Climate, compost, and those plastic cups: Sustainability (1)
Climate, compost, and those plastic cups: Sustainability and Climate Change (1)
This past week I was at the county fair. There were science exhibits, and a display on climate-wise gardening. There was a lot of attention to garbage; it was a zero-waste event. There was an exhibit and lecture on irrigation, with, of course, some discussion of stressed and contentious water resources. After the fair I took a one-day course on grasslands and the reclamation of prairie land. There are many places where climate and climate policy fit into this mix of small activities.
I want to start with the idea of “sustainability.” When I moved to University of Michigan in 2005, I was introduced, seriously, to the idea of sustainability. I kept asking whether or not there was an accepted, single definition of sustainability. The short answer was, “no.” If you look around you find a couple of notions that are always included in the definition of sustainability. First, there is the idea that the way that we use resources to maintain our standard of living does not preclude the ability of future generations to do the same. Second, there is the idea that all of the pieces fit together into a whole. A popular notion of sustainability is “think globally, act locally”, or conveyed by the company Seventh Generation, which strives, “To inspire a revolution that nurtures the health of the next seven generations.” On a whole different scale is Ceres, which “leads a national coalition of investors, environmental organizations and other public interest groups working with companies to address sustainability challenges such as global climate change and water scarcity.” Here are some links to definitions and discussions of sustainability: @ Washington State University, Wikipedia, Environmental Protection Agency, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
It is obvious that our climate and climate change fit into the notion of sustainability, but it is not an easy relation to understand, describe and to make actionable. More directly related to our ability to sustain ourselves are population, energy, energy consumption, and standard of living. Historically we have used easy resources, because they are easy. For many centuries we were reliant upon wood for fuel and building. We cleared forests for agriculture. During the 1800s the United States was largely deforested. It became self evident that forests and whale oil were not going to support a growing population, an industrial society, and a growing economy. (A nice history of energy, and interestingly Dolly Sods Wilderness.) These sources of energy were replaced with coal and oil. All of these sources of energy have obvious, direct environmental consequences. There are also some environmental consequences that are not quite as obvious and direct; namely, those consequences due to the release of carbon dioxide.
The wealthy economies and standard of living that followed from industrialization become the priority; hence, easy energy becomes a priority. The obvious and direct environmental consequences, ultimately, become something that we try to deal with – for example, The Clean Air Act. We seek a balance of environmental pollution and industrialization – a contentious balance. Climate change is an environmental problem that is not as obvious and not as direct. It is problem where it takes, compared with a human life, a significant amount of time for the signal of climate change, of global warming, to emerge over the natural variability that we are used to dealing with. In order to mitigate climate change through the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions our “easy” choice is to quit burning fossils fuels, but that is not an easy choice to make if we humans exercise our prerogative of pursuit of high standards of living and population growth. To address climate change requires us to look out beyond the length of our lives and to see the value that a sustainable environment will have to those who follow us.
There was a couple of years ago a paper in Nature entitled, “A safe operating space for humanity”, by Johan Rockstrom and many colleagues. Here is Figure 1 from that paper.
Figure 1: “The inner green shading represents the proposed safe operating space for nine planetary systems. The red wedges represent an estimate of the current position for each variable. The boundaries in three systems (rate of biodiversity loss, climate change and human interference with the nitrogen cycle), have already been exceeded.” From “A safe operating space for humanity”, by Johan Rockstrom and many colleagues (Nature, 2009)
This figure conveys the integrated nature of sustainability on the planetary scale. An easy example to point out – climate change is, primarily, a problem of carbon dioxide emission, as is ocean acidification. Hence, from an integrated perspective, the two cannot be looked at in isolation. But looking around the circle, all of these environmental issues are related. They are all related to population, energy, consumption, standards of living and robust economies.
I started this entry, this series, with a very mundane event – being at the fair. At the fair we talked about water, and sure climate change might be important to water, but it does not seem as immediately important as the cities’ thirst for water and the purchase of agricultural water rights (Thirsty Cities, Dry Farms). This interface of climate change on this local level is real, it is contentious, and it is substantive. Yes, I have started another series, and in it I will look at “think globally, act locally.” Yet another problem of many scales that must be addressed as we adapt to global warming.
r
Reader Comments
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 — Blog Index
Shep, you are right. The logic of your statement, "You're gonna have to settle down a bit and understand that there are minds that think on a far grander scale than yours and mine that have already hunted these trails with some pretty darn good bird dogs if we are to grow as correspondents." is ... infallible. Very well said, indeed. Then why, may I ask, do we volley back and forth with our opinions?
I grew up in the 50's. I was absolutely certain that all of our resources were endless and that our technology would be able to conquer all challenges. That was the way people thought back then. There did not appear to be any reason to think differently. Things are not as I imagined them to be, in my youth. Now, I find, I must play a serious game of catch up. Since I did not prepare to know the things that we need to know now, I feel a great sense of desperation and frustration. I do not feel frustration with this blog. I feel frustration with myself. I lack the scientific understanding and the capabilities to do the math to be able to discover these things through my own research. I lack the skills to join in a debate among actual climatologist, for they would quickly lose me in their conversations. I also lack the years that I would need to have in order to perfect my skills. So, I looked for the easy way out. Professor Rood's blog attracted me because I believed that I could find the truth of that of which I seek, on this blog. Professor Rood does an excellent job of wording things in terms that I can understand. I guess that is why he is a PROFESSOR. He has the skill set to teach others that lack his knowledge. .... Well, it is not that simple. I have to learn more of the science and the math so that I at least am able to follow a scientific conversation without being lost in the words.
Yes, I will have to settle down and allow this blog to be what it is and to quit trying to change it into something that I wanted it be. My quest, for the truth, will remain just as strong. How I discover the truth will probably have to change. My frustrations will continue but, they are my frustrations and not the blog's.
I pray that I never outlive my children and I hope that my grandchildren do not have to face a life that is far worse than our worst day. Especially if we had a chance to change that now. Should those that deny climate change and those that are less than "true" skeptics turn out to have not been honest in their assessments of climate change and their skepticism, then I will have the satisfaction of knowing that, someday, they will get the chance to meet me, in Hell. ..... Overly dramatic? No, overly honest.
OH NO! Its BIG J! - runs out of room crying
Did IQs just suddenly drop while I was gone?
nymore
Agree with my views???? Should I be satisfied with my views, I would not need to go anywhere. And, yes, you are correct. Children's games should not be played in adult areas.
I understand your history and foundation.
I was born in 1950.
I was blessed with a wealth of exposure to different disciplines. My thinking leans toward absolutes. Sometimes, maybe often, I skip over concerns I might see as moot points driven by ideology or simply of no consequence. Sometimes I'm wrong.
In my opinion, I wouldn't put all my eggs in one basket as far as climate change science is concerned. For instance, Geologists are not an AGWs best friend.
You can bog yourself down in the math if you wish or you can explore the horizon. It's your call.
BTW...Opinions were made to be volleyed. :)
I had a strong sense that we came from the same generation. You are a tad older than I but, only a tad.
I can easily understand your skepticism, when you deal in absolutes. There are very few absolutes that you will find in life. Death, is the one absolute. Taxes, runs a close second.
I understand the basic science. Math is my weakness. I am not forced to move at the same pace as I would have in a classroom. I can move at a my own pace now. Will I learn it? Well, that would be a valid question to ask.
BTW, when it comes to opinions, back in your court now. ;-)
Let me go back and check, nymore.
I find it strange that I did not respond to your links. Allow me the time to go back and see why this would be the case. I promise you that I will do so and I will respond, if I know how to respond to the links.
Added -
Ah, yes. Now I remember. I want to consult with a vulcanologist concerning post# 293. Since I have not had the chance to do that yet, I delayed answering your post# 294 until I had consulted a vulcanologist. - None of my neighbors are vulcanologist so, please, allow me some time.
?
I was not trying to be a wise ass. I was just trying state that it will take me some time. Sometimes, my attempt at humor is less than successful. Sorry.
OK, here ya go!
A skeptical opinion of politics and science. I don't agree with it all, but he pretty much calls it like he sees um at the end >>>>>>> Gnight>>>>>>> :)
My use of the term absolutes refers to "cutting to the chase" rather than dwelling on hurdles of no consequence...However, I subscribed to Existentialism for a short while in in the fall of 68 as a college freshman; maybe three or four weeks. That was the extent of my somewhat brief Liberal view on things.
I find many absolutes.
From if a rattlesnake invenomates you with a bite, you will have a bad day, to if you sit on a thermoneuclear device at ignition, you will not survive... Although an existentialist will argue, but you don't "know" this in a vain attempt at playing "stump the teacher".
Life and conservative observation is a pretty darn good teacher.
Never put faith in proofs with "zero" in the numerator.
Does having a thought process pigeon hole one as being a liberal? Strange. Absolutely strange, indeed! Divide by zero error! When there are 5 equal pieces and you claim to not want your share, then we can now say there are 4 equal pieces. We just eliminated the "zero" as being a numerator!
Tell me, if you will, what are your absolutes concerning climate change. I feel certain that the viewing audience would like to know.
L8R
img src="
Unfortunately, overwash12, the "debate" will never be settled until .................. well, maybe never.
Should the Earth warm, as models predict, and life has to struggle to exist, there will still be those that question its cause.
Should the Earth not reach the point, that the models predict, then there will still be those that will say it is still coming.
Should Hell freeze over, as IceAge predicts, then we can ask him to show us all how to build an igloo. Then we can all sit around and debate, "what the Hell just happened here?"
Added -
The short answer to your question is, no.
According to my original thought they are made out of fiberglass Dr. Willoughby also thinks they could be made from Fiberglass.
Well there is also cathodic protection also. That will extend the life greatly.
There are many condenser water boxes well over 50 years old holding up very well with cathodic protection installed in the fossil fuel power plant industries still in operation to this day.
LMAO! You KNOW how I feel? I eagerly anticipate your elaborations, on this subject.
Yes, I did see what you did there. The transparency of your statement is, well, rather transparent.
Now, if you do not mind, I think I will go "chill out".
Added -
overwash12, I understand, now, that when you suggested that I "chill out" was in reference to the fact that you wanted to have a discussion with cyclonebuster. Well, I did take your advice and I did chill out. Should you go back and read post# 301, you will have a much stronger sense of how I feel. The last paragraph pretty much sums it up, as for my feelings go.
I am being told, by some on this blog, that I should basically forget the science that the climatologist show us and we should just have philosophical and ideological debates on the subject. When you consider all that is at stake, I could care less what the philosophical and ideological debates are on the subject. Yes, let us just volley our opinions, seems to be the solution from some on this blog even though the statement has been made that much brighter people that are using much better tools have been down this path before us. I don't feel like playing a game of Pong over this. This is not a "game" that can be won or lost through verbal sparring. Agreed?
Interesting.
Is there more than one person using your log in?
Absolutes in climate change????
I think you're telling me this conversation is over.
adios
When the conversation is one of climate change you tell me that you deal in absolutes. Absolutes just do not work with climate change, do they? Even if you are speaking of philosophical absolutes. I care as much about your philosophical absolutes as you do mine. Why, oh why, would you even think that climate change should be discussed on a philosophical basis? Where, oh where, is the logic in the that? Deflection? Distraction? Avoidance of the real topic at hand? Should this be the way you wish to "converse" with me, then yes, any conversations concerning climate change that we could possibly have are, in fact, over.
How bout them Astros? Pitiful, just pitiful. Would you not agree?
Humm, what happened with the information, you requested of me, that I provided?
Did it not meet your expectations and subsequently not deserve a response ?
I find your behavior and posts suspect, with respect to forensic linguistics, as related to my gut feelings.
Yep, it's not just about the hand written word now days :)
Bloomberg Article...
I always found the name of the magazine to which you linked to be the epitome of the term "oxymoronic".
That appears to be true. Of course, the fossil fuel industry employs far more geologists than any other type of scientists, so that could certainly have something to do with it; they wouldn't want to bite that hand that feeds them, after all.
What throws you off the most? My multiple personalities or the voices I keep hearing in my head? ;-)
I am but one person. As I have said, I choose not to remain stagnant. There is nothing more to it than this.
LOL. Hey, the grass in my yard has been dead for a couple of months now. Play all you want.
Ok,,,,,, so what is your take on the consensus stuff, now that you actually have the study and not just only an overview from the media ?
Type well.....
Gnight ~`~
nymore, I am working on a response to you concerning post 292 and 293. I am not sure which will be more of a challenge to me, since I am not a scientist.
BTW, my post to ossqss concerning, " the voices in my head" was not done out of disrespect to him. Ossqss knew full well what I was talking about. I sense that this may become somewhat of an inside joke between us. This concerns a conversation we had the other day. ossqss is a good guy. I may try to jerk him around a bit, but I would never try to mess him over.
Watch this.
Hey ossqss, did you notice that I used the word "more" and not the word "most" this time when referring to two objects? Also pay attention to when I use caps and how I use punctuation. ;-) ... All in jest, my friend. All, in jest. Yes, when it comes to forensics, I fully expect to give my coroner fits.
No, nymore. I am not showing ossqss disrespect. In my own twisted way, I am showing him honor.
Wow! Now you are weirding me out. LOL
Consensus ............. on? My insanity? I actually started most of those rumors myself. And now you say the media has already picked up on it? Perhaps I may need to quash my own rumors a little sooner. ... Seriously, what consensus?
Trust me, Ossqss, I never turn to the "conventional" media as a source of knowledge on climate change. As you see, I am on a climate blog. As I have said before, the Professor writes in terms that does not send me on a "Google" search to see what it is he just said.
Gnight (insert tilde here)
Amazing how things happen, is it not :)
Yer "absolutely" right Dr Doolittle.
Even though I didn't hear you yell "Jump!!!"...I know you were thinking it.
:)
"'An Investigatory Committee of faculty members with impeccable credentials' has unanimously 'determined that Dr. Michael E. Mann did not engage in, nor did he participate in, directly or indirectly, any actions that seriously deviated from accepted practices within the academic community for proposing, conducting, or reporting research, or other scholarly activities."
"His work 'clearly places Dr. Mann among the most respected scientists in his field…. Dr. Mann’s work, from the beginning of his career, has been recognized as outstanding.'"
I'm still waiting for some apologies. And waiting. And waiting...
The thing is, as Joe Romm over at ClimateProgress says, "the current warming of the planet is unprecedented in magnitude, speed, and cause...Mann's "Hockey Stick" has been independently investigated and vindicated more times than any other facet of climate science."
Imagine that...
One last thing: Some1Has2BtheRookie, you are doing an awesome job.
So if a large group of esteemed scientists unaffiliated with Mann shouldn't be the ones passing judgement on him, who should? A panel of Fox News talking heads? Some of Big Energy's puppets in Congress? A consortium of oil company execs? The board of The Heartland Institute?
For what it's worth, your response is very prevalent throughout the Denialosphere. Not that that'll come as a shock to anyone...
Shep! Are you hearing the voices of the animals in your head too?!? Are they suggesting that you jump? I find this a bit odd. Have you found yourself trapped inside a burning building? Perhaps they are only trying to help you.
Actually, shep, the reason I chose to not remain stagnant is because I thought it was you that was voicing how well they are able to identify a person simply by how they wrote. Now, I see, you are taking cues from ossqss. Was it ossqss instead? I thought he only recently tipped his hand. Well, you know how it is when you get old. Sometimes the memory is not what it use to be. I am speaking from personal experience, absolutely.
Perhaps you and ossqss should concern yourselves more on the study of the context of the words and less on the study of the speaker. I do not like to be so easily placed into one's pre-tagged pigeon holes. I find that doing so has a tendency to distract from the true thought processes. Games can become so tedious, after you have played them for a time. ... Tell me, if you will, do these forensic linguistic kit thingies come with a built in IQ meter as well? What do I do to your meter, if this is so. Does it have a tendency to bounce around between 80 and 160 and then will simply display a reading of, " ? ". Well, no matter. IQs seem to be so over rated these days anyway. I wouldn't dwell too much on it, personally.
Seems I have placed a volley onto your side of the court. Would anyone mind returning that to me?
BTW, does anyone here know of a good forensic linguistic blog where there may be a serious discussion on climate change taking place? Or, are they too busy trying analyze each other?
Link
That link is the dumbest thing I have seen. It reads like something out of the old communist literature where they mathematically showed capitalism would collapse.
Here's a shocker:
Viewing: 301 - 351
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 — Blog Index