Last week, it said in the SZ that we now definitely have left the 400 behind us …
Around probably a hundred million years ago, our planet had reached a state which made it possible for mammals to develop. This state remained stable for a long time. To be sure, it was an “at the edge” situation, but surprisingly, it worked.
Until humans came with their headlong plunge into the Industrial Revolution.
Because that was the time he – or rather, we – started tampering with one of the most important parameters of our ecosystem with unbelievable speed: the carbon dioxide ratio in our atmosphere. This important heat-trapping gas is a natural part of the air and during the last few hundred years – which is a rather short period of time –, its average concentration increased from an “eternal value” of 0.018 volume per cent (280 ppm) to a horrendous 0.040 volume per cent (400 ppm), because of the burning of fossil energy.
Due to the summer/winter situation on the greater half of the soil-covered parts of the planet south of the equator, the pulsing value had already permanently been more than 400 in 2014 . And by now, it is probably approaching 500 with enormous speed.
From 180 to 400 – this is an increase of 66 %, or more precisely: 2/3. And if it reaches 500, then this will mean an additional 25 %. Relative to the basic combustion value of fossil energy, you get 277,77 %!
Ladies and Gentlemen – we are talking the ecosystem of our planet, which is the basis for our lives!
Now everybody should understand that,
if in such a system,
which is complex to an enormous degree,
which constantly moves in the most fragile of equilibria
you change a central parameter
by two or three times its value,
this must cause a massive change to the entire system!
Also, it seems rather plausible that this change will be felt with some delay and not linearly, either. Instead, it manifests itself in various ways. Which makes matters even worse, because we will always notice the reaction to our behaviour after a long delay. To make up for it, those reactions will be so much the more massive. And if feedback cycles are too long, the willingness to make decisions and take measures will be even less.
You only need a little technological thinking in order to realize this. And it is something everybody who has been socialized with the natural sciences and as an engineer in the 20th century after the ages of enlightenment and industrial revolution should understand. To be sure, you need some good intensions if you decide not to ignore negative, and therefore hindering, information.
Climate models and computer simulations show that something will happen and they also outline scenarios of what might happen. So far, the models are probably far from sufficient to really mirror reality. But still, we should at least take the scenarios of the future gained through these calculated predictions rather seriously. Especially if the actual development keeps supporting them.
Basically, this means that the entire discussion about the end of fossil energy is vain. This is certainly not about where to find more crude oil or gas. Instead, it is all about terminating the mass emission of carbon dioxide as quickly as possible.
Because the carbon dioxide ratio of our atmosphere must be brought down to below 400!
New methods which, after all, often generate more carbon dioxide during the production period than they will later emit during their use are something that must naturally be out of the question. Since they increase the carbon dioxide ratio of the air, you need no additional arguments against them. Additional destruction and risks for the environment during the mining process are purely supplemental. Fossil energy sources such as coal, too, have to be abolished, no matter how much of them is still available.
There is only one thing left to do for us: we have to avoid and end burning fossil energy wherever possible. This is something every human being must decide by himself or herself. I personally definitely plan to radically reduce the consumption of fossil energy during the remaining years of my life. And I already started doing so.
This is not because I believe I can save the world.
This is because it is one way to make me again a little more content and happy. By now, I know that doing without too many too heated rooms in the house, by minimizing air trips, by never going by car, as well as by avoiding plastic waste and much more of the same sort and instead by practicing “active mobility” on foot or by bike and using the slow public transport for mobility, I can increase the quality of my life as much as by eating more consciously and consuming less.
If more people were to act like me, we would probably get a huge “economic catastrophe”. Half of our economy would collapse. And “hard times”, including “social turmoil” and “great changes” would quickly come. Our political and economic systems would probably collapse.
Well, this is something I would gladly accept. Too much is at stake. And, after all, I have been living off the fat of the land for sixty years, haven’t I? Consequently, I will now have to endure something like ten not so nice years of transformation. After all, innovation is always creative destruction, isn’t it? And such destruction will sometimes be more and sometimes less massive.
So far – and this is strictly a gut feeling of mine – I still see the great chance of turning matters around with halfway decent results. That is: starting something new and better out of the collapse as described above which perhaps is not quite as cruel as it seems. Who knows if this will still be an option fifty years from now?
So here is what we should do – better to make a painful break than get a final break full of pain.
Obviously, the next generation will curse our generation, as well as some generations before, as soon as they have to live with the damage we did and suffer the consequences of what we did. Because those who follow us will have to fight against warming nuclear waste as the tip of the iceberg of our legacy: dirty oceans, degraded soil, sealed areas and rivers that dried up, rising sea levels and all kinds of environmental catastrophes caused by us. And they will only shake their heads and decide it is better not to remember their forefathers. Because otherwise they might perish in anger.
At the chance that someone will be reading this article in fifty years: please accept my apologies for my personal behaviour of the last fifty years.
RMD
(Translated by EG)
P.S.
I am not sure if all my numbers have been researched correctly or if they were always computed correctly. However, I do not think this is important, because the trend is well established, more than plausible and visible, as well as noticeable. And if something is as important as this, I do not think it is permissible to assume that predictions were based on huge errors or to hope for a miracle …
After all, the causes for this trend also underline that the current ideas are correct. Said causes are strongly overacted social-ethic anti-values such as greed, waste, ruthlessness, excessive egotism, lack of humility and modesty.
Loading ...