Notre Dame, Before the Disastrous Fire
Over at Yale Climate Connections, a recent article exhorts us to abjure climate doom and gloom.
“This is the fight of our lives, and it’s a multigenerational task,” Hassol says. “We need what’s been called ‘cathedral thinking.’ That is, the people who started working on that stone foundation, they never saw the thing finished. It took generations to get these major works done. This is that kind of problem. And we have to all do our part.”
The difficulty with this view is that it requires several unstated conditions to be true.
1. The collective will of the humans of earth is a multigenerational transnational Climate Corps. No autocrats, dictators, gangs, kleptocrats, wars, shareholders, corporations, pension funds, or religious proselytizers can interfere significantly.
2. The planet has all the years it takes to build a cathedral. It took 83 years to build the National Cathedral in Washington, D.C. It took 200 years to build Notre Dame, 240 years to build York Minster, 35 years to build St. Paul’s in London, 120 years to build St. Peter’s Basilica in the Vatican, but only 4 years to build St. Peter’s in Manhattan.
3. While climate activists are succeeding, no new fossil fuel, chemical, deforestation, or mass extinctions are increasing at the same time, defeating the advances in climate correction.
The conditions in 1. and 3. are demonstrably not being met. The question raised in 2. requires further iteration. Let’s look at the menu. Do we mean how many years has the planet got before it no longer sustains any life? Do we mean how many years do we have, given the current state of development and climate change, before it gets too hot to sustain life? Something else?
NASA tells us that “Humans have caused major climate changes to happen already, and we have set in motion more changes still. However, if we stopped emitting greenhouse gases today, the rise in global temperatures would begin to flatten within a few years. Temperatures would then plateau but remain well-elevated for many, many centuries. There is a time lag between what we do and when we feel it, but that lag is less than a decade. While the effects of human activities on Earth’s climate to date are irreversible on the timescale of humans alive today, every little bit of avoided future temperature increases results in less warming that would otherwise persist for essentially forever.
The benefits of reduced greenhouse gas emissions occur on the same timescale as the political decisions that lead to those reductions.
Without major action to reduce emissions, global temperature is on track to rise by 2.5°C to 4.5°C (4.5°F to 8°F) by 2100, according to the latest estimates.
But it may not be too late to avoid or limit some of the worst effects of climate change. Responding to climate change will involve a two-tier approach:
“Mitigation” — reducing the flow of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere
“Adaptation” — learning to live with, and adapt to, the climate change that has already been set in motion. The key question is, what will our emissions of carbon dioxide and other pollutants be in the years to come?
Thirteen months ago, U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) found that the world is likely to surpass its most ambitious climate target — limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial temperatures — by the early 2030s.
Beyond that threshold, scientists have found, climate disasters will become so extreme that people will not be able to adapt. Basic components of the Earth system will be fundamentally, irrevocably altered. Heat waves, famines and infectious diseases could claim millions of additional lives by century’s end.
At our current global pace of carbon emissions, the world will burn through its remaining “carbon budget” by 2030. Doing so would put the long-term goal of keeping global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) irrevocably out of reach.
In 2022, China approved its largest expansion of coal-fired power plants since 2015. Amid soaring profits, major oil companies are dialing back their clean-energy initiatives and deepening investments in fossil fuels.
The world will not avoid catastrophic warming unless rich nations speed up their own carbon cuts and help poorer countries do the same.
What’s not yet clear is whether world leaders will follow through. When asked about Guterres’s call for developed countries to move faster toward net-zero emissions, a State Department spokesperson instead directed attention toward China, which is now the world’s largest annual producer of greenhouse gases.
But the planet can’t afford further delays or finger-pointing, the U.N. chief said.
“Demanding others move first only ensures humanity comes last,” he said. “We don’t have a moment to lose.”
So that’s the playing field. What do we see in the road ahead? Among other things:
The collapse or severe undermining of institutions that have existed for many generations, including nation-states, banking, finance, transnational governing bodies and authorities.
Ongoing housing crises as formerly safe areas are threatened by sea level rise or repeated flooding, causing migration and housing supply shortages in other, safer regions. Refugee camps.
3. Failures of diplomacy and international relations. More political polarization.
4. Declining birth rates.
5. Continued severe drought and wildfires, deluges of historic floods and rain.
6. Crop failures due to extreme or unusual weather patterns.
7. Significant challenges with pollination and seeding, perhaps due to reduced insect populations. invasive species and/or contagions harming natural ecosystems and wildlife.
8. More pandemics.
9. More human migrations and uprisings. More nationalism, ignorance, MAGA type reactions to existing capitalist and socialist regimes that left thousands of communities worldwide stranded economically and unserved by government.
10. Continued depletion of water supplies, disappearance of glaciers, accelerated sea level rise.
Let’s recognize that it’s important to stare death in the face, acknowledge it, and proceed from that fork in the trail. It is not okay to pretend that the planet is not in mortal peril, it is not okay to pretend that we the people can fix it faster than fossil fuel companies and their government minions can kill us all, and it is not okay to lie to our children about what’s in the road ahead.
What to do? Vote, at every level from local to national, and pay attention every day.
We’re all in this together.
What frequently gets lost or confused in these types of discussions, be it scholarly articles, Substack newsletters, or letters to the editor is the distinction between “life on earth” and human life and in the case of the former the often tossed around generic word “life” (all, some or what form?) and in the case of the latter all human life, some human life, or civilization as we have come to know and understand it (and then are we talking all civilization or only first world civilization?).
Life in some form has existed for hundreds of millions of years on Earth. It has and will continue to exist through a multitude of climate extremes and conditions. So no big deal. Continued denial is acceptable. This is also the view some well learned geologists and geophysicists have taken on the subject of climate change. I suspect a large number of those in those professions that profess this view also likely work in an industry that employs many in those professions - oil and gas exploration and petroleum engineering. I stopped reading their Substack comments and LinkedIn newsletters long ago.
As Martha correctly articulates in her Items 1 and 3 and the timescale discussion of Item 2 is the mitigation and more importantly the adaptation required. This is the human scale, human life, civilization side of the subject.
National leaders and corporate CEO’s are too vested in their myopic thinking of short term reelections, monetary gains, and daily power struggles. They will not ride to the rescue.
“Demanding others move first only ensures humanity comes last,” And that’s only if the problem is first acknowledged.
Martha’s ten road signs are serious and real. Many Historians and archaeologists who study civilization collapse are onboard with this thinking. Pay attention.
“Let’s recognize that it’s important to stare death in the face, acknowledge it, and proceed from that fork in the trail. It is not okay to pretend that the planet is not in mortal peril, it is not okay to pretend that we the people can fix it faster than fossil fuel companies and their government minions can kill us all, and it is not okay to lie to our children about what’s in the road ahead. “
Some people and some form of lesser desirable civilization will make it through.
I don’t often recommend other Substacks, mostly because the ones I read all seem to be the same ones the other commenters read. (The dangerous echo chamber syndrome.) But if you really want a dead serious, if not truly dark, view of the climate, energy, economic, and civilization collapse road ahead, take a radical detour to The Honest Sorcerer SubStack. No one knows the identity of the author, he posts as an anonymous “B”, is located in Europe (probably Germany or a nearby industrial country), and works for a multinational. B looks at the subject through the lens of resource depletion, fallacies of current and alternative forms of energy, and collapse of government, societal, and economic institutions.
Deep breath, we’re all screwed already.
Martha, the scenario that you have just laid down is the one that came to me as I thought through the issues. Humans are riding on a boat, various factions rowing in all opposite directions of the compass, while the tidal wave is nonetheless bearing down. No question that a (not very) future generation is going to live through some rough times (I believe some humans will survive). What I think is just hilarious is that not only will people not change, if/when the climate stabilizes and starts to cool again, all the same factions will arise, but in that time they will all be worried about the impending "big freeze"! Imagine, "How can we stop this planet from cooling!?"