We have met the enemy and he is us

A few bits and pieces to start the year.

New Scientist included this article in their Christmas edition suggesting that our infatuation with “stuff” is deeply ingrained in humans and tied up with our mating habits (though it must be noted that NS does look for “lighter content” at Xmas and the studies did look a tad superficial. Regardless this may be part of what makes conspicuous consumption so prevalent. Amusingly when I went looking for the source of the quotation “We have met the enemy and he is us” I found that the original poster although 40 years old (Pogo by Walt Kelly) was incredibly appropriate.

Quite separately a recent study indicates that petrol fumes increase aggression in rats, allowing for the perfect excuse for road rage (“the petrol made me do it your honour”), and yet another health benefit of going green.

Post Copenhagen, the New Yorker Magazine has an article on China’s green initiatives, which states ” If China’s emissions keep climbing as they have for the past thirty years, the country will emit more of those gases in the next thirty years than the United States has in its entire history” Of course Chinese emissions intensity is already falling, though absolute emissions are still rising fast. Basically we have the biggest historical emitter and the likely biggest future emitter pointing fingers at the other, while the rest of us sweat (literally) on the outcome. The fact that their two economies are so bound together makes an optimistic outcome even less likely.

The long delayed debate between George Monbiot and Ian Plimer was shown on the ABC on Lateline and can be seen here. You may recall George agreed on condition Ian answer a set of written questions prior to the debate. The questions were sent but no answers were forthcoming from Ian. The “debate” is somewhat similar with George (and Tony Jones) repeatedly and forcefully asking questions that Ian never quite answered despite a fair amount of spluttering and hand waving. Worth watching or reading if you are interested in or impressed by the book.

James Hansen has published The Temperature of Science as a statement on the current condition of climate science. Brief (7 pages) and highly recommended.

John Kerry was asked why he has invested so much effort in fighting global warming. His answer: “I’m fighting so hard because this is literally about survival of the planet and life on the planet. People shouldn’t take this lightly. When scientists tell us that if the earth’s temperature warms more than two degrees C, it will be catastrophic, you better listen to them. And every bit of evidence that they have predicted would happen has happened. So you’ve got to take this seriously. I do. I think as a public official, if Dick Cheney can say we should go to war on a one percent chance that a terrorist might attack you, then when you have a near 100 percent chance that you’re going to have disastrous consequences from climate, we ought to go to the moral equivalent of war and do something about it. And that’s why I’m in this: I think its about life and about saving lives. It’s about preventing the spread of disease. It’s about preventing the destruction of natural resources. It’s about providing jobs to people. It’s about better health. It’s about America’s energy independence. You can run down a long list of things that are at stake here. I don’t think the stakes get much bigger than that”. I need to point out that the planet and life in general will survive; it’s just our sort of life that is at risk.

Finally if you have a spare hour this video by Richard Alley is an excellent lecture on carbon dioxide in Earth’s climate history. He is the author of “The Two Mile Time Machine” which is also well worth reading.

Wishing you all the best for 2010.