Surfing between Scylla and Charybdis

     Friends, it has been an incredibly long time since I posted anything. 2013 has been a tough year for this worker-bee, locked into industrial civilization. As the saying goes, life intervenes. I got furloughed from my full-time job, and put to part-time. Now I have to piece a living together with two part-time jobs until I can construct a better way to make a living. We had to work through a serious health challenge with my wife, and move my mother-in-law into a new place, and on top of everything else, my teenager is now driving. Yikes!

      Well, dear reader, if you have followed me this far, you have likely reached one of three conclusions. Either I am as crazy as a pet 'coon and a paranoid, I am a heretic who lacks faith in the human spirit of creativity and intelligence and questions the dominant paradigm of the free market, or human beings have inadvertently (emergently?) gotten themselves lost in a box-canyon from which there is no escape- we are well and truly fucked.

      If you are in the first camp, I have nothing much to say to you, But as the consequences mount, and the chickens of industrial civilization come home to roost, please know that I will hold the asylum door open for you.

      If you are of the second belief, though I believe the free market is delusional, understand it is not the human spirit I lack faith in. Human beings are brilliant, amazing creatures, possessed of a wellspring of ingenuity. It is the hierarchical institutions we are so prone to constructing, in which I no longer have faith. Sumeria, Babylon, Egypt, Greece, Rome, the Maya, the Mississippians, time and again, we discover a rich energy source, virgin topsoil along with wheat, maize and so on. Civilization grows, emperors and their courts emerge, they expand by conquest, they overshoot, and collapse. This time the energy source is fossil fuel, the Emperor is an agglomeration of CEOs, and the Imperial reach is global.

      But, friend, if you are of the third, well then, welcome and good morning! You have begun to awaken. If you feel overwhelmed, or are despairing our fate, know that you are not alone. It is normal to feel groggy and disoriented after too much sleep.

      Once, when I was a lad, I asked my seventeen-year old high-school friend Laura, in a fit of melodramatic teenage pseudo-profundity, what she would do if she woke up and found out everything she believed in was a lie. I think collectively, as a global society, that is one very serious question we all now face. What happens when everything we believed in turns out to be a lie? Can society withstand it?

      Capitalism, supposedly the most advanced (only?) economic model available, is failing the vast majority of the world's population as it sucks the wealth from the periphery and concentrates it at the top. As the third world was literally sucked dry, the capitalists turned to the working and middle class of the first world, and began to feed.

      Our entire energy system is an addictive drug. We know it is killing us, but we cannot abide the withdrawal.

      And the environment, well we have fouled our own bed. When most of the large fish-stocks are gone, the old-growth forests are nearly gone, the vast majority of the prairies are gone, nuclear waste is sitting there in cooling pools- a malignant ticking time-bomb, we have Superfund sites, and dead-zones in the ocean, and there is a Texas-sized patch of plastic garbage trapped in the middle of the Pacific, how could we think otherwise? We have changed the composition of the very air we breathe and each and every murderous day another 200 species vanish into the eternity of extinction. We are unraveling the very web of Creation.

      What they taught us in K-12, in university (It is Morning in America) is a lie and we are swimming in a sea of cognitive dissonance.

      So what to do? A great many people, probably the vast majority, will pull the covers over their head roll over, and go back to sleep. Unfortunately they will be awoken by the shock of hitting the wall. Like a bug striking the windshield, the last thing that will go through their mind is their asshole. A few however, may not be content to wait. For them (us?) perhaps we choose Resistance.

      Resistance is a loaded word, it conjures up some of our deepest cultural fantasies. We may imagine ourselves encamped at Valley Forge, holed up in the Alamo, ensconced in the glacial fastness of the ice planet Hoth. But Washington is not there to lead us across the Delaware. Sam Houston will not avenge us. The Force is not at our command. We have only our tiny, feeble selves.

     This brings us to the piece of the essay, which you may wish to skip. For we are about to tread on the thin ice of sedition.

      Understand, dear reader, I did not arrive at this place lightly. It goes against all I was taught, all that I cherished. The American Dream is the pinnacle of human achievement. The rising tide of the free market will lift all boats. The arc of history (representative democracy?) bends towards justice. All of this pales in the harsh glare of the sixth mass extinction, the Anthropocene.

      The damnable thing about it, we can watch it happen, and understand. The trilobites that were lost in the Great Dying, the dinosaurs who perished in the KT event, were not sentient. They were neither the engineers, nor the documentarians of their own destruction. We are both. And as we drive our pickup trucks to work for yet another day of debt peonage, knowing full well our consumption and our emissions are omnicidal, we can contemplate our choices. Walk away, disengage, become a hermit? That road may lead to divorce, despair, pauperism, and an early death. Continue as we are? Perhaps we live until famine and chaos set in, and we can contemplate the works of Shakespeare, Picasso, Mozart, and our own genetic heritage all disappearing into the void, for the sake of the almighty dollar and a few more gallons of gas.

      There is a wonderful book called “Who moved my cheese?” It is written to assist the economically displaced (fired, laid-off, outsourced) in overcoming the psychological barriers to moving on after a job loss. I highly recommend it for anyone who was bitten by the Great Recession. The central premise is that, like rats in a maze, once we humans discover an easy food source (our jobs in the industrial economy) we will keep returning, day after day. If someone moves the cheese (we get laid off) we will go through a period of disorientation and grief until we find a new source.

      The central task of our time is to intentionally move the cheese, for we know the moldering block, on which we currently feed, is perched on the wire-bail trap of collapse and potentially near-term extinction .

      Here is the conclusion I have reached, though it pains me to say it, we must bring down industrial civilization before it sterilizes the Earth. I really think the choice may be as simple as preemptively collapsing industrial civilization or near-term extinction. Remember, the rat will keep returning to its cheese, as long as it is there, no matter how nasty the supper, until the day the trap breaks its neck.

      This means that despite the limp actions (fuel economy standards, power plant emissions regulations) and grandiose promises (“This is the day the oceans will cease to rise”) of the Obama administration, we will pursue an “all of the above” energy strategy and exploit every last drop possible of the Alberta Tar Sands and Arctic oil, knowing full well this will put us many times over our carbon budget for 2C. I have seen nothing over the last decade that could lead to any other conclusion. Have you?

      Again, I think the choice may be between bringing down industrial civilization and near-term extinction. Is this an example of a straw man, of simplistic binary thinking? Is there a third path? The third path most often cited is something like a Green New Deal or Transition.

      The Green New Deal envisions a massive push by government to scale up renewables to the national level, perhaps incentivized by a carbon tax or fee and dividend. By doing so, we get to keep all our techno-goodies and continue to live the lifestyle to which we have become accustomed. It requires corporate, social and political consensus (a voluntary buy-in) that seems utterly out of reach as well as suspending the laws of thermodynamics. It also requires time, up to 40 years, time we simply do not have. It is the essence of having your cake and eating it too.

      Transition is a voluntary power-down; it is an engineered soft landing. We could, if we chose to, re-localize our economy. We could apply the principles of Permaculture to revamp our industrial farming system. We could actively de-carbonize out energy systems, and deploy a renewable distributed power generation system, albeit at a much lower level of output.. We could opt for an economic model that values human contentment more than GDP. We could, if we chose to, de-fang the corptocracy that has bankrupted and corrupted every layer of governance, municipal, county, state, federal, even (especially?) international. We could opt for a de-centralized, directly democratic approach.

      The real sting of the argument for either a Green New Deal or Transition is the word voluntary. Does anyone honestly believe that the American populace will opt for a voluntary transition to a local, de-carbonized steady state economy or a massive Green New Deal? Would you be willing to pay a carbon fee when your salary isn't keeping pace with inflation? Even if it were available, would you (or your Mom) park your car and take mass transit to work, the local market, school every day because Obama, Mitt Romney, the Pope himself implored you to do right by your children?

      Even if the American public at large were to suddenly have an epiphany and “get it”, what then about the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa)? Will they deprive their citizens of the “right” to a western standard of living that the industrial economy affords? Take China, for example. In order to maintain political stability, the Communist Party has constructed entire cities, that are unlived in, in order to juice the construction section of their economy, suppress unemployment, and forestall political turmoil. If they are willing to spend the resources, energy, and capital building and maintaining a vacant city, can you see them adopting de-growth and putting their political futures on the line. I think not, though their path is omnicidal.

      Thus, this brings us full circle and back to a rather binary choice, take down industrial civilization or near-term extinction. The first objection that is usually raised when this taboo subject is broached is the human cost. The carrying capacity of the earth, when human society operates within a solar budget, is thought to be approximately 1 billion people. Even if we are generous, and arbitrarily double that number for arguments sake, that means we are in overshoot by 5 billion people. And taking down industrial civilization would mean a die-off of 5 billion people over some period of time. That is horrific, almost beyond contemplation.

      But if we wait until the system collapses from its own weight, what will be the ecological cost? As carbon blows through the 650 ppm mark, and ecosystems collapse like dominoes, will there be enough of a planet left to support 2 billion? 1 billion? Or will we be left with scattered bands of nomadic humans scrabbling for subsistence in the polar regions, as James Lovelock posits? As runaway greenhouse takes hold, will the last human wonder if we could have chosen differently in 2013?

      I sat on the idea for this essay for some time after the Boston bombings and other incidents. Feelings are still raw, and rightfully so. Boston was a clear example of terrorism, the attempt to make political change (US foreign policy in the ME) through inflicting violent terror on the populace. The spectators and runners were not directly responsible for the foreign posture of the US and targeting them is morally unjustifiable. It is as reprehensible as the setting of a car bomb in a open market, or gunning down innocents in a hotel. The average American family is not directly responsible for the colossal mess we are in. They are locked into a system they did not choose and do not understand. This means, in my mind, direct militant action is off the table.

      At any rate, I think it is time we admitted we are living in a soft-core police state. As long as you play by the rules, don't step out of line, you are left alone. But step out of line, as the original Tea Party or Occupy did, well the IRS scrutinizes you, or perhaps NSA analysts dig into your meta-data. Or local police take an interest. For example, I know for a fact that the local chapter of Occupy had undercover police officers as guests at their meetings early on.

      So even if widespread support for militant resistance existed, which it most certainly doesn't, the moment they took action the full force of the Homeland Security apparatus would descend on them like Mjolnir, and under the NDAA, they would most likely become permanent guests at GITMO. Members of the Earth Liberation Front learned this lesson the hard way.

      The other option for resistance falls under the mantle of non-violence. In the West, this is the option that should be fiercely pursued. 350.org, Great Plains Tar SandsResistance, Occupy, and others fall under this mantle. They are doing fine work and should be supported. But in my experience, a great many members are operating under the delusion that the capitalist monster we have grown up under can be reformed and his appetite restrained. What we must do is attempt to educate.

      We seem to have stabilized somewhat economically, albeit at a lower level of GDP and growth. This has taken some of the steam out of Occupy, but I suspect another crises will come, and people will once again be in the streets. Look around the world and one sees turmoil in Egypt, Syria, Brazil, Greece; it is not hard not to believe.

      One of the most promising things in my mind to come out of Occupy was the model of the General Assembly. It offered an alternative for direct democracy. It showed there is a different path. As things heat up, we must point out that it is the very nature of industrial civilization that is pushing us over the cliff. With a whole lot of luck, when we hit a tipping point, when the Tower of Pisa needs just a little push, industrial civilization can be sent toppling into the dustbin of history. With a whole lot more luck, groups like Transition and Occupy will be there to help build a new future.

      Unfortunately, there may be a very large monkey-wrench in the gears. Remember the malignancy sitting in those nuclear waste pools? Take down industrial civilization too quickly, or if it collapses of its own accord, too chaotically, and you end up with 437 Fukushimas. Dmitry Orlov posted an essay recently that points the problem out beautifully. Keep industrial civilization propped up in order support 7 (heading towards 9) billion people, and face financial, energy, and ecological collapse. Bring it down prematurely, and set off hundreds of Chernobyls and Fukushimas, and face ecological collapse.

It seems we are riding the wave between Scylla and Charybdis.

Driving a Pale Horse

     “Understand that things are now in motion that cannot be undone.”

           -Galdalf the Grey (The Fellowship of the Ring, J.R.R. Tolkien)

     In these posts over the past few months I have tried to paint a clear picture of the general predicaments we collectively face at this time in history. We have the debt-ridden, fiasco of a fiat monetary system backed by an economic model that requires ever increasing economic growth on a finite planet. We have the hard constraint of energy depletion looming in the not too distant future and an industrial system that demands plentiful, cheap oil.

      If Finance comes in first in our little horse race, if all the shenanigans of the central banks, governments, and Wall Street Banksters come back to bite us, it could trigger a depression that makes the thirties look like a cakewalk. If we are able to prop the system up long enough, and Peak Oil takes the prize, not only could that trigger the Longest Depression, but it will destabilize the institutions and infrastructure we depend on for daily life.

      This brings us right smack dab to face the third contender in the Trifecta to do in industrial civilization: Anthropogenic Climate Change. If our monetary hijinks are the shadow in the closet , and energy decline is the monster under the bed, then global warming is the dragon in the forest, capable of razing the realm with its infernal breath.

      Let us put it another way. Financial collapse is a black horse. Her rider demands a day's pay for a quart of wheat, a day's pay for three quarts of barley, but damn sure don't spoil the olive oil and the wine! Peak Oil is blood red and its rider wields a great sword. Remember the Carter Doctrine, when the oil begins to run short, you think the nations won't take peace from the earth? But Anthropogenic Climate Change is a pale horse: “And his name who sits upon him is Death, and Hell followed with him.”

      Is that a bit hyperbolic? You be the judge.

      I like to look at this issue through two lenses, logos and myths, sort of a left brain, right brain thought excersize. There are often considered to be two paths to gnosis (knowledge), that of logos (reason, logic, observation) and mythos (storytelling, prophecy, poetry). In my opinion, both are necessary for a complete view.

      First we will examine this through the lens of reason. Let's review What we know so far and while we're at it, let's dispense with the fucking nonsense, shall we? We have known about the greenhouse effect since 1824 when Fourier discovered greenhouse gases such as CO2. This is not new and ambiguous information. In 1958 Charles David Keeling began taking measurements of atmospheric CO2 at the Mauna Loa observatory and we have known for five decades that the concentration of CO2 has been relentlessly increasing.

      Physics, chemistry, geology, and simple arithmetic eliminate natural processes as the source of the carbon. Only the burning of fossil fuels can account for the fact, and it is an irrefutable fact that atmospheric CO2 has increased from 250 parts per million (PPM) at the dawn of the industrial revolution to over 390 PPM in 2012.

      The higher the concentration of CO2, the less solar heat is radiated back out space, and the global average temperature is forced higher.

      “Wait!”, the skeptics say. We weren't measuring CO2 in 1850 (the beginning of the industrial revolution). More fucking nonsense, we can drill ice cores. Much like tree rings, they give scientists a very accurate window into climate history. The tiny air bubbles trapped in each layer of ice, contain samples of that year's atmosphere. Count back 162 layers, send the slice to the lab, and bingo! We know it was 250 PPM in 1850.

      “But solar radiation and the earth's orbit can affect the climate!”, they cry. Again, physics and math tell us that the slow increase over eons in the sun's energy output is not enough to account for the rapid increase in temperature, almost 1C since baseline (1850). And we are in the “long” phase of our orbit, which is a negative (cooling) forcing. Keep in mind that these forcings are tiny and have their impact on a geologic deep timescale. Only the profligate burning of fossil fuels can account for what we have seen and what we are seeing.

      And if you believe that this is all a hoax by a cabal of academics and scientists bent on increasing their grant money, well I've got a job lined out for you at Bell Helicopters building black helicopters for the U.N.

      

     Speaking of geologic timescales, CO2 can and does sometimes increase due to natural phenomena. A good example would be the Siberian Traps an episode of massive volcanic activity thought to have caused a 6C temperature increase and the mass extinction event referred to as the Great Dying. Another example would be the PETM (paleocene-eocene thermal maximum) thought to be the result of a release of methane hydrates from the sea floor. Methane is one hundred times more potent as a greenhouse gas than CO2 over the short term and about 20 times more potent over the long term as it degrades to CO2. Both these events happened over many thousands of years, but we have already seen nearly a 1C increase in 162 years. This is at least an order of magnitude faster than previous warming episodes. Not only should that give you pause, it should drive home the point that only the burning of fossil fuels can account for this. Period!

      The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), and various organizations have been sounding the alarm bell repeatedly that we must avoid 2C warming by 2100, in order to stave off risks to civilization. If I have one criticism of the IPCC it is that they have consistently underestimated the impact and the danger. Since the IPCC's report in 2007 (1C warming by 2100) the data and models have been improving and a relentless drumbeat of dire climate assessments have been piling up. Each is worst than the last. Just this year the World Bank forecast 4C by the middle of the century, and they are hardly a left-wing, liberal, environmental organization. The Global Carbon Project and the International Energy Agency forecasts business as usual pushing us to over 6C by 2100. At 6C the oceans are so acidic that they no longer support phytoplankton, the source of half the earth's oxygen. As Lierre Keith puts it: “if the oceans go down, we're going down with them.”

      Another problem I have with the IPCC and other climate groups is the focus on the year 2100. As if we really have 87 years before we have to get worried. It is not about your grandchildren, it is not about your children, it is about you. Here are a few things we have observed in the past few years. You can light the ground on fire in Siberia because melting permafrost is releasing methane, there was a large oyster die off as the baby oysters could not survive in the acidic environment, the Arctic ocean is releasing methane from melting hydrates (remember the PETM), the Arctic ice cap is melting and the North American pine forest is dying, because of drought and an infestation of mountain pine beetles. Each of these (and other phenomena) are self reinforcing (positive) feedback loops.

      Lets take the pine beetles for example. It no longer gets cold enough, for long enough, in the high country to kill off the pine beetles. The forests are stressed due to ongoing drought and the beetles deliver the coup de grace. Warmer winters ensure more beetles are able to overwinter and survive, killing more trees, which sequester less carbon, which makes the winters warmer, which lets more beetles survive, and so on. Or Arctic ice, less summer ice reduces the albedo (reflectivity) of the Arctic, which means more solar radiation (heat) is retained by the dark ocean water, which melts more ice, which reduces the albedo, and so on. It ain't that complicated, can you dig it?

      For crying out loud, we have seen thousands die in the 2003 European heat wave in France, the heat wave in Russia in 2010 was so severe it killed 40% of the Russian wheat crop and sparked massive forest fires (along with 50,000 deaths from smoke inhalation and heat stroke) and the resultant spiking food prices in 2011 triggered the Arab Spring. Superstorm Sandy (yet another “storm of the century”) devastated the Northeast and Occupy ended up feeding FEMA. The 2012 drought sent grain and meat and dairy prices through the roof and it still hasn't broken. The mighty Mississippi, the unstoppable Old Man River dropped to 9 ft at St. Louis and barge traffic was almost suspended. Climate change is upon us, all around us, right here, right now.

      How many warnings do we need?

      And this takes us to the lens of mythos. There are many cultural traditions that provide an insight into mankind's troubles. Hinduism, Buddhism, indigenous philosophy, Wicca, Islam all these and more provide insights. But as I was raised in the mainstream Protestant tradition, I am not really qualified to speak from their point of view.

      This brings us to the role of the prophet. What is a prophet? The word immediately conjures up an image of a crazy man, dressed in skins or rags, bearing a sign which boldly proclaims “Repent! The End is Nigh!” Or perhaps a shaman or mystic, peering into the ether through their tarot cards, scrying the futures of the high and mighty. Neither tells the whole story. The prophet, quite simply, is one who speaks for God. A person who calls humanity to task for their base and cruel actions and challenges them to change their lifestyle. Not only does this include figures such as Amos, Micah, Elijah and so on, it includes Dr. Martin Luther King and Gandhi and Mother Jones. It includes Martin Luther, himself. All these people were acting as prophets, speaking the words of truth to power, great and small.

      In biblical tradition, a prophetic warning often follows two basic patterns: “if – then” and “because – therefore”. If you repent, then you shall be forgiven or because you have sinned, your immortal soul is at risk are two simple examples.

      The story of Joseph and the Coat of Many Colors provides a fine example of the first type of warning. Joseph was the youngest and most favored son of Jacob.. Doted upon by his parents, he was showered with blessings and gifts, the polychromatic robe being the most famous. His brothers, in a rage driven by envy, trick his parents into believing he was killed, and sell the hapless Joseph into slavery in Egypt. Our poor hero eventually finds himself imprisoned in the dungeons of Pharaoh, where his true gifts reach their full potential, the interpretation of dreams.

      Pharaoh is awoken in the middle of the night by a disturbing dream. Seven fat, luxurious cows are feeding in the reeds of the Nile and seven sickly wasted cows come upon them and devour them. Pharaoh is disturbed, but finally manages to fall asleep once again, and promptly descends back into the domain of the nightmare. Seven full stalks of corn (wheat, barley, etc.) are growing when seven stalks of grain, blighted and bare, sprout up after them and they consume the lush crops. Pharaoh awakes again. Later in the day, he confesses his dreams and calls for the magicians and wise men to explain it to him, but they are all mystified. His cup bearer, having seen proof of Joseph’s power, tells Pharaoh to call for Joseph, still languishing in the dungeon, and have his dreams interpreted.

      Joseph tells Pharaoh that his dreams are one and the same. The seven cows and seven stalks of grain are seven years of plenty and the seven sick cows and seven blighted stalks are seven years of famine. The fact that the sick cows and blighted stalks devour the other indicate that the famine will be so severe that the good times will be forgotten in the pangs of want and since the dream was doubled the thing is fixed by God and is imminent.

      Joseph then tells Pharaoh to appoint someone to oversee the harvest and save back 20% of the harvest for seven years against the years of famine. The message is clear and simple. If you heed God's warning and take careful, prudent action now, when times are good, then your people shall be saved when the bad times descend. The entire story of Joseph's journey can be found in Genesis chapters 37-50 and the episode of Pharaoh’s dreams are spelled out in chapters 40-41. We would do well to reflect on the message, if we listen to the warnings, sacrifice and take thoughtful prudent action now (while we are able), then when the hard times come, we will make it through.

      At the other end of the spectrum of prophetic warning, we find” because – therefore”. The Book of Jeremiah is the quintessential example of this sort of warning. I think a thoughtful person, regardless of their personal spiritual beliefs (or lack of them) would be well advised to read Jeremiah and ask, what does this mean for us, in this time, right now? Jeremiah may be a prophet who can speak to this age just as powerfully as he spoke to the Hebrews of the Exile.

      “The word of the Lord came to me a second time, saying, 'What do you see?' And I said, 'I see a boiling pot, tilted away from the north.' Then the Lord said to me: Out of the north disaster shall break on all the inhabitants of the land. For now I am calling all the tribes of the kingdoms of the north, says the Lord; and they shall come and all of them shall set their thrones against all the cities of Judah. And I will utter my judgments against them for all their wickedness in forsaking me; they have made offerings to other gods, and worshiped the works of their own hands.” -Jer. 1:11-16

      “Like a cage full of birds, their houses are full of treachery; therefore they have become great and rich. They have grown fat and sleek. They know no limits in deeds of wickedness; they do not judge with justice the cause of the orphan, to make it prosper, and they do not defend the rights of the needy. Shall I not punish them for these things? says the Lord and shall I not bring retribution on a nation such as this?” -Jer. 5:27-29

      Remind you of anyone much?

      In a nutshell, Jeremiah says that because they have engaged in idolatry, glorified their own technological wizardry, and betrayed their sacred obligation to their neighbors, they shall be chastised and their nation destroyed.

      So, again I ask, how many more warnings do we need? Ever since Rachel Carson wrote “Silent Spring” in 1962, there have been a series of environmental prophets who have told us that an unrestrained industrial economy was not compatible with a living planet or civilization. Paul Erlich, Lester Brown, The Club of Rome (Limits to Growth), Bill McKibben, James Hansen, Paul Gilding, and yes even the much-maligned Al Gore, to name a few, have all told us that our industrial lifestyle is unsustainable and is damaging they very thing we depend on for life itself, the biosphere. They have not advocated going back to a medieval, peasant economy. They just said we must slow down, transition, bend the curves. If we get off fossil fuels, then civilization will continue. But in recent years the warnings have taken on a more strident tone, as no substantial action whatsoever has been forthcoming. You can almost see the panic in the eyes of the climatologists.

      Recently, two more major figures have broken with the majority message of “if-then” and shifted to “because-therefore”. Guy McPherson, a conservation biologist and Professor Emeritus at the University of Arizona believes that we may have crossed the event horizon. The climate crisis is now accelerating due to positive feedbacks. The governments and and populations of the world are paralyzed by economic lock-in and cognitive dissonance (they literally cannot imagine living in a different society). Runaway greenhouse and near term human extinction, is in his view, a distinct possibility This is the worst-case scenario described in fictionalized form by James Hansen at the end of his book “Storms of my Grandchildren”. One of Dr. McPherson's presentations can be found here.

      Kevin Anderson, of the Tyndale Center in the UK, skewers the grand plans of the mainstream climate negotiators and scientists in his presentation “Real Clothes for the Emperor”. It can be found here. He points out that all the major programs designed to avoid 2C warming are predicated on CO2 emissions peaking in 2015, two years hence, and then declining at approximately 3.5% per year, year on year. Yet when compared with the actual data on emissions, and constrained by the demands of neo-classical economists for continued economic growth, a startling picture emerges. We have already blown the carbon budget for staying under the ceiling of 2C. In other words, we cannot maintain our economy and avoid 2C. In fact, we will be hard pressed to stay under 4C. And the consequences of 4C mean the end of civilization. The real sting of his presentation is the phrase that a 4C world “may not be stable”. Translation: runaway greenhouse and mass extinction.

      Both men are saying, because society failed to act early and failed to imagine a different economy (as opposed to consumerist suburbia in perpetuity), a gentle transition, putting on sweaters and installing solar water heaters, letting the “markets” work, well that possibility has been foreclosed upon.

      Keep in mind, we have done nothing consequential on the climate front. Japan, one of the most efficient, cohesive, and socially progressive countries on earth missed its emissions targets under the Kyoto Protocol. If they can't do it, who can? The U.S., killed Kyoto by Senate Filibuster, Dubbya declared that the American lifestyle was non-negotiable, and Obama threw the Copenhagen Accords under the bus, deciding that health reform and the economy were more important. He did raise the auto emission standards to placate the environmentalists leading up to the 2012 election, but this is like a clown tossing candy to a child on the parade route. It is as if we are leaning out of the airplane, pissing on a forest fire.

      Does anyone, anywhere realistically think carbon emissions will peak in 2015? And as Mr. Anderson points out, the longer the emissions peak is delayed, the steeper the fall must be in order to avoid 2C. The last country that was able to reduce CO2 by 5% a year was the USSR when that nation disintegrated and their economy collapsed.

      And if we continue on our current trajectory, and more extreme weather becomes the norm, how shall we eat? Agriculture is predicated on the predictable weather patterns of the Holocene, not the crapshoot of the Anthropocene.

      'Tis quite a quandary we've created for ourselves, isn't it. We squandered the one thing we couldn't afford to lose, time. Normally, an essay of this sort, would offer a series of possible solutions, of actions we could take to “fix” the problem. But I believe we may have left the era of choice and entered the era of consequence. If we are very, very lucky, it will be a choice of consequences. Behind door number one: the end of the globalized industrial economy and perhaps the continuation of human beings and a living planet on which to reside. Behind door number two: continuing our delusion for a time yet, and then the Sixth Mass Extinction.

      So, the obvious question, is what are we to do? Honestly, I don't know. But there are some paths forward. One path: Resistance. The good news is that the Fellowship is recruiting. More on that next time.