tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post2062444745888475342..comments2024-03-24T11:01:27.668-04:00Comments on Resource Insights: The 100 percent renewable energy future: The good news and the bad newsKurt Cobbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05330759091950742285noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-55019733902101592422017-01-04T20:45:26.992-05:002017-01-04T20:45:26.992-05:00I see people are STILL IGNORING the LARGEST OF OUR...I see people are STILL IGNORING the LARGEST OF OUR PROBLEMS! OVERPOPULATION!<br />We are constantly attending to the symptoms of overpopulation but we REFUSE to directly attack our excessive production of MORE HUMANS!<br /><br />It doesn't matter what we try to do to soften our impending collapse if we continue to IGNORE OVERPOPULATION & keep overbreeding, we will suffer a very painful population collapse with all of it's horror.<br />As some have pointed out here, we will indeed have 100% renewable energy in the future but not what so many are expecting, it won't be anything like today's BAU, it will be more like the 1300's, NO electricity, NO auto's, NO trucks, NO airconditoning, NO aircraft, NO trains, NO factory food, NO refrigeration, NO more "progress", NO modern way of life & there will be only ONE BILLION HUMANS ALIVE if we are "lucky", most of us will DIE in the coming collapse of disease, wars & of course starvation. <br />Have a happy Trump, new year!Sheilahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00016705065672424603noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-73674462056193543572017-01-03T23:44:40.174-05:002017-01-03T23:44:40.174-05:00Americans riding bicycles.... Yeah I'd like to...Americans riding bicycles.... Yeah I'd like to see that.Optimistichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15722886191514454697noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-34550759839480122602017-01-02T21:18:48.063-05:002017-01-02T21:18:48.063-05:00Paul, in the event of a precipitous degradation of...Paul, in the event of a precipitous degradation of industrial civilization, I think your list would need to include the 104 nuclear power plants in the US and some 400(?) worldwide whose reaction control systems and spent fuel cooling systems are unlikely to see normal continuous operation. genconchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18017061751345672629noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-17165317309827640612017-01-01T20:46:35.586-05:002017-01-01T20:46:35.586-05:00Paul - I'm afraid you left out rather a lot, j...Paul - I'm afraid you left out rather a lot, just as the book's authors have apparently done.<br /><br />Ending the use of fossil fuels is a large part, but only a part of anthro-CO2 outputs, with both concrete and deforestation outputs also needing to be halted. And on top of that, there are the outputs of the other five main GHGs that must be stopped, and that is only the end of our direct exacerbation of the GHG pollution problem.<br /><br />Ending all those outputs will not end the global warming for three main reasons.<br /><br />1/. Due to the oceans' thermal inertia, there is a timelag on the warming from any GHG output of about 35 years, so in effect the present warming is a consequence of the level of airborne GHG pollution in the early 1980s. Since then we have massively increased the annual output, and most of the warming from it will manifest over the next 35 years (by 2051). After that, we'll see the warming from whatever emissions we release during the period of their being phased out - perhaps out to 2085 - if the Obama Shuffle is ended and the problem is at last taken seriously enough for rapid action.<br /><br />2/. Due to the priority of closing down coal use we are going to end its output of fossil sulphates, and thereby close down the cooling "Fossil Sulphate Parasol" that it maintains, thus unveiling between 0.5C and 1.2C of additional warming that it has shaded out thus far.<br /><br />3/. Due to the eight "Major Interactive Feedbacks"[MIFs] - that are widely reported as already accelerating, with several each having the potential to dwarf current anthro-GHG outputs, there is no prospect of global temperature stabilizing merely by ending GHG outputs and enduring the timelagged and unveiled warming to which we're committed. Those MIFs are not only self-reinforcing, each one's timelagged warming accelerates itself and also all others - on top of which there are very numerous 'direct coupling mechanisms' between them that operate in or near real time. <br /><br />An example of the latter mechanisms is of the Ocean Heating & Acidification feedback (that can reduce the ocean carbon sink) driving the acceleration of ice-loss and the Arctic's Albedo Loss feedback (that allows more warmth into much darker ocean surface) which results in much warmer air-masses above the Arctic Ocean - whose signature has been recorded in the acceleration of the Permafrost Melt feedback 1500 kms inland from the coasts.<br /><br />The eight MIFs will accelerate for as long as anthro-warming continues (2085?) and their output will not be stopped by anything less than either exhausting their feedstocks (ice, permafrost, etc) which would only occur long after society's collapse, - or by the intentional cooling of the planet to decellerate them. (It won't cool naturally for many centuries).<br /><br />For this reason I think the proposals of Heinberg and many well-meaning writers on the issue of Climate Destabilization fall far short of what is needed. Emissions Control alone cannot resolve this existential problem, and the longer that we pretend that it can, the poorer our chances. In addition to radically fast Emissions Control we need also to research, develop and mandate the use of reliably benign modes of Carbon Recovery and Albedo Restoration as a means to cool the planet and stabilize the climate. Failure to do so will leave us heading directly for the onset of serial global crop failures, along with their consequent geopolitical destabilization.<br /><br />From this perspective I'd suggest that Heinberg et all need, like the politicians, to start taking the issue of Climate Destabilization seriously.<br /><br />Regards,<br />Lewis<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-27484285634546530112017-01-01T20:31:42.901-05:002017-01-01T20:31:42.901-05:00Of course we'll have renewable energy in the f...Of course we'll have renewable energy in the future. Civilisation will collapse, millions will die and we'll go back to living on the energy from green plants and the animals that eat those plants, just like we always did. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-24716061654732963792017-01-01T13:44:56.664-05:002017-01-01T13:44:56.664-05:00Once we've sorted out our energy requirements ...Once we've sorted out our energy requirements we then only have fresh water, catastrophic biomass loss, soil degradation, the nitrogen cycle, ocean acidification and existing pollution of every type to sort out. Have I left anything out?Paulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-51047400056513512542017-01-01T12:05:09.951-05:002017-01-01T12:05:09.951-05:00While I like the idea, and agree with the paths th...While I like the idea, and agree with the paths that must be taken to get there, I am far less optimistic in the probability of actually arriving at the destination. Pre/history tends to show that once a society/civilization has overshot its carrying capacity, it tends to continue on its path to collapse. There are many reasons for this, but perhaps the most significant is the tendency of the ruling class to fight tooth and nail to maintain the unsustainable behaviours/institutions/actions that support the status quo arrangements; to say little of the significant momentum of current trends. <br />Hope springs eternal, and no one can predict the future with any accuracy. I'm not holding my breath, however.Steve Bullhttp://olduvai.canoreply@blogger.com