Dear ST list folks:

In CNET.com, staff writer Michael Kanellos reports the findings of an
assessment of projected energy needs and, for every known renewable option,
what sort of ramp-up it would take to back off our lead-footed rush toward
carbon death of the
planet<http://www.news.com/8301-11128_3-9928068-54.html?tag=nl.e703>.
The bottom line is we are not only nowhere near a course toward reduced
emissions, there is not money or will enough in all the planet to build
capacity to harness the needed energy renewably.  Kanellos confesses to a to
an appetite for reporting doomsday sightings but sees no way this picture is
anything but realistic.  One quick use you may have for the article are the
numbers [they are staggering] that measure what scale an adequate building
program would require to meet projected needs through renwables.

The basic notion of "use less, use carefully" that many on this list espouse
in some form is a position that we may have come to as an ethical response
to what we have learned about the long term impact and sustainability of our
personal consumption.  What seems clear to me in light of the reported
assessment by SRI international researchers is that the rest of the planet
will not have the psychological luxury or comfort of reaching this position
on consumption via responsible reflection...they and all of us are going to
have the decision to use less taken away from them.  We simply will have
less to use and it is that eventuality that we should be personally
preparing for.  If the scale of the projected renewable energy shortfall is
indicative of shortages in other basics [and our present grain shortages
indicate how strongly fuel-lust in rich countries is linked to food planet
wide] then we are not talking about having a little less, we are talking
about dire deprivation beyond the worst we now experience in any country
with haves and have-nots thrown in to unavoidable conflict.  As a society in
the grip of a world view fostered by investments vast and cold in the
profits of the energy status quo, appropriate responses in government,
finance, technology or personal habits simply won't come fast enough, and
are already too late to be of much help.

The one "bright spot" cited, i.e. at least we do *have* enough coal to meet
demand, is to me a demented response that ignores a climate already in the
early stages of collapse under its thickening blanket of CO2.  In fact, the
clear implication of the report is that the chances of leveling off or
reducing CO2 emissions to Kyoto levels or to those prescribed in Hansen's
proposals is nil.  If someone can point me to well supported findings or
persuasively argued papers that counter my impression that the whole world's
population and its economies are basically on rails towards collapse and
without brakes, please do so.

Happy dearth day :(
[earth day is one day a year, all the rest are....]

-George

-- 
freedom is not more important than fairness and much easier to fake.
_______________________________________________
For more information about sustainability in the Tompkins County area, please 
visit:  http://www.sustainabletompkins.org/ 

RSS, archives, subscription & listserv information for:
[email protected]
http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainabletompkins
free hosting by http://www.mutualaid.org

Reply via email to