Is There a Hail Mary in Your Future?

 

Guardian columnist Moira Donegan poses an important question, "what if it's too late to save our planet without geoengineering?"

What if? Donegan may be right. We may have allowed the man-made damage to our environment to reach a point where we do indeed need to resort to geoengineering.

Sure, just as every country experiences the climate emergency differently according to their unique vulnerabilities, the most commonly discussed geoengineering options may work for some but cause nightmares for others. Still, if we go into our bag of climate change options and that's the last one left we may have no choice but to take it.

Geoengineering isn't much of a long-term solution. It's a response to an otherwise unsurvivable emergency. There is no magic wand answer to this terrible predicament.

A more helpful and long-ranging response is to accept that our species must live in harmony with the environment, our one and only biosphere. We live on a finite planet. Earth can support a finite number of humans. It can support a finite level of consumption. It can cleanse a finite volume of our waste and pollution. Today, each of those three is not just running in the red, it's off the dial. 

If we are going to continue inhabiting this planet we'll have to walk our way back on population, on consumption and on waste to bring humanity's footprint safely within the planet's carrying capacity. There's little point in being aboard a lifeboat that's so overloaded the water is at the gunwales. Sooner or later, you're going to drown.

During the Holocene it was estimated that the world was able to support a maximum human population of about 3-billion.  That was around the mid-1970s.  Since then we've soared to nearly 8 billion. While we were growing in raw numbers we were also engineering improvements in longevity and consumption. It's estimated that our degraded environment today can support perhaps 2 billion, no more.

There is a way to fix these existential threats but that doesn't mean we'll take it. We're reluctant to talk about it. Imagine a game of musical chairs where they remove six chairs leaving just two. That's not very appealing. We're in no mood for doing without.

Comments

  1. TrailblazerAugust 26, 2021 at 5:04 PM

    In our profit motivated world I can see geoengineering becoming quite fashionable.
    Most would rather say; I'm making a killing at geoengineering than others saying, I sucked up and did without to save the planet.

    TB

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Disaffected LibAugust 26, 2021 at 9:46 PM

      Geoengineering could have unexpected consequences, TB, as what benefits one region may greatly harm another. There are some who express fear that China, beset by just about every climate impact in one area or another, could act unilaterally.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Up in Smoke. 300 Sq. Mi. of Amazon Rainforest Lost Every Day.

Image
  The Amazon rainforest is disappearing at what should be an alarming rate. 312 sq. mi. or 808 sq. kms. every day. Over the past 30 years humans have destroyed a patch of the Amazon equal in area to the states of Texas and New Mexico . The Amazon – historically a great carbon absorber, since trees take in carbon dioxide and release oxygen – now releases more carbon than it stores, which adds to, rather helps to reduce, our global climate crisis. Deforestation rates decreased slightly from 2004 to 2012. But since then, they’re back on the rise, especially in the past couple of years, since Jair Bolsonaro became president of Brazil. In 2018, as Bolsonaro campaigned as a patriotic man of the people, scientists predicted that once the Amazon lost more than 25% of its tree cover, it would become a drier ecosystem, all because deforestation changes weather patterns (due to how trees respire), which in turn reduces rainfall. Furthermore, as the forest becomes fragmented, areas surrounded...
Read more

The Cognoscenti Syndrome

  There is a group of people I think of as the Cognoscenti, people who are well educated, very informed and of rapidly diminishing relevance. Their ranks include writers such as Chris Hedges and Glen Greenwald. These are people who have honed an almost Puritanical value system, readily finding fault in any direction. They are scathing in their attacks on Republicans and Democrats alike to the point where they become nihilists. They don't endorse. They prescribe. This is where they fail. They're unable to advocate for anything that might resonate with the public whose interests they argue are being trammeled. Donald Trump was bad but Joe Biden is scarcely better. This is where their elitism comes in.  74 million may have voted for Trump but, hey, they didn't know any better. The mob that stormed the Capitol. They were just victims of the system venting their frustrations. All the racism, bigotry, xenophobia, misogyny, white nationalism - inevitable side effects of their oppr...
Read more

Who Asks "Why?"

Every time there's a conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians, all we hear is 'why?'  Why, as in, whose fault is this? It's easier to affix blame if you can truncate the event. Pick a convenient start date, something recent. In this case we'll make it either the Israeli eviction of Arabs from Jerusalem or the scuffle that took place outside the mosque in response. If those don't work, let's go for Hamas launching unguided rockets into Israel. That's even better because it tags Hamas with the blame. The nice thing about this approach is you can just keep using it. It goes on and on, just as it has for the past half-century since the '67 war. You can even date this whole mess to the beginning of the occupation of the Palestinian territories. The Israelis are said to have called these periodic wars, "mowing the lawn." The idea is that, every now and then, you have to take these Arabs to the woodshed. And then you keep your powder dry unt...
Read more