The renowned economist Anwar Shaikh has correctly stated that the most serious challenge facing our world in the near term is the struggle between those (1 per centers) who believe things are just fine, and we should all continue full-speed ahead down the neoliberal superhighway, and those who don't. Kudos to LSE for hosting/organizing this conversation! This, in my opinion, is THE conversation humanity needs to be having at this moment in the Anthropocene. Much work needs to be done. Time to get our heads out of our "budgets" and be about the business of creating this new narrative, which can help us create the conditions to usher in a future the vast majority of our brothers and sisters across the globe are clamoring for.

@johnkintree763

Ай бұрын

Yes, the COP meetings are a farce. The delegates come from a structure of power that is hierarchical and centralized, and that favor special interests such as the fossil fuel industry. I would like to hear more about constituting ourselves as a global collective democracy that is based on the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Earth Charter.

I've always liked the Swedish concept of lagom. Roughly, it means that having too little is suffering but so is too much. I really enjoyed this talk and i feel much more positive for having listened to it. Thank you LSE.

@reuireuiop0

Ай бұрын

Just ran into a brilliant little coffee grinder, named Lagom. It indeed isn't the fastest, but makes up for that in other ways ☕

"People of privilege will always risk complete destruction rather than surrender any material part of their advantage." ~~John Kenneth Galbraith~~

@SimonBransfieldGarth

Ай бұрын

The rise in populism would suggest that this short term self-interest applies much more widely, not just to people of privilege.

@judithmcdonald9001

Ай бұрын

@@SimonBransfieldGarth The people who watch soap operas.

The global total energy consumption of 18 terawatts could be generated by 180 billion people peddling on stationary bikes where each person produces about 100 watts of continuous energy. This is to say that we consume energy at levels beyond our capacity of sustain. Any discussion of energy transition without a reduction in energy consumption is missing at least half of what matters.

@SimonBransfieldGarth

Ай бұрын

Not sure why these two are linked. We have massive oversupply of energy from the sun (directly via solar and indirectly through things like wind). The problem is we are not harnessing it and instead choosing to use fossil fuels.

@next_door_rigil3270

Ай бұрын

​@@SimonBransfieldGarthThat energy has consequences no matter if it is abundant. In the case of solar energy, it is land use. I just cant understand your mentality tbh. It feels like leaving food on your plate after filling your face just because you are in a buffet. It is ugly and disgusting.

@SimonBransfieldGarth

Ай бұрын

​@@next_door_rigil3270So what do you regard as an "acceptable" level of energy use per capita and where should that energy come from?

@next_door_rigil3270

Ай бұрын

@@SimonBransfieldGarth As little as possible of course. Enough to survive and thrive but not enough that we forget that we use energy. Renewables should be enough. Ideally, we dont need anything else. If we dont have energy at night, then great, it becomes a night for stargazing. Backup energy only for essentials and emergencies not for convenience.

@karlwheatley1244

Ай бұрын

@@SimonBransfieldGarth "So what do you regard as an "acceptable" level of energy use per capita and where should that energy come from?" The average human has to shrink their consumption and wastes down to what about 3-3.5 acres of habitable land can provide per year. Right now, the average American's footprint is 21 acres/year, so we must shrink energy and material consumption by over 80% or worsening ecological and societal breakdown is inevitable.

im reading it right now, very good book

MSM seems to be reporting weather events loudly now. It may be that as loss and damage effects people then the add on effects of insurance and economic loss MAY serve as some inducement to stimulate AT LEAST some markedly new approach.

The cliche goes follow the money. This has at least two meanings / consequences. Firstly, Look at the capital flows from who to whom and where the flows end up. The second is stop dead in its tracks the ideology that money rules the world, and operate only on real and natural indices for the living and resource planet. Forget the money you can't eat or drink it, and if we matured somewhat as a species wouldn't need to continue it to the detriment of all we know and love about this planet on which we live. All else is related to commodification and financialisation is bunkum and ideology. We are quickly discovering if we are intelligent, emotional living beings or crud. The pointer atm is swinging strongly toward the latter. Nice book and very readable from Mr Robinson.

It is hard to imagine us avoiding +2°C. Primarily, that involves reducing emissions to zero. We are 54 months behind in a 120 month commitment to that end. Realizing that we will go beyond the +1.5°C threshold permanently in by 2030, +2°C by 2045, one would have to conclude our failure is inevitable. The plan he describes is from the mid eighties. Which would have been a good thing to do... back then. Now, this sort of thinking kinda misses the obvious. A world of +2°C is a planet in severe crisis. The act of reducing emissions puts our system into a rapid degrowth cycle akin to collapse. A managed collapse is far better than having the floor drop out from under you. We do rely on politics to move us forward. But are we ready to shoulder up to the task ahead and push with all we have. Nothing short of an "all or nothing" campaign will keep us in the game. For us to achieve a success if some sort, we need come together as Team Human. Our society must accept the transition required to adequately address global warming.

Anybody know if they've had on economist Steve Keen?

55:47 This would be valuable if there wasn’t a major overlap between those who deny the climate crisis, and those who do not trust the medical system.

10:01 - this is an unsupported claim. There is not an accurate enough understanding to make it, and it does not factor in the effects - direct and indirect - of current levels and feedback loops. For example, best estimates suggest the 1.5-2°C level is the tipping point for Greenland and W. Antarctic ice sheet loss. Losing these contributes to further reduction in albedo, resulting in more light absorbed by the planet, and further warming. Then other factors such as methane release from permafrost thawing or, on the other side of the coin reduction in aerosol masking, make further contributions to the equation. And, having already gone over 1.5° for 2023, average temperature increases are happening faster than models predict, most likely due to understated climate sensitivity estimates used in the models. The Global Carbon Budget estimates that 8% of total emissions remain (roughly 7 years worth) before there is a 1 in 2 chance that temperatures break the 1.5° limit permanently, although we may already be there - it will take several more years to know if the 2023 temperature is the new norm. So with the limitations to what we can say about the system, it could be a wild mistake to consider a budget of a further 500gt of emissions before breaking 2°. 14:11 - that aside, this is getting towards the crucial point. Without this, and a maintenance of realist IR, there's not an ice cube's chance in the desert that we change the system in ways that support preservation and regeneration of the biosphere. And it's goodnight from him.

@guastomike

Ай бұрын

I agree. Plus James Hanson's Global Warming in the Pipeline. The future is bad even if we stop emissions now.

Save Our Planet Now!

What crap, platitudes at the edge of extinction!

Of anyone, a SiFi writer should be aware of what, how and where narratives are composed, and see what is an infinite/eternal thought experiment condensed from log-antilog time-timing, (you just look at it and you notice by resonance, math-music reciprocation-recirculation materialisation, that pure-math relative-timing motion-potential is everything and anything, if you practice verisimilitude and allow significance to emerge/emulate quantization Entanglement. What makes a good narrative made-of-making elemental e-Pi-i quantization relative-timing ratio-rates Perspective.

@jjeremyhunterr

Ай бұрын

what

@SquawkingSnail

Ай бұрын

Science fiction writers seem to have a unique set of skills and perspective that enables them to interpret realities in a genuinely useful way, so much so that as time goes on some of their work reads more like fortune telling. We should mobilise their future finding imaginations a lot more.

There's that 40 years again, now 40+, when the West went full-on denial Kubler Ross style because of the Boomer temper tantrum against the Club of Rome.

Focusing on GHGs, of which water vapor is the most important contributor, is a fool's errand, when waste heat production and retention are the real problem. Too many humans are using too many natural resources and producing too much pollution. We are now 3,000 times more numerous and every one of the 70M newborns this year will grow-up to strive for the Western model of "success", so don't judge the "less fortunate" today by their/our consumption patterns, as all are headed for the same materialistic goals. The economic theorizing is most entertaining but really a distraction when the house is burning down.

Sure as they pump out millions of gas powered vehicles 😂 this is MOOT.

Don't mention population overshoot.

All of humanity is dancing on a volcano, and the fossil fuel industry are who is playing the music

@vsstdtbs3705

Ай бұрын

Most voters are women, and as an animal, we want to survive. Old ladies can not survive without fossil fuel transport, fossil fuel food, fossil fuel medicine, fossil fuel retirement villages, fossil fuel plastics. They control the ballot box and know they can not selfishly survive without fossil fuels.