etnobofin

I commend this 4-minute soundbite to you – it’s journalist Bill McKibben putting our current climate change in the context of the history of human civilisation.

Source: Speaking of Faith (NPR)

Clive James points out this week that the exact science behind climate change theories might be up for debate (or perhaps has been scandalously misreported by the media).

However politicians and individuals have to make decisions based on the best evidence available at the time: right now, majority international scientific opinion tells us that the planet’s climate is changing, that it’s likely that human activity is causing it, atmospheric carbon levels are off the chart and if we do nothing, the consequences will be disastrous.

On this basis alone, postponing global action to change our would be highly irresponsible, and probably immoral. Maybe 10, 20, 100 years from now, our current climate science will be proved wrong. Maybe future generations will laugh at us, but at least they won’t be able to accuse us of inaction in the face of the science that we do have.

US Sea Level Trends, 1900-2000 (Data Source: NOAA/US EPA)

Elsewhere in the podcastsphere this week, George Kenney’s been talking to coastal geologist Professor Orrin Pilkey about sea level rise – an interesting hour’s conversation covering the scientific evidence for rising oceans and the policy challenges facing those who are trying to convince governments to tackle the problem.

In any case, moving away from a carbon-based economy promises enormous political and environmental benefits – decentralising power generation, reducing reliance for energy on politically unstable regions of the world, diversifying economies and offering new, cheaper energy technologies to developing countries. The meeting in Copenhagen this week is a great chance to start moving towards a low-carbon future. We’d be stupid not to grab it.

And if you’re a little jaded by all the political and science talk we’re hearing at the moment, check this out: a car that runs on compressed air.

Invented by a French engineer, the MDI engine produces ZERO pollution while running. The concept model may suffer a little from inimitably French design, but the underlying technology looks very promising. Tata has invested in the company, and there are plans to begin commercial production in 2010. The revolution is here, and it looks like a plastic snail.

Image by Passetti

2009 already looks like it’s going to hell in a handcart.   The credit crisis rolls on and with it the possibility of the worst economic conditions for 60 years. Israel and Hamas continue their mutual idiocy. (Can someone please put the leaders of both sides in a sealed room for a month and tell them to  tell ‘em to f*cken sort their sh*t out? I apologise for the expletives, but they aptly convey my frustration and sadness at what’s happening in Gaza).

Oh, and we still seem unable to help Zimbabwe, and the slaughter continues in the Congo.  And there’s that climate change thing, and Australia’s running out of  useable water.  So, everything’s alright then.

Last night I found Jared Diamond‘s talk on Why Societies Collapse at TED.com.  It’s worth spending 18 minutes watching it, even if just for his awesome Boston accent. Recorded in 2003, Diamond’s talk seems remarkably prescient, looking back on it with 5 years’ further wisdom.  Environmental change, inability to adapt, incapacity to think beyond the short-term self-interest … although his studies of environmental history concentrate on individual societies, Diamond could be describing the entire human race right now.

For me, Jared Diamond’s key insight is that human societies have a general inability to plan for the long term.  We have evolved to instinctively choose short-term benefit, even if this means long-term catastrophe.  We’re also not helped by our political processes. Although democratic government is probably the best way we have of organising ourselves, a major weakness of democracy is that it encourages policy-making based around electoral cycles.

Politicians aim for targets that ensure they get re-elected the next time around – giving most policies a maximum time for payoff of between four and seven years.  No leader seems willing to make a good long-term decision if it might lead to a lower standard of life for their voters in the short-term.

Diamond suggests there’s probably not one single thing we can do to avert global disaster.  There’s probably a dozen things that need to happen, and we need to get them all right.  Off the top of my head – dramatic and immediate CO2 reductions, giving women an equal role in all decision-making, media and politics, reducing energy consumption, a re-thinking of the benefits and side-effects of economic growth… and that’s just a short brainstorm. Add your priorities in comments below…

Image: uncultured

So yeah, I’m a bit down on the whole humanity-planetary-viability-survival thing at the moment. I blame the cold weather in Birmingham.  But there are reasons for hope.  For example:

• ColaLife.org – a project to use Coca-Cola’s global distribution system to get medicines to patients in remote villages (possibly the smartest idea I’ve heard all year – for once, I really want to buy the world a Coke).
• ICRD – an NGO involved in peacemaking that recognises the necessarily important role that faith still plays in solving conflicts.
• Room to Read – supplying books, libraries and educational acitivties to children living in poverty. Founded by former Microsoft executive John Wood.

And these programmes aren’t necessarily the best, or the most worthy of our support – they’re just three I’ve learned about just in the past 24 hours.

We have brilliant brains, we have brilliant people, we have brilliant ideas. But we don’t have much time.  As with all strategy, the problem isn’t coming up with a plan. The problem is implementation – we need brilliant leaders.   Will we make it?

Sorry for the kinda heavy post. More of a mood-piece than a think-piece. Hopefully some music soon!