IPCC Report

Intended for constructive conversations. Exhibits of polarizing tribalism will be deleted.
Post Reply
Riggerjack
Posts: 2666
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: IPCC Report

Post by Riggerjack » Thu Oct 18, 2018 12:03 pm

Rereading that last post, I may come off as cynical. I don't feel cynical. I feel like I got a good grip on the problem, and now I should focus on solutions.

This is a much more comfortable state of mind than focusing on the problem, and trying to get other people to do the solving. But that may just be my low expectations of others' solutions.

In the future, the world will be warmer. The sea will rise, the forests will burn, the farmers will stop sending me food. So I should prepare for this. There will be fallout and refugees. I should prepare for this. There will be wars and government will make everything worse for anyone in their crosshairs, or in the way. I should prepare for this. See the pattern?

Seeing the problem for what it is, and letting go of rock throwing solutions, is mentally freeing. All I need is to avoid the falling rocks, and build for the way the world will be. Nothing that is out of reach, just a more difficult variety of problems I was already addressing.

But the world should feel free to keep throwing rocks and posing for social media. That just makes my efforts easier, since it frees me from competition for resources to build as I wish. And the people getting tired of falling rocks can play political games with rock throwers. We all need to occupy our time somehow...

jacob
Site Admin
Posts: 11319
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 73
Contact:

Re: IPCC Report

Post by jacob » Thu Oct 18, 2018 12:08 pm

It should be noted that trust in government is at a historic low (<20% now cf. >70% in the 1950s) in the US, so it's perhaps not surprising to see Americans believing that government can not solve this. It's largely a US article of faith these days that governments can't do anything right. This is perhaps not surprising since the US government has been [deliberately] gridlocked for the past 20+ years, so that's been most people's experience/foundation for their conclusions.

For a clear demonstration, compare the infrastructure---a very visible expression of government effectiveness---in the US with the infrastructure in other countries. Faith in government tends proportionally higher in countries where the roads aren't full of potholes, bridges aren't collapsing, and trains aren't continually derailing.

Riggerjack
Posts: 2666
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: IPCC Report

Post by Riggerjack » Thu Oct 18, 2018 12:23 pm

Some say it is useless to try because we cannot reverse the warming trend completely. Is that what you are saying?
Not at all. I am saying know how to use the tools one is trying to use.

Government cannot solve this. Full stop. End of sentence. You may as well try changing a lightbulb by sledgehammer.

Government can adjust incentives. We do this all the time. But this is an incremental process, that we (citizens) do not control. Hell, we only slightly influence it.

Your example is perfect. Government has fixed smog. We can go back and forth on the who and why, but Government was brought in to solve that problem. Look to any air quality reports, and it is clear.

But how? Do you know? Did they choose the best option? The best option for who?

They did it by measuring tailpipe emissions, based time. X amount of pollution on Y seconds. So we used catalytic converters to burn unused fuel in the exhaust system.

Would it have been more effective to base pollution per unit of fuel? If one is concerned about pollution, yes. But that wasn't the issue. Smog was the issue. And here we are 4 decades later, with the same solution.

The incentives are the same. The tools are the same. The government is the same. And whatever the problem, the process is the same.

That process cannot solve a problem of this scale. We don't have time. We don't have the resources. And anything that process starts working on gets harder, for all the falling rocks.

So my solution is to start at the bottom, find a local, small scale adaptation. Then I will publish it. When I do, others will repeat and improve my adaptation. Eventually, it will be easier and cheaper, and more common.

Seems more productive than rock throwing.

Riggerjack
Posts: 2666
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: IPCC Report

Post by Riggerjack » Thu Oct 18, 2018 12:42 pm

@ Jacob,

Gridlock seems to be the scary Boogeyman those with faith in good governance use to explain the difference between expectations and results.

But that doesn't account for the same difference seen in mid 20th century, when we were a single party state. From 1957-1955, Dems controlled the house, the Senate, and the White House for 6 election cycles. They had control of the Senate the whole time. They only lost the house only during the Reagan years.

Is there a time when governance did what we expected?

I am not picking on Democrats. The results would be similar under Republicans.

I am saying that gridlock is a BS smokescreen for the same difference between expectations and results we have always seen.

Infrastructure built at this time, seems like a point in my favor, rather than yours.

Riggerjack
Posts: 2666
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: IPCC Report

Post by Riggerjack » Thu Oct 18, 2018 12:52 pm

I should point out that my criticism of government to solve this has no basis in some special quality of government to screw things up.

I am saying that herding people is difficult and complex. Herding people into complex changes is far more difficult. Herding people into complex changes that are difficult and unpopular, is beyond the scope of what a democracy is capable of.

I don't understand how this can be controversial. Look at all of human history. When has anything like what is necessary to stop CC ever been coordinated by a government? Now try several. Now all.

Government was never the answer.

ThisDinosaur
Posts: 997
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2015 9:31 am

Re: IPCC Report

Post by ThisDinosaur » Thu Oct 18, 2018 1:12 pm

@Riggerjack
Do you have a timeline for when you plan on revealing this double secret plan of yours?

I gather it involves permaculture and mud brick housing >100ft above sea level?

Tyler9000
Posts: 1568
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 11:45 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: IPCC Report

Post by Tyler9000 » Thu Oct 18, 2018 1:35 pm

jacob wrote:
Thu Oct 18, 2018 12:08 pm
It should be noted that trust in government is at a historic low (<20% now cf. >70% in the 1950s) in the US, so it's perhaps not surprising to see Americans believing that government can not solve this. It's largely a US article of faith these days that governments can't do anything right. Faith in government tends proportionally higher in countries where the roads aren't full of potholes, bridges aren't collapsing, and trains aren't continually derailing.
And when it comes to controlling climate change that faith is largely misplaced. Government-managed carbon reduction is one of the rare ideas where we've had a true ongoing experiment for quite a while now with the US playing the part of the control. The evidence isn't on the side of government bureaucrats being effective problem solvers on this issue.

IMO one does not need to be anti-government to question the effectiveness of political climate control schemes. Those convinced by the science and demanding concrete solutions should be shouting the loudest to try something new because big government clearly isn't getting it done.
Last edited by Tyler9000 on Thu Oct 18, 2018 2:32 pm, edited 4 times in total.

daylen
Posts: 1152
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2015 4:17 am

Re: IPCC Report

Post by daylen » Thu Oct 18, 2018 2:10 pm

BRUTE wrote:
Wed Oct 17, 2018 9:51 pm
that's why brute specifically said "nothing (political)"
Which is not ambiguous at all. :roll: Maybe it is just my gripe with the word "political". Rules and power pervade all levels of human organization, so anything can be interpreted as political without an extensive context.

I get where you and Rigger are coming from, and I generally have the same induvidualistic attitude. Though, it looks like there will always be humans around forming groups, and the collective behavior of these groups is hard to model. Therefore the possibility of radical change in response to a new stressor is not impossible. I do agree that it will not happen with some grand plan conjured at the level of the US government (maybe this is all you mean).

Spreading too much hope about the future is doomed to backfire. Though, I think that spreading awareness of future risks can help. People suffering some anxiety about these issues now could help them cope when the stressors come.

tonyedgecombe
Posts: 250
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 2:11 pm
Location: Oxford, UK
Contact:

Re: IPCC Report

Post by tonyedgecombe » Thu Oct 18, 2018 2:31 pm

@Riggerjack I think you are probably wrong. There has been a time when a Government did the right thing and brought the population along with it despite the sacrifices.

ZAFCorrection
Posts: 182
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2017 3:49 pm

Re: IPCC Report

Post by ZAFCorrection » Thu Oct 18, 2018 2:44 pm

@Tyler:

Stats cited in the article you linked:
https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/en/co ... ssions.pdf

The point might still reasonably be made, but that article's use/representation of the stats is somewhere between false and misleading. UK had a higher percentage of reduction, for instance.

User avatar
Bankai
Posts: 560
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2014 5:28 am

Re: IPCC Report

Post by Bankai » Thu Oct 18, 2018 2:49 pm

How again was slavery abolished? Was is free market? Or maybe...?

Tyler9000
Posts: 1568
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 11:45 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: IPCC Report

Post by Tyler9000 » Thu Oct 18, 2018 3:15 pm

@ZAFCorrection -- Fair enough. I don't think it changes my overall point about the efficacy of government-based climate solutions, but I do appreciate good data!

Riggerjack
Posts: 2666
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: IPCC Report

Post by Riggerjack » Thu Oct 18, 2018 4:32 pm

@Riggerjack I think you are probably wrong. There has been a time when a Government did the right thing and brought the population along with it despite the sacrifices.
How again was slavery abolished? Was is free market? Or maybe...?
And this is what I mean when I say grade school teachers rule the world. These are the exact "solutions" I hope get put off until after I am dead.

Yes, lots of people are going to suffer and die in the coming decades. And government is very good at that.

But strangely, it's harder to build and create than destroy. Far harder as scale builds. But bombs and corpses do make for fertile farms, so I guess that's a plus.
@Riggerjack
Do you have a timeline for when you plan on revealing this double secret plan of yours?

I gather it involves permaculture and mud brick housing >100ft above sea level?
Sorry if I seem overly mysterious. I still have hopes of a industrial strength demonstration, which requires not talking much.

But if that doesn't work out, I go back to plan A.

Plan A is a DIY container house. It just won't look like or function like what we think of as a container house. It will be insulated, won't rust out in 20-40 years, and it won't look like everything I ever learned about buildings came from playing with Legos.

I am about 2.5 years from prototype, and about 5 years from the first occupied example. My wife has talked me into a less ambitious schedule. I will post pics when we break ground.

For what it's worth, very little mud will be used. :D

BRUTE
Posts: 3803
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: IPCC Report

Post by BRUTE » Thu Oct 18, 2018 8:42 pm

daylen wrote:
Thu Oct 18, 2018 2:10 pm
Which is not ambiguous at all. :roll: Maybe it is just my gripe with the word "political". Rules and power pervade all levels of human organization, so anything can be interpreted as political without an extensive context.
this is the definition brute goes by:
Milton Friedman wrote: Fundamentally, there are only two ways of coordinating the economic activities of millions. One is central direction involving the use of coercion – the technique of the army and of the modern totalitarian state. The other is voluntary cooperation of individuals – the technique of the marketplace.



Riggerjack wrote: Democracy
Democracy was never designed to solve problems. Democracy was invented to prevent totalitarianism. gridlock is not a bug, it's the only feature.

BRUTE
Posts: 3803
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: IPCC Report

Post by BRUTE » Thu Oct 18, 2018 8:45 pm

Bankai wrote:
Thu Oct 18, 2018 2:49 pm
How again was slavery abolished? Was is free market? Or maybe...?
slavery was a government decree. it was actually required by (government) law that private citizens return escaped slaves if they encountered them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fugitive_ ... ted_States

Lucky C
Posts: 325
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2016 6:09 am

Re: IPCC Report

Post by Lucky C » Fri Oct 19, 2018 5:48 am

Riggerjack wrote:
Thu Oct 18, 2018 12:52 pm
Herding people into complex changes that are difficult and unpopular, is beyond the scope of what a democracy is capable of.
Good thing we are a constitutional republic. A democracy to vote on complex/difficult issues would be terrible indeed. There was no national vote to join or exit the Paris Agreement, no national vote to ration food during WW2, etc. Difficult or unpopular changes are forced upon us without our ability to vote, and often regardless of how many phone calls we make or letters we write to Congress. Sure, we vote our lawmakers in and out democratically, but the big changes we are talking about would require bipartisan support to some extent. So to maximize government enacting environmental policies, ideally the choices on the ballot would be between two candidates who both want to enact the same types of changes, though they may disagree on other issues.

Also, typical voter turnout is only about half of potential voters, with the average voter in that half hopefully being more informed and passionate about political issues than the average of the non-voting half. For a candidate to win, they really only need about a quarter of their potential voters to get behind them. This is just a rough estimate, but now I'm looking at the 2016 election, and I see that Trump got 63 million votes out of an estimated 251 million potential voters, or 25%.

I know it's unlikely to get a majority of lawmakers who want to help the environment rather than their wealthy friends/funders, but I'm saying dramatic changes are not dependent on getting >50% of the public to be as informed as we are. A passionate minority can have more sway than the apathetic majority.

Finally, there is the option of playing dirty when it comes to campaigns, voting, lobbying, and forcing laws through the system. Currently these tactics tend to favor people with ties to the oil and defense industries. Changing all that to rig the system in favor of what's best for the planet (however unlikely) could be more important than changing public opinion, since that's just how the game is played.

User avatar
Bankai
Posts: 560
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2014 5:28 am

Re: IPCC Report

Post by Bankai » Fri Oct 19, 2018 6:13 am

BRUTE wrote:
Thu Oct 18, 2018 8:45 pm
slavery was a government decree
Umm...no. Slavery predates government(s).

Riggerjack
Posts: 2666
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: IPCC Report

Post by Riggerjack » Fri Oct 19, 2018 7:25 am

BRUTE wrote: ↑ slavery was a government decree
Umm...no. Slavery predates government(s).
Well, in that sense, I guess it never really ended at all.

Just yesterday I went through the code of conduct training at work, where I learned we have a zero tolerance policy for forced labor and human trafficking. None at work. Nor will we hire subcontractors who use forced labor or human trafficking.

That part wasn't there last year...

Riggerjack
Posts: 2666
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: IPCC Report

Post by Riggerjack » Fri Oct 19, 2018 7:46 am

Good thing we are a constitutional republic.
Uh huh.

Well, rather than splitting hairs over definitions, can you give any examples of any government you would want to be under, enacting policies in peacetime that were against the short term vested interest, and in the long term interests of it's citizens? How long did it last? Were they able to spread that policy beyond their borders?

Or, tackle this from the other side. Look at the history of international cooperation. When have states agreed to anything that wasn't in the short term vested interest of all? And the few times they did agree, did anyone follow through? Now step this up from a few countries, to all.

As far as I know, that is just league of nation's an UN territory. Is this the history of success we should bet our future on?

Or maybe, people who care, should put their money where their mouth is, and get going on prototype adaptations, now. All I am suggesting is a grassroots movement to develop enduring green spaces, as a reasonable action.

I am sure there will be enough consensus to galvanize action to start addressing emissions, after gen x is in the ground, but according to the science, that's too late. This is the only solution I could think of with that in mind.

User avatar
jennypenny
Posts: 6263
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm
Location: Stepford USA

Re: IPCC Report

Post by jennypenny » Fri Oct 19, 2018 9:58 am

Governments act differently depending on where they are in their cycle. We (the US) could lead people and get out ahead of issues when we were on the upswing of empire. Now that we are on the decline, our government is more reactionary than proactive, thus always lagging behind the big issues. I fear now we're drifting now into the doldrums where very little of any significance will be enacted. Xi has a plan to get out in front of (some) issues. He's had some major missteps but is attempting to correct them. Putin has too much Make Russia Great Again in him. My money is on Xi/China.

That said, humans have problems now that extend beyond borders. The environment is the big one but there are others. If governments, including hard line ones like China, won't make the necessary changes, other entities will step in to fill the breach. The environment could be the one where multinational corporations usurp power from nation states. If Bezos and Friends ever decides to try to tackle the climate change issue instead of space travel, they could develop/wield significant power. IMO they are vainly wasting their golden moment ... how many of you would support a cabal of B & Co who dedicated their wealth to cleaning up the planet? To buying up polluters and shutting them down? To making renewable energy easy and affordable?

Some problems have grown too big for nation states to deal with independently, and the UN's structure is too adversarial. A different model is needed. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of B & Co (to put it mildly) but the environment is collapsing and won't be able to sustain us indefinitely. It's not just about climate change, it's about overfishing, deforestation, monoculture farming, etc. Amazon's algos are better at figuring out what people want, and more importantly what people will spend money on, that any political party or organization. They are the ones who could figure out exactly how to incentivize people to 'do the right thing'. If the .01 percenters are sucking up all the wealth in the world, why not force them to lead the charge in fixing the problems?

Post Reply