Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it  (Read 73715 times)

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #100 on: March 14, 2015, 11:10:28 AM »
and im willing to bet ur both far happier than u were in either place before.

Not yet, it was a lot of hard work, we're still recovering. But it should get better in years to come.

Quote
i think thats the piece of the dialogue we forget to mention when we make these changes.  a simpler life is a better, happier, more connected life.

Yes, this is what needs to be demonstrated, and is demonstrated all around the world.

The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

viddaloo

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #101 on: March 14, 2015, 12:06:33 PM »
I'm not for communism. On the contrary, I believe there have to be differences between people. But there has to be a cap on this difference. And so we need to discuss how much one person is allowed to own. I don't care how much it is. In fact, I don't want it to be too low. It has to be much more than can be won in the lottery. But there has to be a limit.

Neven, I agree 100%. I also think there should be a cap on lying. When polluticians lie about pollution, about climate projects and policies done in the past, or done right now or to be done in the future, they take away people's right to decide and vote between different options.

In short, lying is anti–democratic, as voters are left with a choice between a great honest policy and an amazing policy that was only a lie. Or in a more dystopian scenario: We are left with a choice between Lie A and Lie B.

Norwegian parliament recently changed a law that capped pollutician lying and threatened polluticians with prison sentences if they lied to voters or parliament about important matters. The problem is they changed it from being an active law into being one from our judicial past.

In other words, they removed that law. We should reintroduce it — in Norway and elsewhere — and put a cap of maybe 3 major lies about important matters per pollutician. Then you do time.
[]

JimD

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2272
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #102 on: March 14, 2015, 05:07:48 PM »
anotheramethyst  welcome and I like your well written posts.

Neven as you say it is not the Green in Green BAU that is the problem.  It is the BAU.  As I have said many times there is good value to us in much of the technical advancements being made.  It is just that, as usual, they are being misapplied and thus promoting BAU. 

In the need for degrowth there comes with that a requirement for a decrease in complexity.  Some of that decrease will be in global political institutions (like the EU and the UN) and some of it will necessarily be putting back on the shelve advanced technologies which we will no longer have the wealth and complexity to support.  They will not provide enough value to justify the expense and complexity they require to be maintained.  Large scale Green BAU falls often into this category.
We do not err because truth is difficult to see. It is visible at a glance. We err because this is more comfortable. Alexander Solzhenitsyn

How is it conceivable that all our technological progress - our very civilization - is like the axe in the hand of the pathological criminal? Albert Einstein

SATire

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 514
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #103 on: March 14, 2015, 06:28:54 PM »
Right. Scientist are also only people (I know by hard). After decades of fighting to get green mainstream finally it is blamed "green BAU".  I seriously suffer ideological burn-out.
I think we all suffer ideological fatigues of this form or another, SATire. In my case, it means I do not care if the people promoting a solution "worked hard and long" or "did their best" or "are very well–meaning". The green BAU people are not a kindergarten child that we have to comfort and encourage when it's made a new drawing. If they're promoting a prolonged industrial adventure that's essentially "kicking the can further down the road" — meaning "we deal with this later" — then it's a non–solution that they are suggesting. Or a slightly different path to (essential) extinction.

Green BAU took a lot of hard work getting where it is today. And it will be immensely hard in the coming decades. But should we all just settle for green BAU even though we know it won't solve our problems, only delay them somewhat?

viaddaloo, such ideological burn-out is also a good starting point to see things clearer, thus is not only bad.

E.g. in my private life I am close to a lot of anthroposophists people (but probably less hardcore than the people Neven found in Austria - I am living in a city...). Such life-style is not consumption oriented, very "Green" but also some kind of BAU: In the respect that there is a holistic "business" (agriculture concepts like demeter, shops, drugstores like dm, schools, a bank like GLS and now even camera producers like Leica) and in the respect that it is "as usual" since the concept is already 100 years old and a lot of people are part of it. But there is also some ideology in it I do not like but I have to accept, since the whole thing is working (e.g. sometimes religious fundamentalism or esoteric homoeopathy...). At my place it is easy to accept different opinions concerning such "ideological" issues, especially after one is in the age of "ideological burn-out" - and a lot of people are in that state and that is making life liveable.

There are a lot of other "Green BAU" (I really have problems with this term - personally I do not like to be put in that context of "Green-washing" and other negative issues I read in this term) concepts working for a while - Bioland BAU, permaculture and others.

I have to admit that all those concepts have in common that people life together in civilized societies and enjoy at least some if not all industrial benefits and thus are less carbon efficient than the few individual hardcore drop-out people managing to get around with about zero emission. But for me and my family this kind of hermit life is not suitable - we are lacking the land necessary for that, the skill and also the will.

But next to zero emission there are also other numbers/targets worth to work for while still enjoying some kind of technologies - and I am really tired for being blamed for that. I am sure that collapse will not be caused by such work and also economic issues/troubles are not a big problem, since the necessary consumption is lower. Such groups at least work in the right direction in practise - I do not know more CO2-efficient groups like such "real Green BAU" groups in densely populated areas (200 people per km2).   

Of course it would be much better if the life of Green BAU groups would become common law - see imperative from Kant. But that was not possible up to now. E.g. during the last election campaign Green party discussed a vegetarian Thursday in all lunch-rooms of companies and such. People really did not like such intervention into their private life... This is the dilemma of freedom and the integrity of others and if the "others" are nameless children they loose normally. To much force to make the people act as you like will not help and probably end in a war, which would be much more dangerous than AGW. Trying to force people is never a good idea anyway, since people will push back with even more pressure. The same is even more true if you want to force other countries - that will not work even if you are big and the other country is small.

So we are left with work in private life until we are the majority, if we want to stay in a democracy. And we want to do that for sure.

The next step is to bring the Kant categorical imperative to business life. E.g. in my case (engineering science) this is the most CO2 producing activity of my life (flights to conferences, purchase of big machines and such). To do that it was helpful to found a company to be able to do the decision making. If I would be a farmer that would be a straight-forward task. But as an engineer in high-tech production machines that is tough thing. However - 3D printing and production 4.0 and such things make a lot new things possible. So we can improve efficiency in production dramatically - but by increasing the built-in complexity just another time (JimD will not like that for sure). But I think we can manage that easily by education (which is virtual CO2 free) and software and we will be judged in future anyway.
Anyway - at this place (densely populated, democracy, high-tech & high wages) this could be reasonable and not everybody can/should be a farmer.

viddaloo

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #104 on: March 14, 2015, 08:15:11 PM »
SATire, I appreciate and agree with most of what you wrote, but I can't quote everything, and this was the part I wanted to comment on:
To much force to make the people act as you like will not help and probably end in a war, which would be much more dangerous than AGW. Trying to force people is never a good idea anyway, since people will push back with even more pressure. The same is even more true if you want to force other countries - that will not work even if you are big and the other country is small.

So we are left with work in private life until we are the majority, if we want to stay in a democracy. And we want to do that for sure.
I assume you and I disagree or have different perspectives on the high–end of the danger within the climate change scenarios. War much more dangerous than AGW? I think not. Civilisation loves war, and banks and businesses make bigger profits.

However, I agree with everything you say about forcing people when not absolutely necessary, for instance to push your dietary choices onto other people (they do that in 'ideological spaces' here in Oslo, too).

If we were in a democracy I could at least contemplate your question of whether we should stay in it or not. Your suggestion to "work in private life until we are the majority" sounds to me like the slave's morale, but I'm thankful that you brought it up. Is this what they make you believe in if you think you live in a democracy? I guess it is, and it explains why nothing ever happens.

Even if democracy was something we already had, and not something we have to fight tooth and nail for in the decades to come in order to establish, changing your private life together with your family until such families were the majority would never work within the time–frame that the immense climate problems need to be solved.

I guess you only say that because you also say a war would be worse than AGW? My last question to you, then, would be if you truly believe AGW is such a light–weight threat (to be outdone by an average war), or if you quietly make it out to be a lesser threat because you know deep–down that you or we cannot face this threat within the timeframe of "work in private life until we are the majority"?
[]

SATire

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 514
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #105 on: March 14, 2015, 11:12:40 PM »
I assume you and I disagree or have different perspectives on the high–end of the danger within the climate change scenarios. War much more dangerous than AGW? I think not. Civilisation loves war, and banks and businesses make bigger profits.

However, I agree with everything you say about forcing people when not absolutely necessary, for instance to push your dietary choices onto other people (they do that in 'ideological spaces' here in Oslo, too).
[...]
viddaloo, I grew up in the eighties with nuclear war the biggest threat. I still assume that nuclear winter will be worse than AGW. Personally I would rate AGW a big threat. But not bigger than nuclear war or other possible ways to significantly reduce the world population.

The second point: I think without significantly reduced freedom AGW can not be prevented. We need to agree to limit resources consumption and CO2 emission per person significantly. A vegy-day would be the smallest intervention into personal freedom. It must also include other means to get CO2 emission down close to zero soon - everything resulting in CO2 emission would be a crime if we would take AGW seriously. People will not like that but must accept it. That is not ideological but that is a fact.

viddaloo

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #106 on: March 14, 2015, 11:24:37 PM »
It's an interesting discussion. I was thinking conventional war, but even with a nuclear war, I think, global warming can compete. In some of the Ragnarök scenarios storms, floods etc knock out local electricity systems and meltdowns at nuclear power stations ensue. And even in a managed collapse scenario, hundreds or thousands of power stations worldwide take decades to close down safely. During all of this time they require electricity, cooling water etc.

A quick all–out nuclear war could easily be a less harsh option (if it wasn't for the fact that it, too, would melt down all the power stations).
[]

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #107 on: March 15, 2015, 04:47:13 AM »
Quote
Not technology that supports BAU, like these huge projects involving hundreds of windmills out at sea or a Sahara full of solar panels.

OK Neven, you want people to consume more than some modest amount.  That would work if you've set that level low enough. 

Now, how do we get that to happen?

We're running out of time.  There's no time to start in kindergarten and raise a new generation of low consumers then let them replace the people that you think are our problem.

You need to describe how we get from here to '350' by limiting desire.  Any ideas?

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #108 on: March 15, 2015, 09:02:10 AM »
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Quote
There's no time to start in kindergarten and raise a new generation of low consumers then let them replace the people that you think are our problem.

Yes, but there is time to prevent the next generation from being completely indoctrinated by consumer culture. I have a 10-year old daughter. I have seen in various European countries in the past 10 years what is being done to children on a massive scale. The lies they are being fed and then re-feed each other every single day, through school, through TV, through 'smart' phones. The way government and culture force teachers and parents to unconsciously condition children to become docile consumers and producers, killing all creativity, love of learning and critical thinking. The way these children are being fed, turning them into the junkies and Big Pharma clients of the future.

And you say, let's not talk about that because that won't solve the symptoms, let's just greenify everything? Sorry, I can't accept that. I can't accept the doomerism because I have a responsibility as a parent and inhabitant of this wonderful planet, but I have an even harder time with this wilful beating around the bush and trying to make an oligarchical system more palatable.

Why the continuous either/or propositions, and why this focus on symptoms, away from the cause? Because it's hopeless to even talk about it and think that will change anything? If this is hopeless, then everything is hopeless.

Doomerism is hopeless, cornutopianism is hopeless. I say no to both.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2015, 09:32:28 AM by Neven »
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #109 on: March 15, 2015, 06:19:52 PM »
Quote
Yes, but there is time to prevent the next generation from being completely indoctrinated by consumer culture.

Have you figured out how to reach the kids in redneck places and instilling the values you are giving your daughter?

We need ideas that work.

Quote
And you say, let's not talk about that because that won't solve the symptoms, let's just greenify everything?

I am not saying that we quit talking about conservation.  I am shouting that we have been doing that for decades and it is not sufficient.

It may offend you to see people living a more materialistic life than you do but your "feelings" will not fix the problem.  We need workable ideas, we need them now, and we need to put them into play.

We need solutions, Neven.  We need things that work.  Now.

Angst will not lower GHG emissions. 

Solar panels, wind turbines and EVs lower GHG emissions.  They are lowering GHG emissions.

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #110 on: March 15, 2015, 08:03:11 PM »
Solar panels, wind turbines and EVs lower GHG emissions.  They are lowering GHG emissions.

Yes, and now we need to change the system as well, so that solutions can reach their full potential.
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #111 on: March 15, 2015, 08:18:11 PM »
Solar panels, wind turbines and EVs lower GHG emissions.  They are lowering GHG emissions.

Yes, and now we need to change the system as well, so that solutions can reach their full potential.

That's fine, Neven.  Now please lay out your plan for changing the system. 

1) What sort of world do you envision?

2) What steps might we take that would get us there?


SATire

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 514
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #112 on: March 15, 2015, 08:29:44 PM »
Bob, I surely do not want to speak for Neven. But everybody here in the Forum can read about all the things he did and does to reduce his carbon footprint. That is the best plan: Do good things and talk about it. Talking about not done things is nothing.

There is nothing good unless you do it. So please forget all plans if its basis can not be done.

And if you need a plan I could suggest, that we choose Neven's CO2 budget as the max. for all people in the world. It can be done and it is clear how - so what is the problem with that real existing solution? A bit less freedom? Who cares if that helps you survive?

And next year we will find another guy with even lower footprint and get the max CO2 emission down accordingly - until we got zero one day.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #113 on: March 15, 2015, 08:40:17 PM »
Bob, I surely do not want to speak for Neven. But everybody here in the Forum can read about all the things he did and does to reduce his carbon footprint. That is the best plan: Do good things and talk about it. Talking about not done things is nothing.

There is nothing good unless you do it. So please forget all plans if its basis can not be done.

And if you need a plan I could suggest, that we choose Neven's CO2 budget as the max. for all people in the world. It can be done and it is clear how - so what is the problem with that real existing solution? A bit less freedom? Who cares if that helps you survive?

And next year we will find another guy with even lower footprint and get the max CO2 emission down accordingly - until we got zero one day.

SATire, I have a very low carbon footprint compared to other Americans.  Neven and I, with our low carbon footprints, have not solved the CO2 emission problem.  We have made very insignificant dents.

Green people like me have been talking about energy conservation, reducing, reusing, recycling, eliminating unnecessary consumption and all that other good green stuff for over a half century.  All that talk, all that "leading by example" has not stopped climate change.

Now you suggest we force the rest of the world to comply with Neven's CO2 budget.  How will you accomplish that?  Will you send the military in to kick down doors and haul away Game Boys?  Will you build mobile car crushers and go block by block smashing any cars that use more gas than Neven thinks appropriate?

Quote
It can be done and it is clear how

Who is going to head this dictatorship you envision?

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #114 on: March 15, 2015, 08:48:33 PM »
That's fine, Neven.  Now please lay out your plan for changing the system. 

1) What sort of world do you envision?

A world where limits are respected.

Quote
2) What steps might we take that would get us there?

First we talk about it. We don't try to solve the problem by not talking about the problem.

There will come a time when a critical mass will be open to the idea, because the symptoms can no longer be ignored. Hopefully the link to the root cause will have become sufficiently clear (because we did talk about it) and create enough momentum for the application of solutions I and others have described many times on the forum:

- A new definition of GDP that better mirrors what (western) society needs, revolving around primary needs instead of profit maximization, that allows for a transition towards a stationary, circular economy.
- A limit on how much wealth and land one person can own.
- A minimum basic income for every inhabitant.
- Working weeks reduced by half.
- A fee&dividend system for carbon pollution.
- A taboo on consumer culture and decadent wealth propaganda.
- The transformation of armed forces into a kind of super Red Cross that applies a blueprint for  poverty- and hunger-stricken regions to turn into a self-sufficient region within two decades, using appropriate technology and rational agricultural practices.

If we don't strive for these kinds of things, by talking about them, by stressing the link between symptoms and root cause, by living it in our daily lives as much as we can, Green BAU will only prolong the 'party', but eventually be done in by the other symptoms.
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #115 on: March 15, 2015, 09:03:15 PM »
Quote
Green people like me have been talking about energy conservation, reducing, reusing, recycling, eliminating unnecessary consumption and all that other good green stuff for over a half century.  All that talk, all that "leading by example" has not stopped climate change.

How can you say that? You and Sigmetnow put up links every day showing that things are going in the right direction. This would never have happened if it weren't for all those people who started walking the walk as far back as the 70's. Solar panels, windmills were completely unprofitable back then, but people still built and developed them. Because it was the right thing to do.

Now the mainstream is picking it up because the EROEI of fossil fuels has gone down so much that renewables can compete. That's great and shows that a lot of good green stuff for over half a century have been worth it.

But now we need to work hard at closing the cycle, by showing the possibilities of the new culture, without throwing away the baby with the bathwater. Just like the Green is good in Green BAU, the culture is good in consumer culture.

I'm trying to set an example, not just to have my ego stroked by everyone, but because it's the right thing to do, not just for the planet or other generations, but for me. It's the most selfish thing I can possibly do.

Additionally, I've set up the ASIB to show that we are bumping into limits. The next step is to show the connection with the root cause, and what could be possible for a lot of people when that root cause is truly overcome: a healthy, sustainable life. Green BAU isn't going to accomplish that. More is needed.

I know it might be hopeless, and I know, like it says in Ecclesiastes, that 'all is vanity'. I just don't have anything better to do. And Green BAU ain't gonna cut it.  ;D
« Last Edit: March 15, 2015, 09:16:53 PM by Neven »
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

viddaloo

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #116 on: March 15, 2015, 09:13:53 PM »
I know it might be hopeless, and I know, like it says in Ecclesiastes, that 'all is vanity'. I just don't have anything better to do. And Green BAU ain't gonna cut it.  ;D

Norway's most famous living poet says it: "It's hopeless, and we don't give up."

Not "BUT" we don't give up, and. That's what makes him a poet. Jan Erik Vold.
[]

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #117 on: March 15, 2015, 09:19:47 PM »
That's fine, Neven.  Now please lay out your plan for changing the system. 

1) What sort of world do you envision?

A world where limits are respected.

Quote
2) What steps might we take that would get us there?

First we talk about it. We don't try to solve the problem by not talking about the problem.

There will come a time when a critical mass will be open to the idea, because the symptoms can no longer be ignored. Hopefully the link to the root cause will have become sufficiently clear (because we did talk about it) and create enough momentum for the application of solutions I and others have described many times on the forum:

- A new definition of GDP that better mirrors what (western) society needs, revolving around primary needs instead of profit maximization, that allows for a transition towards a stationary, circular economy.
- A limit on how much wealth and land one person can own.
- A minimum basic income for every inhabitant.
- Working weeks reduced by half.
- A fee&dividend system for carbon pollution.
- A taboo on consumer culture and decadent wealth propaganda.
- The transformation of armed forces into a kind of super Red Cross that applies a blueprint for  poverty- and hunger-stricken regions to turn into a self-sufficient region within two decades, using appropriate technology and rational agricultural practices.

If we don't strive for these kinds of things, by talking about them, by stressing the link between symptoms and root cause, by living it in our daily lives as much as we can, Green BAU will only prolong the 'party', but eventually be done in by the other symptoms.

I'm sorry Neven, it's simply delusional to think that there is any possibility to avoid extreme climate change by following your plan.

Perhaps sometime in the future everyone in the world might buy into the idea of self-limitation but I doubt that will happen within the next century.  And you are aware of how fast we must cut our CO2 emissions.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #118 on: March 15, 2015, 09:26:38 PM »
Quote
Green people like me have been talking about energy conservation, reducing, reusing, recycling, eliminating unnecessary consumption and all that other good green stuff for over a half century.  All that talk, all that "leading by example" has not stopped climate change.

How can you say that? You and Sigmetnow put up links every day showing that things are going in the right direction. This would never have happened if it weren't for all those people who started walking the walk as far back as the 70's. Solar panels, windmills were completely unprofitable back then, but people still built and developed them. Because it was the right thing to do.

Now the mainstream is picking it up because the EROEI of fossil fuels has gone down so much that renewables can compete. That's great and shows that a lot of good green stuff for over half a century have been worth it.

But now we need to work hard at closing the cycle, by showing the possibilities of the new culture, without throwing away the baby with the bathwater. Just like the Green is good in Green BAU, the culture is good in consumer culture.

I'm trying to set an example, not just to have my ego stroked by everyone, but because it's the right thing to do, not just for the planet or other generations, but for me. It's the most selfish thing I can possibly do.

Additionally, I've set up the ASIB to show that we are bumping into limits. The next step is to show the connection with the root cause, and what could be possible for a lot of people when that root cause is truly overcome: a healthy, sustainable life. Green BAU isn't going to accomplish that. More is needed.

I know it might be hopeless, and I know, like it says in Ecclesiastes, that 'all is vanity'. I just don't have anything better to do. And Green BAU ain't gonna cut it.  ;D

How can I say what?

I said that many of us have been talking about conservation, etc. since the 1960s.  It has not worked.  Is that not obvious?

Later many of us started talking about renewable energy.  At the time costs were too high to make wind and solar practical.  But those cost have fallen.

Quote
Now the mainstream is picking it up because the EROEI of fossil fuels has gone down so much that renewables can compete.


No, because wind and solar have become cheap.

Quote
And Green BAU ain't gonna cut it.

It depends on what how you define Green BAU.  I define Green BAU as moving from fossil fuels to renewables and moving our manufacturing/consumption inputs to sustainable materials.


SATire

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 514
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #119 on: March 15, 2015, 09:56:38 PM »
Quote
It can be done and it is clear how

Who is going to head this dictatorship you envision?
Bob, here we tried dictatorship, democracy and socialism recently. It looks like democracy is most efficient in most aspects. So it became clear that we need to concentrate on the aspects and not on the type of the system. Education and practise are needed and reasonable regulations may do the rest do guide also the unreasonable people to life in a harmless way. So we need 50% of the people convinced or at least tolerating the necessary effort. The number of such communities is increasing and the groups are getting larger and getting more influence - just because that makes sense.

You may say again that it is an illusion to rely on reason and doing what makes sense. But that must not stop us. Probably we will not come to an agreement in Paris sufficient to stop AGW soon. But anyway we have to stop AGW. So it is worth to continue. It is better than waiting for miracles or self regulation not backed up by peoples will. You know for example the prices for PV & wind went down because people did that. In such way we can do much more. The reduction of consumption is also proven possible in smaller groups. To enlarge the number of people quiting BAU we surely need better marketing to compete with the very efficient BAU-marketing. I think "virulent marketing" is the way to go here together with the good practice and the feeling of such life with sense. Other tested ideas are welcome.

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #120 on: March 15, 2015, 10:16:12 PM »
How can I say what?

How can you say "that many of us have been talking about conservation, etc. since the 1960s" and that it "has not worked"?

You show every day with your links that all that has been done in the 60's and 70's has started to pay off now. Where else did all the ideas come from? What spurred collective consciousness? How can you be so optimistic and yet so cynical at the same time?

Quote
Quote
Now the mainstream is picking it up because the EROEI of fossil fuels has gone down so much that renewables can compete.


No, because wind and solar have become cheap.


Yes, that too, but the EROEI helps too. It's easier to compete when the easy oil is gone.

Quote
It depends on what how you define Green BAU.  I define Green BAU as moving from fossil fuels to renewables and moving our manufacturing/consumption inputs to sustainable materials.

That's just the Green, not the BAU. The Green is being done (not enough, but still), but the BAU remains the same. BAU is GDP growth at all (externalised) costs, consumer culture and the 1% exponentially increasing its wealth, at the expense of the poor and the middle class, and, of course, at the expense of functioning ecosystems.

The Green cannot fulfil its potential if the BAU remains in place. You know, business-as-usual, business being done as it always has been done. In general, not just the energy business.
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #121 on: March 15, 2015, 10:29:03 PM »
Quote
You show every day with your links that all that has been done in the 60's and 70's has started to pay off now. Where else did all the ideas come from? What spurred collective consciousness? How can you be so optimistic and yet so cynical at the same time?

Neven, I've been concerned about environmental issues for over 50 years.  Here's what I have observed.

A) Trying to get the world's population to live a low consumption lifestyle has been a failure.  It works for a small percent but they are totally overshadowed by the "Donald Trumps" of the world.

B) Researching renewable energy, improving technology has brought the price of renewable energy down to a point at which wind and solar are pushing aside fossil fuels on economic grounds. 

A - has not been successful.

B - is starting to be successful. 

Try to recognize the signs of success. 

Quote
The Green is being done (not enough, but still), but the BAU remains the same. BAU is GDP growth at all

Pay attention to the data.  China separated GDP growth and coal use starting a few years back.  And right now we're hearing that the world seems to have separated GDP growth and CO2 emissions.

I know you don't like GDP growth, but it should be clear to you that GDP growth does not have to drive GHG levels.

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #122 on: March 15, 2015, 10:59:22 PM »
Neven, I've been concerned about environmental issues for over 50 years.  Here's what I have observed.

A) Trying to get the world's population to live a low consumption lifestyle has been a failure.  It works for a small percent but they are totally overshadowed by the "Donald Trumps" of the world.

B) Researching renewable energy, improving technology has brought the price of renewable energy down to a point at which wind and solar are pushing aside fossil fuels on economic grounds.   

A - has not been successful.

B - is starting to be successful. 

Try to recognize the signs of success.

And so before B started to be successful, it was a failure? Both A and B emanate from the same mindset that came into existence in the 60's and 70's. If B is successful now, why can't A be? Because of BAU, I know. But B is not enough without A.




Quote
I know you don't like GDP growth, but it should be clear to you that GDP growth does not have to drive GHG levels.

I don't like GDP growth the way it is currently defined. If it is defined differently, I agree that it does not have to drive GHG levels. But if it really starts growing again, without any bookkeeping tricks, combined with the current oil prices, we'll have to see how decoupled things really are. And we'll possible have wasted another couple of years, talking about how we shouldn't be talking about the thing that needs to be talked about.
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #123 on: March 15, 2015, 11:18:48 PM »
Neven, I've been concerned about environmental issues for over 50 years.  Here's what I have observed.

A) Trying to get the world's population to live a low consumption lifestyle has been a failure.  It works for a small percent but they are totally overshadowed by the "Donald Trumps" of the world.

B) Researching renewable energy, improving technology has brought the price of renewable energy down to a point at which wind and solar are pushing aside fossil fuels on economic grounds.   

A - has not been successful.

B - is starting to be successful. 

Try to recognize the signs of success.

And so before B started to be successful, it was a failure? Both A and B emanate from the same mindset that came into existence in the 60's and 70's. If B is successful now, why can't A be? Because of BAU, I know. But B is not enough without A.


B is being successful because we figured out how to make it successful.

A has not been successful because no one has found a way to make it successful.  A few people being personal examples and decades of green messaging has not done the job.  Come up with something that works and we can attack climate change from two directions.

Quote
But B is not enough without A

Horseshit.

It would be quicker if we could also get people to cut consumption, but we can't.  At least we have found no way to date.


Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #124 on: March 15, 2015, 11:39:58 PM »
It would be quicker if we could also get people to cut consumption, but we can't.  At least we have found no way to date.

Yes, we have: the limits. If it weren't for global civilisation bumping ever more into limits, B would still be unsuccessful. But B has finally started to become successful (relatively, not absolutely yet) because of them. 

Now, like the Arctic rebounding after a record low year, we have to wait and see how B weathers the current rebound in oil prices (because of lowered demand, because of the limit of debt creation). This wouldn't be a problem if BAU would be changing due to A, but BAU is still in place.

Maybe bumping some more into limits, will make A more successful too?

The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #125 on: March 15, 2015, 11:55:20 PM »
Since very little oil is used for electricity generation we won't see much impact on wind and solar from lower oil prices.

B - wind and solar - have dropped in price because we started installing a lot, created a market, attracted other producers, and watched competition drive down costs.


AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #126 on: March 16, 2015, 04:02:40 PM »
The linked RTCC article is entitled: "Shell’s climate change strategy: narcissistic, paranoid, and psychopathic".

This article focuses on a letter by John Ashton and states that: " In an open letter to Shell’s Ben Van Beurden, the UK’s former top climate envoy says now is the time for to show leadership".

http://www.rtcc.org/2015/03/16/shells-climate-change-strategy-narcissistic-paranoid-and-psychopathic/
 
The open letter contains a lot of fairly tough talk about the oil industry's need to get off the BAU pathway and to recognize that they will need to leave fossil fuel reserves in the ground.
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

wili

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3342
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 602
  • Likes Given: 409
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #127 on: March 16, 2015, 05:37:04 PM »
Some perspective on the prospects of bringing our current atmospheric CO2 levels down to 100+ppm to anything like pre-industrial levels using reforestation:

"By 1610, the growth of all those trees had sucked enough carbon dioxide out of the sky to cause a drop of at least seven parts per million in atmospheric concentrations of the most prominent greenhouse gas"

So when much of the population of two continents was wiped out, allowing most of the vast areas under cultivation to revert to forest, the drop in CO2 concentration was only 7ppm.

Yes, we can do fancy things with charcoal etc. But we have many multiples more people here now to feed than they did then.

So let's not pretend this is going to be remotely easy.
"A force de chercher de bonnes raisons, on en trouve; on les dit; et après on y tient, non pas tant parce qu'elles sont bonnes que pour ne pas se démentir." Choderlos de Laclos "You struggle to come up with some valid reasons, then cling to them, not because they're good, but just to not back down."

crandles

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3379
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 239
  • Likes Given: 81
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #128 on: March 16, 2015, 09:59:11 PM »

A world where limits are respected.

First we talk about it. We don't try to solve the problem by not talking about the problem.

> A limit on how much wealth and land one person can own.

The limits you have indicated for individuals seems so high that to me it seems it will have negligible effect even if people do respect the limits rather than find ways around.

> A minimum basic income for every inhabitant.
So welfare capitalism.

> Working weeks reduced by half.
For everyone, including those that need to work longer to pay their mortgage and other debts? Or is this voluntary so people can choose to work longer (without overtime rate ?)?
If mandatory, they are allowed to write off debts or do they have to go bankrupt and lose most current possessions? Do businesses get any choice in this?

Not quite sure what you are expecting: Businesses to cut their opening hours or to employ twice as many employees or some combination or some flexibility allowed according to circumstances?

> A fee&dividend system for carbon pollution.

Good as long as it is eased in not too sudden causing ff companies to go bankrupt at the same time as causing power cuts.

> A taboo on consumer culture and decadent wealth propaganda.

Changing culture is difficult. How do you go about achieving such change?

> The transformation of armed forces into a kind of super Red Cross that applies a blueprint for  poverty- and hunger-stricken regions to turn into a self-sufficient region within two decades, using appropriate technology and rational agricultural practices.

>If we don't strive for these kinds of things, by talking about them, by stressing the link between symptoms and root cause, by living it in our daily lives as much as we can, Green BAU will only prolong the 'party', but eventually be done in by the other symptoms.


Talking to root out the best ideas that can achieve more than others is excellent. Endless repetition that gets nowhere much less so.


Mandatory cut of working week in half would seem to have possibility of being excessive if we can get renewables up to over 60% in a couple of decades. I guess you can move in slow stages half day at a time and stop if in danger of going too far. Bound to be quite a lot of problems implementing this: cheap leisure businesses welcoming it other businesses hating it especially if they need more employees and transfer of information to the people who need to know where things are up to is difficult and/or time consuming. To some extent people could and would get used to being told 'this job is assigned to person x and (s)he works Mon, Tues and Wed mornings'. Can you imagine the number of times you would get 'hold on, on Tues you said he worked Thur and Fridays' 'Errr that's right he changed his rota on Friday.' A bit of a recipe for frustrated customers, but maybe it would do us good to chill out a bit instead of expecting everyone to be available at the end of a mobile close to 18 hours a day.
 
For a country with 25% unemployment and 50% youth unemployment it may make a good deal of sense.

Do you foresee a political party advocating such changes getting enough support to bring about such changes? I struggle to imagine this - too many people would be adamant that it would be extremely bad for all sorts of different reasons. I am not saying ignore it but chances of getting such policies implemented do not look good to me. Still worth trying to persuade people such policies are appropriate but it looks like a long slow struggle to me.

I would suggest such discussion is more appropriate than just attacking ideas as delusional. But maybe the result is close to the same thing?

Getting to high percentage renewables as quickly as possible seems to me to different from 'prolonging the party' and more in the direction of addressing the most direly urgent of the interconnected problems', the cause of AGW.

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #129 on: March 16, 2015, 10:52:09 PM »
A bit of a recipe for frustrated customers, but maybe it would do us good to chill out a bit instead of expecting everyone to be available at the end of a mobile close to 18 hours a day.

You reckon?  ;D

And you think it'd be good for unemployment and all the social misery that comes with it?

Let me throw another idea in the mix: How about exchanging labour taxes for higher resource taxes, and outlawing things like planned and perceived obsolescence?

Quote
The limits you have indicated for individuals seems so high that to me it seems it will have negligible effect even if people do respect the limits rather than find ways around.

Okay, so lower them. What number would you propose? How much can one person own? 10 million? 50 million? 500 million?

Quote
So welfare capitalism.

I don't know about what label to assign to it. I'm not talking about a monthly amount of money so people can continue their consumer lifestyle, as so-called freeloaders. I'm talking about a minimum on which to get by, and if people want something extra, they can decide for themselves how much they want to work, without having to end up in the position where they have no choice but to do mind-numbing work and get completely exploited, having just enough money to buy unhealthy, addictive stuff and feeling utterly miserable, making other people miserable too.

With a minimum income they can also decide to work 3 days in the week and provide some of their food needs through gardening. For example. Or they could be workaholics and work like crazy until they hit the wealth limit, after which they have to start using their brains and be creative.  ;)

Dependence creates power, power corrupts, corruption kills democracy. If you want a strong democracy you want as many independent people as possible. Not completely independent, but at least dependent on each other for providing basic needs, instead of being dependent on enormous, multinational companies that are legally required to be interested in one thing: the bottom-line.

Quote
> Working weeks reduced by half.
For everyone, including those that need to work longer to pay their mortgage and other debts? Or is this voluntary so people can choose to work longer (without overtime rate ?)?
If mandatory, they are allowed to write off debts or do they have to go bankrupt and lose most current possessions? Do businesses get any choice in this?

Not quite sure what you are expecting: Businesses to cut their opening hours or to employ twice as many employees or some combination or some flexibility allowed according to circumstances?

Implementing such measures in the system as it currently is, of course won't work. And if you want 100% perfect, waterproof plans before even contemplating them, things will stay just as they are.

Quote
Changing culture is difficult. How do you go about achieving such change?

By talking about it (like we are doing now), by denouncing the idiotic worship of the mega-wealthy and famous, by demanding a limit on how much one person can own, by showing the relation between the current culture and the bumping into limits.

Changing culture is difficult, but we do it by talking about it with each other, for a long, long time. Not by saying 'let's not talk about it, because it won't work (fast enough)'. And like I said, 'help' is on the way: Limits will continue to be bumped into, more and more.

This used to be solely a philosophical discussion on the right way to live, but now we get this concrete, physical aspect to it, where you can really point and say: Look, this financial crisis, it's ultimately caused by a system that demands infinite GDP growth, leading to this financial industry that creates ever more insane debt constructions, like subprime derivative package stuff.

Or: Look, top soil erosion, deforestation, obesity, ocean acidification, resource wars, etc, etc. are happening because Big X needs to maximize its profits because GDP must grow at all externalized costs.

Or: The Arctic is losing its sea ice because of AGW, because of excessive consumption, because of current cultural conditioning, because GDP must grow at all externalized costs. And if this BAU continues, these could very well be the consequences.

This is one of the two reasons I set up the ASIB (and by extension this forum): show the limits, proven beyond reasonable doubt, and why we are bumping into them.

That's the only way this culture could change. By pointing out the problems, by explaining the possible consequences, by talking about the root cause of it all and what could be done to change things, setting an example in your personal life. And do it again, and again, and again. Like Frank Luntz said: "Repeat your message again and again and again: when you're absolutely sick of saying it, your target audience has heard it for the first time."

So there's your answer to:

Quote
Talking to root out the best ideas that can achieve more than others is excellent. Endless repetition that gets nowhere much less so.

 ;D

Quote
Do you foresee a political party advocating such changes getting enough support to bring about such changes?

No, I fear not. You and I will have to do it, my dear friend.

Quote
I struggle to imagine this - too many people would be adamant that it would be extremely bad for all sorts of different reasons. I am not saying ignore it but chances of getting such policies implemented do not look good to me. Still worth trying to persuade people such policies are appropriate but it looks like a long slow struggle to me.

Indeed. But I can't think of anything better. And I have nothing else to do anyway (except for gardening and reading Penguin Classics).

Quote
I would suggest such discussion is more appropriate than just attacking ideas as delusional.

Hold on, I'm never quick to say someone's ideas are delusional. In this case, someone said my ideas were delusional. And then I said 'your ideas might be as delusional as mine, because we're both human'.

Don't think for one second that I think my ideas are brilliant. I'm well aware of the limitations of my knowledge and thinking. I will hopefully hone the whole thing as I get older and wiser, but it will never be perfect. That's why I need you and everyone in the world to enter the conversation.

Quote
Getting to high percentage renewables as quickly as possible seems to me to different from 'prolonging the party' and more in the direction of addressing the most direly urgent of the interconnected problems', the cause of AGW.

A green consumer culture will not solve anything, only kick the can further down the road. We need to do what Bob Wallace proposes, and thankfully a lot is already happening, but we need to do more to make the effect even more effective and lasting.
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

crandles

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3379
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 239
  • Likes Given: 81
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #130 on: March 17, 2015, 12:19:10 AM »
How about exchanging labour taxes for higher resource taxes, and outlawing things like planned and perceived obsolescence?

Outlawing planned obsolescence might be another small wedge. Difficult forming appropriate definitions to do it: One persons suitable cheaper material with adequate lifetime may be insufficient lifetime for someone else. Outlawing perceived obsolescence? Huh, are you talking not actual planned obsolescence but customers believing there has been some planned? How would that be possible? or is it cultural view that you constantly need and want upgrades - that makes more sense. Difficult but isn't it all.

Quote
The limits you have indicated for individuals seems so high that to me it seems it will have negligible effect even if people do respect the limits rather than find ways around.

>Okay, so lower them. What number would you propose? How much can one person own? 10 million? 50 million? 500 million?

I fear if you do introduce such limits, clever people will find ways around such limits to do what they want so the policy has no real effect and this may have unintended consequences. Maybe you want it merely as a signal to help a degrowth mentality than for the effect of the limit? In which case go ahead pursuing the idea but make them easy to get around. Can't say I am a big fan of the idea.

>Implementing such measures in the system as it currently is, of course won't work. And if you want 100% perfect, waterproof plans before even contemplating them, things will stay just as they are.

I don't need perfect waterproof plans but there seemed a lot of possibilities and your answer either hasn't narrowed the options down much if at all or has completely eliminated them all.

> Look, top soil erosion, deforestation, obesity, ocean acidification, resource wars, etc, etc. are happening because Big X needs to maximize its profits because GDP must grow at all externalized costs.

Is the answer internalise those externalities or are the problems so interconnected that you cannot tackle any one without addressing them all?

> The Arctic is losing its sea ice because of AGW, because of excessive consumption, because of current cultural conditioning, because GDP must grow at all externalized costs. And if this BAU continues, these could very well be the consequences.

If we could never get above 60% of energy from renewables and all growth resulted in even more excessive consumption, then this would be a problem that has to tackle the excessive consumption problem head on because there is no other way. If we have a realistic chance of getting over 90% of energy from renewables, does the excessive consumption need as much or more priority than getting the renewable share of energy up?

There is much more to do to get to fully sustainable but different aspects have different urgency to them and the link you provided seems to indicate to me that you think climate problems are more urgent than excessive consumption by many people.

>No, I fear not. You and I will have to do it, my dear friend.

At least that is friendly. (Now how do I admit I will probably mainly wimp out? I am probably not the right person for this or some such excuse.)

>Hold on, I'm never quick to say someone's ideas are delusional. In this case, someone said my ideas were delusional. And then I said 'your ideas might be as delusional as mine, because we're both human'.

That is fine - that wasn't addressed at you - there are a few other instances of such around.

>A green consumer culture will not solve anything, only kick the can further down the road. We need to do what Bob Wallace proposes, and thankfully a lot is already happening, but we need to do more to make the effect even more effective and lasting.

We certainly need to do more. Maybe we need to agree to disagree - I think we should cheer on what Bob Wallace proposes rather than call it kicking the can down the road. I regard it as very useful progress not something pointless that doesn't help solve the problem only delay the day of reckoning.

You may have the priorities right if there is no way of getting renewables up above 60%. If renewables remain cheaper, I don't see limiting factors: land - plenty of desert land for solar, lower marginal costs than ff burning so adequate people. But if I am wrong please explain what limits us from reaching at least 90% renewables? Or why this shouldn't be the priority?

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #131 on: March 17, 2015, 05:05:20 AM »
It's hardly kicking the can down the road to convert from fossil fuel energy to an energy source that should serve us well for the next five billion years.

That's a permanent fix for a major problem.

Yes, there are other problems such as wealth distribution, but getting one problem solved frees us up to address others.  And this problem is like finding a rattlesnake in our bed.  It takes priority in my book.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25759
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #132 on: March 17, 2015, 11:35:45 PM »
How about exchanging labour taxes for higher resource taxes, and outlawing things like planned and perceived obsolescence?

Outlawing planned obsolescence might be another small wedge. Difficult forming appropriate definitions to do it: One persons suitable cheaper material with adequate lifetime may be insufficient lifetime for someone else. Outlawing perceived obsolescence? Huh, are you talking not actual planned obsolescence but customers believing there has been some planned? How would that be possible? or is it cultural view that you constantly need and want upgrades - that makes more sense. Difficult but isn't it all.


What would help here is 100% recycling... along with 3-D printing that uses recycled material to create an upgraded model on demand.  :)

People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #133 on: February 17, 2019, 09:14:04 AM »
From another thread:

The evil Elon Musk paradox. He is a scammer who invested all his money and time on a company that is going bankrupt. He keeps buying his own stock even when there is no demand. He works for free on a company that can't produce cars.

 Worst. Scammer. Ever.

I mean, how much he can really sell and then hop on his jet to some extradition free location? Wouldn't he lose a lot of money if he was a scammer? The only way for him to gain something out of this is if he succeeds.

He puts his money, and more important, his time where his mouth is. Go Tesla. This is happening.

Jesus Christ. Every conman or fraud has had everything to lose when they conduct their shady business. It's called high stakes.  If scam and fraud didn't have consequences then everyone would be doing it. I feel like I'm speaking to a child when I have to explain this to you.

But here's the thing.  Billionaires and the ultra rich get away with everything. And that's why they always scam us. That's why Exxon kept polluting even though they knew about climate change.  That's why the banks kept selling garbage securities during the housing crisis. That's why Elizabeth Holmes kept lying about theranos. That's why pharmaceutical companies push opiates to addicts. Because they're fucking rich and can get away with literal murder.

Why the fuck do you think Musk is different.  The dude didn't even start Tesla. He knew that shit was a cash cow. Look at all the government and investor money that is thrown at it. His customers and fans display a cult-like obsession. The SEC has shown that's it toothless when he's literally committing securities fraud. This is a wet dream for assholes like Musk.

Like, I'm curious, what separates Musk from the rest of the assholes that are sucking our society dry, that makes you so honestly believe that he's one of the Good Ones.
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3511
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 899
  • Likes Given: 206
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #134 on: February 17, 2019, 02:46:30 PM »
Quote
Like, I'm curious, what separates Musk from the rest of the assholes that are sucking our society dry, that makes you so honestly believe that he's one of the Good Ones.

That he is producing actual working solutions to the fossil fuel CO2 emissions of climate change. Model 3 is real. The EV revolution is happening, lead mostly by Tesla.

I know there are truths that you can't believe because they crumble your  world view, but EV's significantly reduce emissions. Batteries and solar significantly reduce emissions. Elon Musk (among many others) is making them cool and affordable.

I know he is not a fraud because the mission is working.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

crandles

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3379
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 239
  • Likes Given: 81
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #135 on: February 17, 2019, 03:24:26 PM »
This

http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/RossiECat/Andrea-Rossi-Energy-Catalyzer-Investigation-Index2.shtml

is what a fraud looks like: lots of promises and no products at all.

I get that you don't like Musk and green BAU, and Musk 'promises' or are they in many cases just suggested timelines that turn out to be 'aspirational'. There is a big difference there.

I don't like to imagine what language you would reserve for Rossi in order to distinguish him from Musk. There is a huge difference and your language towards Musk is more appropriate for Rossi.

Quote
Every conman or fraud has had everything to lose


Hmm. hardly the case really is it. If Rossi has been to prison twice over oil waste before e-cat, what else did he have to lose? More like no other options but to give another fraud a try.

What else needs to be said to show you your language re Musk is over the top? Seems like your language is designed to deliberately wind up Tesla fans; why do this?

Shared Humanity

  • Guest
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #136 on: February 17, 2019, 05:51:36 PM »
While I have serious doubts that EV adoption is sufficient to save transportation as we know it, Elon Musk is a visionary, not a fraud.

Bruce Steele

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2503
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 744
  • Likes Given: 40
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #137 on: February 17, 2019, 06:10:54 PM »
The Sunflower star die-off and heat related disease were posted on the Holocene extinction thread Jan. 29 and Jan. 30 posts # 238 & 239.  This is my world and I have been watching for several decades as things degrade. We had a very similar starfish die-in the 82-83 El Niño and the 97-98 event. The starfish did recover but as the oceans continue to warm they will eventually hit thresholds that remove them from the nearshore ecosystem and their losses will cascade in sad and damaging ways. Heat, rapid ecological transitions, disease ,death, and truncated ecosystems.
 There are terrestrial parallels , insects, birds, reptiles , amphibians, either directly threatened by heat resulting in stress and disease or affected by the loss of their primary food supplies because heat changed when insects bloomed and when the migrations of nesting birds arrived at their nesting sites to late.
 This is my world , the oceans, riparian farmland animals that I have known for my entire life .Vanishing before my eyes. I raise farm animals and I deal with them when they are sick. We don't have the knowledge , ability or skill sets to Doctor our wild environs. Most people are so damn removed from nature they never even see what is happening . They have no empathy for those things they haven't lived with, they feel no pain. The vanishing insect populations are a good example. Even those few people who happen to notice that the bug splats on their windshields have disappeared couldn't really give a crap. Dulled by their fancy machines, the glowing computer screens, their myopic politics, or just their stupidity. Nature will repay us for our vanity , heat and changes in hydrological cycles will deliver old vicious opportunistic scourges upon us too as our synthetic monitory utopia transforms into hell on earth.   
 Technology is death my friends because is removes us as active participants in our living world. Those who survive will know again the stars at night, will know again the terrible tolls of childbirth and childhood disease but the planet will again have a chance at healing from a species emotionally unprepared to deal with their strange sad attempts at taking the reins of gods.
 I am angry too Zizek , no swearing, no personal attacks . Rage against  the machine !  Sadly I am guilty too in my comforts , we all are . It defines tragic but your generation Zizek has been captured more than mine by this computer screen , know that too.

Man, introverted man, having crossed
In passage and but a little with the nature of things this latter
century
Has begot giants; but being taken up
Like a maniac with self-love and inward conflicts cannot manage
his hybrids.
Being used to deal with edgeless dreams,
Now he's bred knives on nature turns them also inward: they
have thirsty points though.
His mind forebodes his own destruction;
Actaeon who saw the goddess naked among leaves and his hounds
tore him.
A little knowledge, a pebble from the shingle,
A drop from the oceans: who would have dreamed this infinitely
little too much?
Robinson Jeffers
« Last Edit: February 17, 2019, 08:27:48 PM by Bruce Steele »

zizek

  • Guest
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #138 on: February 17, 2019, 08:06:55 PM »
This

http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/RossiECat/Andrea-Rossi-Energy-Catalyzer-Investigation-Index2.shtml

is what a fraud looks like: lots of promises and no products at all.

I get that you don't like Musk and green BAU, and Musk 'promises' or are they in many cases just suggested timelines that turn out to be 'aspirational'. There is a big difference there.

I don't like to imagine what language you would reserve for Rossi in order to distinguish him from Musk. There is a huge difference and your language towards Musk is more appropriate for Rossi.

Quote
Every conman or fraud has had everything to lose


Hmm. hardly the case really is it. If Rossi has been to prison twice over oil waste before e-cat, what else did he have to lose? More like no other options but to give another fraud a try.

What else needs to be said to show you your language re Musk is over the top? Seems like your language is designed to deliberately wind up Tesla fans; why do this?

No. Rossi is a bad analogy. He is a small scale conman. A better analogy would be something like this:

Take a company like Monsanto as an example. Monsanto isn't exactly fraudulent since they play by the rules of capitalism, and I'm sure their books are a lot cleaner than Tesla's . But to reasonable people, the fraud would be selling products like round-up while hiding the effects of cancer. Cornering markets by forcing farmers to rely on their GMO products by swindling governments, especially of poorer nations. They do this all under the guise that they're feeding the worlds population. But in reality, they just force farmers to rely on their products, dominating the market and becoming incredibly profitable

Now imagine if a eccentric social media darling like Elon Musk was the CEO of the company.   

Imagine if the CEO of Monsanto was an eccentric social media darling like Musk. And he promised to eradicate hunger in three years. A noble cause. And he has a vision.... A plant that can grow twice as fast, in the worst of conditions, and with all the nutrients a human body needs. A ridiculous proposition of course, but this man is convincing, he is smart, he is charismatic, he speaks to me, he may not by a bioengineer, but he did sell start papal - and that's good enough for me. And that's not all, he's telling us that in five years, he will develop a plant that can grow.... in SPACE. And he will build farms.... Underground.  AMAZING.

So with all that. The government starts throwing money at him. Investors are lining up at the door. People are blowing 50% of their 401k in Monsanto stock.  The sky is the limit.

Finally the product is released. PlantSX is what it is called.  It wasn't exactly what was originally promised. overall yields only slightly better than wheat and rice, in colder climates it yields substantial less, and the nutrient profile isn't quite there.  But it just needs time. He promised to feed the world. And we need more of it. He needs market dominance. Every square foot of fertile land should have PlantSX.

People have their suspicions of PlantSX of course. Should we only rely on industrial mono cropping to feed the world? Do we have other options? Doesn't matter, Musk's vision is pure, it is true, and he will feed the world. We just have to trust him.

After 5 years, PlantSX only puts a small dent into world hunger. And places that relied on more traditional farmings became devastated when they had to switch to the inferior plant. PlantSX didn't live up to its expectations. Well, except for Monsanto and its investors. They now have a complete worldwide monopoly of agriculture. Their CEO, who decided to be paid in stock, is now the richest man in the world.  Not bad. We still haven't solved the hunger problem. But just give him more time. Eat your PlantSX and shut up.


zizek

  • Guest
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #139 on: February 17, 2019, 08:29:04 PM »
While I have serious doubts that EV adoption is sufficient to save transportation as we know it, Elon Musk is a visionary, not a fraud.
Visionary of what?

His family fortune was started through slaver gem mining.

He never founded Tesla, nor has he engineered anything there
https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-co-founder-sues-elon-musk-2009-6

And I love this display of pettiness by Musk :
Quote
If that's not enough, Eberhard was promised the second Tesla Roadster to be produced. He didn't get it, a friend of Musk received that car, which will probably be quite valuable as a collectors item down the road. Instead, Eberhard received a Roadster that was wrecked. "The car was delivered only after it had been smashed into the back of a truck by a Tesla Motors employee during a so-called 'endurance test' conducted on the dense and public highway 101." That car needed 75 parts to be fixed.

And then there's SpaceX. You mean the company that that's riding the coattails off of billions and billions of dollars of previous investment by taxpayers into NASA. And now that NASA has been completely gutted, SpaceX and others are trying to force themselves into lucrative gov't contracts. It's only on the Arctic Sea Ice Forum where people consider neoliberalism "visionary"

My favorite part, is that Musk's little pet project at SpaceX is this:

A water-tower company built that beautiful piece of work.



His only claim to fame is cashing into the dot-com bubble through paypal. But then again, so did Kevin O'Leary, and I'm not sure if I'd go as far as calling him a visionary.

And all of his other half-baked ideas are no more inspiring than what you would hear at a college freshman's pot-smoking sesh.

zizek

  • Guest
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #140 on: February 17, 2019, 08:57:06 PM »
Let's chat a little more about "visionaries".

Take this company Modo.
https://www.modo.coop/about/#tile-about-modo

A car sharing cooperative.  They have 700 vehicles shared between 20,000 members. Pretty damn impressive. Thousands of people now no longer have to rely on an personal vehicles. They can bike to work and school, and in the rare occasion use the car.  They can live in higher density living where parking is limited. People who can't afford an expensive car, especially an EV, now have the option of sustainable transport. The amazing benefits of a company like Modo are pretty obvious. I really don't need to go through them.

But where are all the people salivating about these visionaries? Why isn't sigmetnow endlessly posting about the benefits of car-sharing.  Why aren't the original founders held up to the same god-like status Musk is?

Because they aren't billionaires.  I rarely, if ever, hear that term used by a layperson to describe activists, environmentalists, and leadership of companies like Modo. You see, you have to be rich to be a visionary. Musk... Visionary. Gates..... Visionary. Buffet.... Visionary.

In fact, people on this forum would describe alternatives to capitalism and the status quo a little differently. You see, Modo isn't visionary. No, they're idealist. This is how pathetic this forum is. That I have to explain this shit all the time. When will this billionaire worship and status quo defending finally end?

zizek

  • Guest
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #141 on: February 17, 2019, 09:00:00 PM »
And thank you Neven for moving this discussion here.  Where this thread will quickly die and Sigmetnow can keep on doing the happy dance in the Tesla thread. 

zizek

  • Guest
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #142 on: February 17, 2019, 09:03:44 PM »
The Sunflower star die-off and heat related disease were posted on the Holocene extinction thread Jan. 29 and Jan. 30 posts # 238 & 239.  This is my world and I have been watching for several decades as things degrade. We had a very similar starfish die-in the 82-83 El Niño and the 97-98 event. The starfish did recover but as the oceans continue to warm they will eventually hit thresholds that remove them from the nearshore ecosystem and their losses will cascade in sad and damaging ways. Heat, rapid ecological transitions, disease ,death, and truncated ecosystems.
 There are terrestrial parallels , insects, birds, reptiles , amphibians, either directly threatened by heat resulting in stress and disease or affected by the loss of their primary food supplies because heat changed when insects bloomed and when the migrations of nesting birds arrived at their nesting sites to late.
 This is my world , the oceans, riparian farmland animals that I have known for my entire life .Vanishing before my eyes. I raise farm animals and I deal with them when they are sick. We don't have the knowledge , ability or skill sets to Doctor our wild environs. Most people are so damn removed from nature they never even see what is happening . They have no empathy for those things they haven't lived with, they feel no pain. The vanishing insect populations are a good example. Even those few people who happen to notice that the bug splats on their windshields have disappeared couldn't really give a crap. Dulled by their fancy machines, the glowing computer screens, their myopic politics, or just their stupidity. Nature will repay us for our vanity , heat and changes in hydrological cycles will deliver old vicious opportunistic scourges upon us too as our synthetic monitory utopia transforms into hell on earth.   
 Technology is death my friends because is removes us as active participants in our living world. Those who survive will know again the stars at night, will know again the terrible tolls of childbirth and childhood disease but the planet will again have a chance at healing from a species emotionally unprepared to deal with their strange sad attempts at taking the reins of gods.
 I am angry too Zizek , no swearing, no personal attacks . Rage against  the machine !  Sadly I am guilty too in my comforts , we all are . It defines tragic but your generation Zizek has been captured more than mine by this computer screen , know that too.

Man, introverted man, having crossed
In passage and but a little with the nature of things this latter
century
Has begot giants; but being taken up
Like a maniac with self-love and inward conflicts cannot manage
his hybrids.
Being used to deal with edgeless dreams,
Now he's bred knives on nature turns them also inward: they
have thirsty points though.
His mind forebodes his own destruction;
Actaeon who saw the goddess naked among leaves and his hounds
tore him.
A little knowledge, a pebble from the shingle,
A drop from the oceans: who would have dreamed this infinitely
little too much?
Robinson Jeffers

I really enjoy your posts Bruce. They're very wholesome, even if the subject matter really isn't all that wholesome. People like yourself give me a firm reminder that all is not lost quite yet.

crandles

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3379
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 239
  • Likes Given: 81
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #143 on: February 17, 2019, 09:15:03 PM »

My favorite part, is that Musk's little pet project at SpaceX is this:

A water-tower company built that beautiful piece of work.

Are you predicting this will never fly?

Did you also predict SpaceX would never land and refly a F9 booster?

So what is wrong with a water-tower company being expert on building with stainless steel? The outer shell is hardly all there is to rocket science.

Is reflying F9 boosters a) impressive, b) a minor impressive stunt or c) a complete fraud, or something else?

Yeah NASA and other companies do $300 million dollar + launches. Then along comes SpaceX doing them for under $100 million dollars. right blast NASA for inefficiencies but SpaceX is the one showing up the inefficiences so why direct your ire at them?

zizek

  • Guest
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #144 on: February 17, 2019, 10:32:27 PM »
Musk is barely involved with anything SpaceX related outside of the spaceship.

You have no idea if the real cost is $100 million. He may be running at a loss in order to monopolize. And does SpaceX account for any other externalties not considered? Like the billions  of dollars NASA has spent on spacetravel, that SpaceX hasn't spent a dime on?

But please continue to lecture me on how privatization is actually a good thing.

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9805
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3584
  • Likes Given: 3922
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #145 on: February 17, 2019, 10:48:37 PM »
Zizek, here's some response to your barrage of posts:
Your Monsanto analogy is highly flawed, as it has the charming CEO causing the whole world to do the wrong thing due to his promises. I have seen you make that claim in the past - if not for Musk overpromising a Green BAU solution, the world would have done the right thing. I believe that this claim is delusional. Most of the 100 million annual buyers of new vehicles have not even heard of Musk, let alone believe him, or even care about the issue. He has far less influence than you think.
Bill Gates is not a visionary, he managed to execute on other people's visions (the mouse, the windows user interface, the personal computer) and created a monopoly. Warren Buffet is not a visionary, he took an existing method of value investing and managed to stick to it for long decades. Elon Musk is a visionary, he tried to create something all said was impossible - an affordable and well-performing electric family car. Read the Tesla master plan he published in 2006. His vision has largely come true, with some snags and delays and at higher prices than originally envisioned. Still not finished though.
Modo don't sound like visionaries. Car sharing is not new, my city has two such services, one supported by the city government and one operated by a cooperative of some sort. Many people use them, and there are reserved parking spots all over the city for them. And still this doesn't stop the loads and loads of new cars being sold here. It's a very partial solution.
Many others are visionaries and are not billionaires or even millionaires. You're just overly obsessed with Musk. He will not solve all the world's problem, but he is not the root of those problems either.

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3511
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 899
  • Likes Given: 206
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #146 on: February 18, 2019, 02:00:27 AM »
What is "not BAU"? How do we get there? Who is working on "not BAU"? How many people can "not BAU" sustain?

I agree that BAU will kill us all. I know that with certainty. But sudden "not BAU" might fail to feed all 7 billion people of the world, that will kill a lot of people and cause the same chaos climate change will cause.

How do we transition to "not BAU" without hurting those with the least?
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

wili

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3342
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 602
  • Likes Given: 409
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #147 on: February 18, 2019, 02:13:26 AM »
"I agree that BAU will kill us all. I know that with certainty. But sudden "not BAU" might fail to feed all 7 billion people"

Sooo, BAU kills us all for certainty, while not-BAU 'might fail to feel all 7 billion people'

Hmmm, I think the second is the better option. Especially since BAU is already not adequately feeding all 7 billion people.

Some elements of the Green New Deal go beyond BAU, so that's a start. But really we have to walk away from car culture, plain culture, cow eating culture as quickly as possible Every burger no produced frees up lots of nutrients that can give us wiggle room for the inevitable failures that will come about in the transition.
"A force de chercher de bonnes raisons, on en trouve; on les dit; et après on y tient, non pas tant parce qu'elles sont bonnes que pour ne pas se démentir." Choderlos de Laclos "You struggle to come up with some valid reasons, then cling to them, not because they're good, but just to not back down."

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3511
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 899
  • Likes Given: 206
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #148 on: February 18, 2019, 02:34:58 AM »
Yep. That's the thing of sudden "Not BAU". The ones doing the "Not BAU" will come to the inevitable conclusion that they must make the hard choice to live while others will need to be sacrificed, for the common good of course. Makes sense in fantasy world, but sadly that's a panic reaction that will lead to war and the end of the world as we know it, likely faster than climate change would.

We MUST have replacement technologies and social behaviors for transportation, agriculture, healthcare, education and every energy intensive human endeavor, or it is over for most people. There is no political ideology that can solve this. The root of the Climate change problem is thermodynamics and entropy, not politics.


Politics will be needed to speed up the implementation of technological and social solutions, and politics is currently making things more difficult, but politics is not the root.

I ask again because I want to hear more in order to get there: What is "not BAU"? How do we get there while saving everyone?
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

Bruce Steele

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2503
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 744
  • Likes Given: 40
Re: BAU until they peel my cold dead hands from it
« Reply #149 on: February 18, 2019, 03:51:00 AM »
Archimid, Maybe your response is the very definition of BAU until they take my cold dead hands off it.
No people and the rest of living creatures on the planet can't wait for technology to deliver rich people's  large  single driver transportation preferences before they begrudgingly change their lifestyles.
No people can't put off food preference changes, their 6,000 sq.ft. housing preferences heated by fossil fuels, their plane flying habits, their annual vacations to exotic locales, the electric demands of their comunication addictions. BAU by definition.
 If you don't believe we could currently feed everyone on the planet with beans, grains, pulses, rice and vegetables and some fish , chickens and small amounts of pork while at the same time vastly reducing our carbon footprint you'd be wrong.
 If you don't think we could transition to buses for transport within ten years you'd be wrong. If we just banned air transport of food and all but emergency transport of people the planet and society would still get through. If people just changed their housing expectations or shut off all but 600 sq. ft. to heating or air conditioning most people would still survive.
 Problem is people aren't willing to do what is necessary to save this planet. There are billions of people however that already live lives very similar to the restraints I have grossly outlined above. I am quite certain however you aren't one of them. It is your expectations and mine that will cost those other humans untold pain and hunger as climate change proceeds apace and you want to complain about the inevitable war or deprivations instant change would precipitate?  I am sure those other humans would have choice words for you and me but they simply don't have a voice.
 I would take the leap tomorrow , I would take the chance we could muddle through . I'd do it for the other living things on the planet, I'd do it for the suffering we are willing to inflict on others, I'd do it for the future generations we are throwing under the bus. If it meant a couple million rich fucks passed away uncomfortable I'd be fine with that too. Now I probably have the NSA on my ass , thanks !