning money, and saving, that in future they will be able to have (at least) security, maybe more material comfort, and maybe escape the treadmill they have to run on day after day. This ponzi hope is all pervasive.
I really struggle to imagine the future for the west, except to recall visits developing countries based around peasant agriculture, and worry slightly as I am not very good with either oxen or buffaloes.
Something extraordinary, unplanned and unexpected has to happen if we're to get out of this predicament. I don't know what that will be, but I know it's possible. More and more of us are living in the post - transition paradigm in one way or another. There is an inner tipping point, both individually and collectively. The process is underway, moving very rapidly. Who knows what will happen?
Maybe Florida being submerged under waist high water this week will do it for the Floridians? Maybe at least get the conversations seriously started?
Good question. I wonder about tapping into the very human needs of all of us that are being denied right now: community, connection, trust. One of the things I'm thinking of is an activist peace choir that prints the words to songs of peace and transition on flyers and invites people to join in singing. Could build and show up at events. Here's an example of one peace choir: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKKRVeCdX7I&ab_channel=ThriveEastBay I know this isn't a direct action, but it could bring people together so we can get more people involved in taking action.
I like this idea!
Well THAT hits the nail on the head! My only quibble is that I think it's silly to name a specific number of years we have to turn things around. Obviously, we've already blown past the limits that could have stopped major destruction (from climate change AND biodiversity loss etc), and on the other hand even if we continue to do nothing real through 2032, it will still be better to act at that point than to keep our collective foot on the gas pedal till we go over the cliff. I suppose it's helpful in galvanizing people to give them a deadline, but it's arbitrary. Also--I use the word "fracked" as my substitute word--it names an ugly, destructive act whereas the censored word arguably names a pleasurable and loving one.
"I suppose it's helpful in galvanizing people to give them a deadline, but it's arbitrary."
Point taken about putting a 'deadline' on it. But the way I see it is that the scientists are calculating an estimate of how much emissions reductions must happen in the very near term if we are to avoid blowing past international agreements on limiting those emissions. So it does make sense to state it clearly and boldly, as they have done.
However, I personally believe we don't really have any more 'carbon budget' to spend. I think current concentrations of greenhouse gases are already well past anything we could call safe. Any more emissions are too much. But to continue business usual, without at least trying to rapidly and dramatically reduce those emissions, would clearly a collective crime of humanity.
I don't believe there will be an arrival of some sort of Galactic Federation of Living Planets from some far-off galaxy. So it would seem it is up to us to find a means of catalyzing rapid cultural (which includes economic) transformation. And we really don't have any time to waste in getting started, which is why I'm going to publish yet another (short-ish) article today on one proposal which might exhibit a viable, sound, and intelligent approach to getting started. My basic idea is that schools and universities are likely going to need to serve, again, as a major locus of political and social engagement. My upcoming article will propose that we need to organize campuses everywhere as sites of ... real and profound education of the public about the necessity of energy descent as the principal piece of any real energy transition and climate response.
Well--I have a piece of advice. Not about choosing universities--but about the idea of trying to massively get out a reality check about the need for degrowth rather than the notion that some combination of efficiency improvements ("decoupling") and technical magic wands will allow us to reduce emissions sufficiently without a change of lifestyle. And my advice is--another thing you must tackle is inequality, because across the political spectrum people resent the rich and powerful, and if they think the rich will be able to buy their way out of the restrictions the rest of us are expected to accept, it will be that much harder to get buy-in.
Good point, Mary. I agree.
Those who want to see what sort of conversation this essay is stirring up may want to check out the comments following the article here: https://www.resilience.org/stories/2022-09-29/global-emissions-must-drop-by-50-by-2030/
After writing what I did in this little essay, I realized that Wikipedia's article on philosophy of culture was extraordinarily bad -- to the point of uselessness. So I added an "Afternote" to the original article. Please see that note for explanation.
https://rword.substack.com/p/energy-descent-and-campus-life-part