Escaping
BAU - 450ppm, 2 Degrees C, Change Now
By Bill Henderson
16 October, 2007
Countercurrents.org
Last week Tim Flannery revealed
that the next IPCC report will reveal that
greenhouse gas levels in the atmosphere have passed the 450( E)ppm level
a full decade ahead of earlier IPCC prediction. 450ppm is the precautionary
ceiling to keep temperature rise below a 2 degree C increase above the
pre-industrial mean. Limiting the temperature rise to less than 2 degrees
has long been considered the bottom line for avoiding dangerous climate
change: for avoiding possible latent positive feedback that could lead
to runaway climate change, for avoiding an apocalyptic situation where
climate change was no longer within our control.
The bitter truth is that
GHG emissions continue to rise in spite of attempts at mitigation over
two decades. (Remember the Toronto Targets in 88?)
Also last week climate scientist
Andrew
Weaver and his UVIC team reported that their modeling indicated
that a rapid 100% reduction in present greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
plus capture and sequestering of some volume of GHGs already in the
atmosphere will be necessary to keep temperatures below 2 degrees by
mid century.
In a review of a new book
SURVIVING
THE CENTURY in this months Nature, our present growth orientated
free market economies are indicted because "(p)rogress at weaning
the world off its reliance on fossil fuels will continue to be blocked
by those who benefit from the persistent under-pricing of carbon".
"The main impediment
to tackling global warming is that many of the powerful institutions
of the world, whether it be the World Trade Organization, BP or the
investment banks that control the world's allocation of capital are
resistant to radically changing the way we operate the world economy...
Large companies, the theory goes, are threatened by actions to reduce
emissions. The oil and gas industry will suffer if the world moves to
renewable energy. Monsanto's profits will fall if we switch from industrial
agriculture back to low-input farming methods. The Brazilian government
will lose elections if it resists attempts to turn more of the rainforest
into soy farms and cattle ranches. Freely operating markets, the book
says, do not solve difficult problems. Markets concentrate power, rather
than dispersing it, with the result that the success of global capitalism
over the last twenty years has produced an elite of immense power and
wealth. Aggressive action on climate change threatens this power, and
is being resisted at every turn... (M)any of the world's most intractable
problems are only solvable if we reduce the power of the global elite,
whose influence is holding back any attempt to restructure the world's
economic system."
Capturing the sadness, frustration
and anger conservation biologist Glen
Barry sums up our predicament:
"Climate change
is not about on average being 2C warmer. It is about whole countries
and regions not having food and water, about an end to ecosystems and
agriculture, about enormous and continuous floods and droughts, and
so much more. Climate change is about death, destruction and mayhem
for billions, maybe for all...
(T)his is the core of
my sadness -- this beautiful magnificent Earth and all its bright and
brilliant creatures including human good works are going to needlessly
end because of greed, vanity and intransigence."
We can't afford to exceed
450ppm, 2 degrees, but emissions aren't being reduced - they're still
increasing.
Change can be very difficult
in our complex, service sector dominated societies. Jim Hansen hammers
away at the importance of understanding
climate change as a non-linear process, but Americans and
informed publics everywhere also seriously underappreciate that the
topography of both market and policy change has valleys and sinks. Path
dependence severely limits change in markets and government's ability
to even regulate properly let alone take decisive, interventionist action
(except maybe when faced with a human enemy like a Hitler). Far from
a level playing field where anything is possible, change is difficult
and severely constrained down paths formed over decades in the past.
There is a political science
understanding of the policy space limitations of present day governments.
Thomas Freidman's metaphor of the golden straightjacket is relevant
- can any Western government introduce any policy that negatively effects
the economy by even single digit percentage points? Almost everybody
presently involved in advocating climate change solutions grossly underestimates
this foremost impediment to needed emission reduction.
I learned the limitations
of governments, the very restricted policy space they have to work in,
as an activist in BC's failed forestry revolution in the 90s. For a
decade
I have predicted that if mitigation is restricted to just
incremental change within business as usual (BAU), emission reduction
will just be fudged: fossil fuel use will continue to increase along
with emissions and we will be toast.
80%
by 2050 won't do it - the Governator and all those who
would reduce emissions within the present continuing car-sprawl economy
are pulling your leg. TEQs or cap and trade even with a Draconian price
for carbon won't do it - although these tools could be key if our capacity
to change was unblocked. A new Kyoto-plus multilateral treaty is necessary
but faces the same fate as Kyoto 1 without a massive reconfiguration
of all of the world's economies.
Governance innovation is
needed. Governance innovation to escape BAU. Something like Lester
Brown's wartime-style coalition government with a mandate,
the power and stabilizing ability to reconfigure the American, developed
world and developing world economies so that emission reduction of a
scale needed becomes a possibility.
The reality is that massive
change globally is needed quickly and must realistically begin and be
lead by the US. Nothing less. And the powers that be are
in denial and will resist radically changing the way we operate the
global economy. How are we going to make this change a reality?
Al
Gore and the IPCC won the Nobel Peace Prize last week.
If Mr. Gore chose to show as much leadership in educating Americans
about the inconvenient political science truth about climate change
mitigation as he has done with the science of climate change there might
be a glimmer of hope that reason and not greed, vanity and intransigence
will win. Al Gore focusing attention on how to escape BAU is what is
needed to unblock our ability to confront the emergency so that we won't
continue to drift through another wasted decade.
There are promising
new digital tech ways of building a much more robust consensus
about expected climate change severity and risk probabilities where
virtually all Americans could be on the same page if not in total agreement
about both the science and politics of mitigation in time for 08. Our
governments don't lead - they are pushed. Powerful elites now control
government. Change requires a new turbocharged consensus.
If there is leadership in
identifying escaping BAU as THE problem that has to be overcome FIRST,
AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, and if such a powerfully informed consensus is
built, then there might be hope that those elected in the crucial 08
American elections will win on a platform mandating such a bi-partisan
emergency government. The best and brightest could maybe then be employed
with some possibility of success in creating a much more begnine but
still wealth creating economy. There could be some hope, some possibility
of success - if it's not too late - in saving humanity and most of the
species with which we share creation from the increasing probability
of extinction.
Bill (at) pacificfringe.net
Leave
A Comment
&
Share Your Insights
Comment
Policy
Digg
it! And spread the word!
Here is a unique chance to help this article to be read by thousands
of people more. You just Digg it, and it will appear in the home page
of Digg.com and thousands more will read it. Digg is nothing but an
vote, the article with most votes will go to the top of the page. So,
as you read just give a digg and help thousands more to read this article.