|
|
September 23 · Issue #8 · View online
Martin Walfisz distracted by games, technology and politics.
|
|
Happy Monday! This issue is solely about climate change. I’m a little concerned about how (relatively) little we focus on technology innovation in the climate change discourse; too many people ridicule or disregard the advances that are made. But we don’t have time for technophobia in the context of saving humanity.
|
|
Climate change: 12 years to save the planet? Make that 18 months - BBC News
“ We’re hard-wired to want immediate payoffs, even if it’s unwise.” Many of us can hopefully agree on the terrible consequences of climate change. But if that means dramatically changing our quality of life now, to probably, maybe, possibly, have a better quality of life (for our children) in 30-50 years, it becomes an almost impossible equation. There’s no question that we should all do what we can. But apart from doing less of the bad stuff, we should perhaps be doing more of the good stuff? Maybe (hopefully) the true long-term solution to fixing negative climate change effects will be to find a way for humanity to innovate out of this crisis. As much as we’re considering how to fly less, and eat less red meat, we could spend time thinking how we can help and fund technology and innovation systems to focus on environmental solutions. Politicians should maybe start diverting much more of public funds to climate change innovation, and, even more importantly, stop supporting and subsidising industries that have a highly negative effect on the climate.
|
Global Climate Finance Flows
This is what I’m talking about. The investments going into innovation and technology isn’t anywhere near where it should be. Overall, we note that these figures represent a small share of the overall economic transition required to address climate change. The last Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report showed a $1.6 - 3.8 trillion energy system investment requirement to keep global warming within a 1.5 degree scenario and avoid the most harmful effects of climate change.
|
What if We Stopped Pretending the Climate Apocalypse Can Be Stopped? | The New Yorker
An important perspective (please disregard the dramatic headline). The climate crisis is already here – it’s a sliding scale, and where already on it – and can’t be reversed in the time we have available. What should we do to prepare ourselves? Keep in mind that earth will survive. This big round slab of rock will live and thrive almost regardless of what we throw at it. Climate change is not an earth problem, it’s a human problem. And humanity will also survive. The issue at stake is our quality of life. Will all future humans live in Mad Maxian societies, fighting daily for survival, or will we have stable, democratic societies, but just a “warmer” climate? So far civilisation and quality of life has dramatically improved throughout history. Will climate change and destructive technologies be powerful enough to stop the force of civilisation? Or maybe it always has?
|
The Simplest Explanation Of Global Warming Ever
As a bit of background, not least to why we always talk about carbon dioxide (CO2) in this context. The article is quite scientific, despite the comforting headline. Interesting nonetheless. All of this leads to a very straightforward conclusion: if we increase the concentrations of infrared-absorbing gases in our atmosphere, like CO2 and CH4, the Earth’s temperature will rise. Given that the temperature record unequivocally shows that the Earth is warming, and we have put these additional proverbial blankets onto our atmosphere, it seems like a slam dunk that this is cause-and-effect at work.
|
Greta Thunberg and George Monbiot make short film on the climate crisis
This is a hugely important message. But planting trees has a delay of more than thirty years before the tree has grown enough (and thus absorbed CO2) to offset the CO2 released by using a grown tree for biofuel. Therefore, we need to protect the growing trees and don’t cut them down in the future. #PROTECT #RESTORE #FUND Planting trees is great. But not quick enough. We need to innovate and change faster. (But, in anticipation of better solutions, plant trees now!)
|
Trees and Carbon Dioxide: What Is the True Connection?
The headline says it all. In case you want to learn more.
|
A New Bioreactor Captures as Much Carbon as an Acre of Trees
Now, here’s potentially a very efficient way of absorbing CO2 into plants. We should all help fund these types of initiatives. Maybe we should invest the money saved from eating less meat, in this new technology. Joking aside, it would be a win-win. :)
|
Why is Greta Thunberg so triggering for certain men?
It’s really a side note to the much more important story of climate change, but this is just sad. Unfortunately I have too many people in my own social feeds that seem to have a problem with Greta. She’s amazing at raising much-needed awareness. We should all be grateful and applaud her tireless efforts. Part of the reason she inspires such rage, of course, is blindingly obvious. Climate change is terrifying. The Amazon is burning. So too is the Savannah. Parts of the Arctic are on fire. Sea levels are rising. There are more vicious storms and wildfires and droughts and floods. Denial is easier than confronting the terrifying truth.
|
What Are Salt Reactors? | Molten Salt Reactor News and Advantages
The last link for today, but potentially the most important. Maybe nuclear reactors ( modern; not the Chernobyl kind) is the future of clean energy? If we only dared to innovate (faster) in this space. But in a Moltex assembly tank, the company says, it would then be filled with “safe molten salt coolant, which is not pressurized like gas or water coolants in today’s power reactors and not violently reactive with air and water.”
|
Did you enjoy this issue?
|
|
|
|
If you don't want these updates anymore, please unsubscribe here.
If you were forwarded this newsletter and you like it, you can subscribe here.
|
|
|