I’m now belaboring a point made by many others before me, but I’ll say it just to complete the discussion. When we multiply the energy hunger of our new technology by the huge fraction of the now billions of people able to afford that technology, then add the relatively recent harnessing of gas, oil and coal to produce that energy, we have a radically new situation never before seen on the planet.
These new fuels are very carbon rich. Burning that carbon produces lots of energy, but at the same time also produces what is becoming a very dangerous byproduct: carbon dioxide, otherwise known as CO2. That CO2 goes straight into the atmosphere. How much? In 2007 alone it is estimated that we humans released into the atmosphere 29,321,302,000 (that’s 29 billion!) metric tons (Wikipedia), or almost 60 trillion pounds of CO2. Let me emphasize, that’s for only one year!
(Here’s a piece of trivia for you. Somewhere I read that two pounds of CO2 gas will just about fill your refrigerator, so it would take 30 trillion refrigerators to store that CO2, or about 4700 refrigerators EACH YEAR for every man, woman and child on the planet. By any measure that’s a lot of CO2!)
And, as most of us know by now, that’s where the problem lies. CO2 in the atmosphere acts like a transparent blanket. It lets light from the sun pass through while keeping some of the earth’s radiant heat from escaping. Until recently that blanket has been pretty thin, keeping the earth’s temperature just right for all the creatures that live here and that we rely on for our survival. But now our human activities are adding so much CO2 that we’re thickening the blanket and thereby raising the average temperature of our planet. And therein lies the problem, as I will discuss in further epistles.
(I know the whole issue is considerably more complicated than this, and I plan to examine some of those details later, but this is the essence of the problem for now.)
END OF FIRST DISCUSSION
A wonderfully lucid statement of the basic problem. I'm looking forward to more.
ReplyDeleteComment from an email from my friend Arden:
ReplyDeleteThere are several excellent 20 minute or so presentations on TED.com that I suggest you view and reference (link to) in your blog.
-- http://www.ted.com/talks/peter_ward_on_mass_extinctions.html
makes the case that the past mass extinctions were caused by carbon dioxide build ups and Hydrogen Sulfide releases, not just extraterrestrial body impacts.
-- http://www.ted.com/talks/nic_marks_the_happy_planet_index.html
Nic talks about GDP being a poor national measure of well-being; He proposes a better indicator called the happy planet index. Also a very significant observation is made that the Declaration of Independence calls for the life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (not the pursuit of GDP). There also is a TED- eBook on this topic for $2.99 that goes into more detail.
-- http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/juan_enriquez_wants_to_grow_energy.html
Juan talks about bioenergy and global warming and the destructive path we are on. He also has a TED eBook on evolution going forward.
-- http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/hans_rosling_on_global_population_growth.html
Hans talks about population growth with excellent graphics.
-- http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/hans_rosling_the_good_news_of_the_decade.html
Hans talks about the UN Goals with excellent graphics.
Search further on TED.COM and you will find other excellent talks related to your blog"s goal
Another interesting fact is that in the period from 5000BC to 1000BC the world population was growing at at rate of about 0.06 pct per year (hence the world's population was doubling about every 1200 years -- in the last 1000 years, the world exponential growth rate was about 0.5 pct per year a doubling almost every 150 years when the numbers are gigantic.
You also may want to add a calibration reference statement that says:
7.0 pct growth rate doubles population in 10 yrs
0.7 pct growth rate doubles population in 100 yrs
0.07 pct growth rate doubles population in 1000 yrs.
Arden
Comment from my friend Susan:
ReplyDeleteI almost put off reading this since I don't make time for blogs on busy days. However, you got to me. I'm very pleased with the presentation: the format, vocabulary, the combo of scientific and common sense ways you explain the situation. Good for you! I find myself trying to stay off the computer more and more lately, but keep me on the "alert" list when you post, if that's how it's handled. I'm not apt to remember to check it on my own.
Susan
Comment from friend Linda,
ReplyDeleteInteresting blog. Finally found it using your suggestion. Wondered if you might be interested in two things, Lloyd's of London has done a report, creepy and cold but right on, hope that some corporate types might awaken.
http://www.lloyds.com/360
might interest you and group. It is very concise. And at the other end of the spectrum is Noetic Science Institute which does have Nature and Ecology section
http://noetic.org/topics/nature/
and people working on changing humanity's mind "Great Shift Dialogue: Bill Plotkin and David Abram depth psychologist and spiritual teacher and an ecotherapist in-depth discussion of our cultures disconnect from nature and the consequences. Up your alley? Will check in to read, now in my bookmarks. That's all hope blog does well. Take care. Think it is a great idea, looks like some knowledgeable interesting people. Computer is really good for that isn't it.