Tuesday 25 March 2014

Will sanity ever prevail?


When I was a lad my father warned me of the danger of getting embroiled in political or religious debates and as I entered manhood and beyond, there were times when I reflected on his warning. People's views often defy logic particularly when individuals sharing a set of cultural values regard themselves as superior to other individuals who have different values.  Now although it is common for competing religions to be regarded as a principal cause of discontent, in my advancing years I have become more convinced that it is politics that is the root of most evil, albeit often using religion to fuel the fire.  Seneca the Younger said: "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful".  

I am someone who spent a large chunk of my working life in the defence industry, so it might sound like heresy but I do wonder why such an intelligent species like human beings, regards military might as both necessary and glamorous.  Look at typical state occasions in most countries in the world and there will be people (mainly men) dressed in decorated uniforms parading themselves and usually accompanied by an array of sophisticated weapons.  Proving what?  They they can kill others with different uniforms and weapons?  That one nation is superior to another nation?  Well the weaponry might be amazing but at the time of writing this post, the technological might of many nations can't find Malaysia Airlines MH370, which disappeared with 239 passengers on board!  So when military technology is directed towards a peaceful and extremely worthwhile endeavour, it fails miserably.  That said, the latest breaking news is that even though the aircraft has not been found after 17 days of searching, satellite analysis of flight tracking data suggests that there is a high probability the plane was lost in the Indian Ocean.

Another hot topic in the news, is the Russian annexation of Crimea to protect the ethnic Russian population from the 'fascist' Ukranians.  But hang on a minute, if this is justifiable on the grounds of historic origins, Africa was apparently the home of the early human species, the cradle of humanity, so does that give the African military forces the right to march into the rest of the world and 'protect' ethnic Homosapiens?  Although I am not sure what they would be protecting them against!

Now I could fill each of my blog posts with current affairs that defy logic and question the sanity of those who supposedly govern and protect their nations' and the world's interests.  But it would be a pointless exercise and no doubt support my father's warning of entering into fruitless political and religious debates.  I have admired for many years the now deceased management guru, Peter Drucker, and I still come across some of his extremely insightful quotations.  The one that grabbed my attention the other day was "culture eats strategy for breakfast".  Anyone who has had responsibility for introducing new strategies into organisations will know that the biggest barrier to success is often company culture - "that's not the way we do things around here".  I think Peter Drucker's words of wisdom could be extended to the behaviours of nations or, indeed, the global community.  A strategy for people to exist in peaceful harmony, is not rocket science, but implementing such a strategy would require seeking solutions to the world's conflicts, which in turn would be dependent upon a collective willingness to break down outdated cultures, rather than fuelling them.  But every nugget of strategic common sense is usually devoured for breakfast by culture!

Will sanity ever prevail?  I doubt it, so I'll return to less contentious blogging next week!

Tuesday 18 March 2014

Polluted Thinking


After the storms hit Northern Europe, with horrendous flooding and misery for many, a high pressure system has at last arrived with fine settled weather.  That's good news isn't it?  Well apparently not for Parisians because the atmospheric conditions have caused high levels of pollution.  It's blamed on minute particles from diesel exhausts, heating systems and industrial emissions becoming trapped in the lower atmosphere.  The authorities responded swiftly, firstly by giving free travel on buses, metros and public bikes over the weekend.  This was followed on Monday morning by a scheme of alternating driving days, based on odd and even number plates, for cars and motorcycles.


Now the Parisians are known to be a bit rebellious.  A French friend of mine once said "rules are for fools" and there is no doubt that not everyone complied with the restrictions, even though the aim of the measures was protect people's health.  But wait a minute, what's new about pollution?  The nasty pollutants in Paris are being replenished continuously and all over the world.  So is it now time for action purely because the toxic air is getting too close for comfort?  I find the situation in Paris very interesting from two perspectives.  Firstly, the authorities appear to have been panicked into action.  Is it genuine concern for public health or could the forthcoming Paris mayoral elections have something to do with it?  Secondly, the fierce resistance by some residents to the restrictions is, in my view, symptomatic of an egotistic human race.  A slight bit of inconvenience to, for example, one's travel-to-work plans is met with harsh indignation.

The major pollutant in the atmosphere is excessive carbon dioxide, which is responsible for on-going climate change, the impacts of which could be extremely damaging to life as we know it on this planet.  Carbon dioxide is a very long-lived pollutant, being more persistent in the environment than radioactive waste.



The level in the atmosphere has already exceeded 400 parts per million and continues to rise.  This, as we know, has a direct impact on the global temperatures and the weather systems.  Now to do anything about this requires measures that are far more draconian than those experienced in Paris over the past few days.  What's more, if we wait for the introduction of 'panic measures', it will be far too late.  In fact some would argue we have already gone past the point of no return.  Most of the carbon-reduction measures have been voluntary, with citizens of many countries being encouraged to reduce their carbon footprints.  But the measurements being taken of carbon dioxide pollution continue to confirm that it's business as usual.

What will it take to change individual and collective attitudes?  One thing's for sure, the technology to combat pollution and its knock-on effects, is available but that will not eradicate the real toxicity within society - polluted thinking.



Tuesday 11 March 2014

Connecting the dots


I have just completed an eight-week course on Climate Change, which I summarised in the eight previous posts.  I thoroughly enjoyed it and it has dominated my time allocated to intellectual activities over the past couple of months but I am now returning to other mind-stretching pursuits.  For some time I have been very interested in system thinking and its application to, for example, the world economy.  So with the Climate Change course on the back burner (solar-powered of course!) my first port of call was the Modern Monetary Theory - MMT World group on LinkedIn.  I have just joined a discussion on MMT and Morality, the starting point of which is Charles Eisenstein's book 'Sacred Economics'.  I have dipped into Eisenstein's book and also had a look at some of the plethora of his videos and essays.  He talks in a way that appeals to me about how the current monetary system is a main driver of both society's bad behaviour (notably greed) and the current economic mess.  I will return to this later but let me first pick up on some of the issues arising from the Climate Change course that, in my opinion, are highly relevant to the monetary discussion.

Obviously a key finding arising from the work of climatologists is the link between the rapid increase in human-induced carbon dioxide emissions, mainly from the combustion of fossil fuels, and global warming.  It would appear that over the past 150 years there has been a strong correlation between world population, carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and global temperatures.  For centuries up until the Industrial Revolution, these three variables had remained fairly constant but over the past 150 years there have been rapid increases.  Now correlation does not always imply causation but in this case there is strong evidence to link the growth in human population with increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and global warming.

Now let's return to the economic discussion.  My view, which I have held for a long time, is that a scourge of society is the insatiable desire for economic growth.  You only have to tune in to any TV business programme to listen to pundits extolling the virtues of company growth in turnover and profit, as well as national and international growth of GDP.  But growth means more people, greater industrial output and, therefore, more carbon emissions.  Can you see how the dots are connecting?!  Moreover, as Eisenstein (and others) are quick to point out, infinite growth on a finite planet is unsustainable.  What's more, our monetary system relies upon growth for its survival.  Money is created as an interest-bearing debt, which means the amount paid back is greater than the amount created.  So more money has to be created, which results in a bigger pay-back........Do you get the picture?  It feeds the need for continuous growth.  I see more dots being connected and dangerous reinforcing feedback loops.  But of course the fools' paradise cannot continue forever and financial crashes, which self-regulate the financial system, albeit painfully, are inevitable.  Unfortunately, however, the environmental damage to the planet is already done and because of the inertia in the system, driven by the 'stock' of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere (currently greater than 400 parts per million), global warming would continue for some time even if anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere were 'turned off' overnight.

So I see the dogma of economic growth as the real enemy within society.  Now Eisenstein is a wonderful thinker and theorist and his proposed 'gift society' where wealth, security and status don't come from hoarding but from generosity, is good stuff.  Being generous creates bonds between individuals rather than arms-length monetary transactions that thrive on competition and greed.  Now there's obviously work to be done to move from Eisenstein's concept to something that works, but if we do nothing, the dots of planetary destruction are fast connecting and there will be no winners.

So let's take positive action to prevent the apocalypse.

Wednesday 5 March 2014

Climate Change Week 8


Another new word entered my vocabulary in this, the final week of the Climate Change MOOC - ANTHROPOCENE.  It is a new geological epoch and is the period during which human activity has been the dominant influence on climate and the environment.  It is generally considered to have started at the time of the Industrial Revolution, since when carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere have increased rapidly and in May 2013 reached 400 parts per million.  If we continue to burn the known 4,000 billion tonnes of fossil fuels, then carbon dioxide levels will probably rise to 1,500 parts per million by 2300 - frightening!  This assumes we take no action to reduce our carbon footprints.

Of course we are trying to reduce carbon footprints, aren't we?  The 1997 Kyoto protocol, which expires in 2020, committed industrial nations to reduce carbon emissions.  The United Nations is now working on a new agreement to keep climate change within safe levels of less than two degrees of global warming above the pre-industrial level.  This should avoid dangerous tipping points, like the collapse of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, from happening.  If there is an agreement to meet the two degree target, it will require a 60% reduction in CO2 emissions.  This sound like a lot, but wait for it!  In order for developing countries to industrialise, developed countries will have to reduce emissions by even more than 60% - wow!  Now it seems reasonable to me that the developed countries, who have created most of the industrial pollution to date and have benefitted economically from it, should take more pain in the future than the the developing countries, who have yet to catch up economically, hopefully with far less pollution.  Whilst it's all very well talking in generalities, we need to take specific actions.

We were introduced to a carbon footprint calculator, which allows you to quantify the amount of carbon dioxide your household is producing in tonnes per year.  That's interesting, but it's just a number.  What I believe is more valuable is, through the inputting of data to the online calculator, identifying the factors that directly influence your carbon footprint.  These include loft and cavity insulation, the use of energy-efficient devices and switching off electronic devices at the wall.  Additionally, your individual footprint is affected by factors like walking, cycling or using public transport and holidaying closer to home.  I am fortunate to live on an area that benefits from long hot summers and my property has solar panels for water heating.  From May through to November the water is only heated from the sun.  During the winter months, a top-up immersion heater is required but never for more than two hours per day.  In fact, two hours is the maximum switch-on time.  The thermostat will ensure that power is supplied to the heating element for considerably less time than the switch-on period.  I am now considering installing solar Photo Voltaic (PV) panels to supply electricity to some of the electrical equipment in an off-grid configuration.  At the moment I am evaluating the technical requirements in order to specify the system and estimate the procurement, installation and support costs.  If you wish to change the world start with yourself - it's exciting!

The course isn't quite over yet as we have a feedback session later in the week, but we're almost there and it's been great fun.  I've learnt a lot.  There was a test at the end of each week on the content of that week, as well as a two-part test this week on the total course content.  The aggregate of my scores is 94% and although I don't like dropping any points, I think that's a respectable result.  I will be thanking those responsible for the delivery of the MOOC at the University of Exeter directly, but if Professor Tim Lenton or members of his team read this post, thanks again guys, it's been great!