The Four Radical Steps Needed for a Sustainable Future

[Social Media]

 

In 2008, the late American climate scientist Wally Broecker warned of the dire global consequences of polar ice loss. His predictions now resonate more urgently than ever as Greenland’s ice sheets hemorrhage at an alarming rate, raising the specter of rapid sea-level rise. The Arctic Circle has been heating up at four times the global average, now exceeding temperatures from the 1980s by more than 3°C. The year 2023 saw an unprecedented loss of Antarctic sea ice. 

 

Land and ocean temperatures have skyrocketed over the past year, far surpassing what was expected during an El Niño year. Global average temperatures have breached the critical 1.5°C mark, indicating that the climate transition is in full swing. Record-breaking wildfires, catastrophic floods threatening major cities, and other extreme climate events have become the new norm, causing extensive loss of life and economic damage worldwide. Despite the mounting evidence and urgent pleas for action, meaningful progress remains elusive.

 

Historically, global prosperity has been built on the foundation of fossil fuels. However, the grip of fossil fuel giants—heavily subsidized by governments and backed by financial institutions—prioritizes short-term profits over the planet's survival. This entrenched dependency hampers efforts to transition to a sustainable future, even as the need for change becomes increasingly critical. GDP growth is treated as sacrosanct, while climate, biodiversity, health, and social equity are sacrificed, condemning future generations to inherit a ravaged planet.

 

As the chair of the global Climate Crisis Advisory Group, I recognize that such statements may seem like virtue signaling, particularly to those in the global south where development is still underway. This is not about denying them their pathway but about altering our stance in the developed world—and perhaps redefining our ultimate destination.

 

On our current trajectory, civilization as we know it will vanish. If we adhere only to current commitments—net zero by 2050—some form of humanity might survive, managing the challenges of continued extreme weather events, ice loss, and sea-level and temperature rises. However, we have the agency to change this, and a thriving future is still within reach. To achieve this, we must embark on a radical journey through the “4R planet” pathway: reducing emissions, removing excess greenhouse gases (GHGs) already in the atmosphere, repairing ecosystems, and strengthening resilience against inevitable climate impacts.

 

It is absurd to believe, as some influential fossil fuel leaders claim, that we can continue our economies based on burning fossil fuels because scientists are developing ways to capture the emissions. Recent analysis indicates that annual global GDP costs due to extreme weather events could approach 100% of global GDP by the end of the century.

 

The transition away from fossil fuels is already underway, with renewables, hydropower, geothermal energy, distributed energy storage, electric transport, and nuclear energy operating at competitive economic levels. For example, Kenya has achieved more than 90% electricity production from renewable sources, providing a significant advantage to its economy. The global transition rate, properly led by government regulations and the removal of fossil fuel subsidies, could and should be accelerated tenfold. Implementing the four Rs must be seen as a crucial risk management cost, offsetting the projected enormous financial losses.

 

Currently, the world emits over 50 billion tonnes of GHGs annually, expressed as CO2 equivalent. Given that we are unlikely to achieve a removal rate exceeding 10 billion tonnes per annum, reducing emissions to a very small figure is imperative. Today, GHG levels in the atmosphere exceed 500 parts per million (ppm), compared to the pre-industrial level of 275 ppm. A safe level for humanity is about 350 ppm, necessitating the removal of excess GHGs already in the atmosphere. At a removal rate of 10-20 billion tonnes per annum, this process could extend to the end of the century, and we must commence this immediately.

 

Additionally, repairing ecosystems is essential to buy time; otherwise, the consequences of melting polar ice and ice from mountain peaks will overwhelm us before GHG levels are sufficiently reduced. Repairing the Arctic Circle will be a significant enterprise. Promising processes are under development but are hindered by inadequate funding. Two immediate projects worth supporting include covering the Arctic Sea with bright white cloud cover during the three months of the north pole summer and pumping seawater on top of the thin layer of ice formed over the sea in the polar winter to thicken it. These projects will cost billions of dollars annually, a small fraction of the costs of lives and damage avoided. Deploying such projects will require unprecedented global governance and collaboration, but if not now, then when? If not for this cause, then for what?

 

The most vulnerable are already suffering the most from incredible changes. Investing on the necessary scale in global resilience, particularly in the global south, will not only improve lives in real-time but will also help repair the damaged trust between nations needed for a cohesive climate response.

 

Funding the development of the four Rs will fall on advanced and emerging economies. Leaders of G20 countries must take the lead. Vision and understanding from our leaders, coupled with a global public demanding more, are essential. Beyond policy changes and investment, a seismic cultural shift is imperative to steer humanity away from self-destruction towards a just and sustainable future. We must realign our political will, economic priorities, and societal values to recognize that ecological well-being is synonymous with human well-being.

 

We often hear that responding to the climate crisis requires sacrifices. However, this framing is flawed. We must find joy in nurturing what is around us, from nature to the things we own. Fulfillment should come from quality, not quantity, and from nature, not new possessions.

 

We are part of the natural world and depend on it. We can choose to transition our societies into a sustainable period of ecological civilization. As we face a self-inflicted set of global challenges over the coming decades, the need for such a cultural transformation will drive action. This process must begin now.

 

David King is the founder and chair of the global Climate Crisis Advisory Group

 

Credit: The Guardian 2024-05-29

 

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

[Tug]

I fear we are doomed to learn the hard way unfortunately as a species we can’t seem to collectively work together and the obvious forced changes needed to achieve the required results aren’t going to happen without grevious prolonged suffering…..sad 

[impulse]

4 hours ago, Social Media said:

We often hear that responding to the climate crisis requires sacrifices. However, this framing is flawed. We must find joy in nurturing what is around us, from nature to the things we own. Fulfillment should come from quality, not quantity, and from nature, not new possessions.

 

 

Here's a thought.  Quit jetting around the world in your private planes to virtue signal.  Then maybe some more of us will believe your sincerity.

 

 

[Chelseafan]

Hydrogen - It's there in abundance, its relatively clean but theres too many vested interests in holding the technology back.

 

 

[impulse]

56 minutes ago, Chelseafan said:

Hydrogen - It's there in abundance, its relatively clean but theres too many vested interests in holding the technology back.

 

The biggest vested interest is Mother Nature herself.  Hydrogen as it occurs in nature has no value as an energy source.  Hydrogen power is like battery power.  You have to add energy, and you only get out what you've put in.  The question is, where are we going to get the energy to put in?

 

Contrast that to petroleum and natural gas, which has had the energy put in over millions of years.  By Mother Nature.

 

[placeholder]

44 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

The biggest vested interest is Mother Nature herself.  Hydrogen as it occurs in nature has no value as an energy source.  Hydrogen power is like battery power.  You have to add energy, and you only get out what you've put in.  The question is, where are we going to get the energy to put in?

 

Contrast that to petroleum and natural gas, which has had the energy put in over millions of years.  By Mother Nature.

 

"The question is, where are we going to get the energy to put in?"

The same source all those fossil fuels got their energy from: the sun.

[JonnyF]

The Guardian using global climate change to push for global socialism.

 

Shocker. 

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, Chelseafan said:

Hydrogen - It's there in abundance, its relatively clean but theres too many vested interests in holding the technology back.

 

 

One problem with hydrogen is that it outcompetes methane (CH4) for oxygen. So while hydrogen itself isn't a greenhouse gas, by prolonging methane's life in the atmosphere it has the same effect. Hydrogen could have a future as an onsite source of heat for industrial processes. There has been huge progress made with electrolyzers that can break apart water in hydrogen and oxygen.

Also, there is now white hydrogen which is hydrogen created by geological processes. Whether there's enough of it to be economically significant is another question. And again, the problem with leakage could be serious.