Brainy primates on the barbecue along with everyone else

How do we respond to the polycrisis? More beautiful ideas and great aspirations? Or real measures that address the root cause and avoid the worst impacts?

Jun 11, 2024

Although we’re all brainy primates, inhabiting the same spherical rock circling the a single star in the universe; although we share the same atmosphere and swim in the same world ocean, it is very unlikely we will agree on how to navigate the polycrisis together.

If one thing has become clear in the 2020’s, it is that one world, one people is losing out against regional, cultural, civilizational, and even racial interests. Just as the climate, conflicts of interests and conflicts of values are heating up.

Human conflicts have already erupted into violence or are close to escalating into violence. Even where I live, rather remotely in southern Portugal, I can almost hear the war drum in the distance. People in Europe feel threatened, so do Russians apparently, and in The Promised Land the blood is flowing in the streets, once again. These are times of immense suffering

Similarly, the disruptions to the climate system are accelerating and causing irrepairable damages to the climate, and more human suffering. We might see a completely ice-free summer in the Arctic within the next couple of decades. Sea-level rise will be consuming land, making it inhabitable and useless for agriculture. And deadly heatwaves will likely become a recurring phenomena around the equator in the coming decades. Causing damages to ecosystems, human suffering and death, and crop failures.

While we know this is happening, we will be making the problem worse at least until 2050, the magic netzero year. Even if magic happens, and we reach global netzero by 2050 we will have surpassed levels of global warming deemed manageable by the IPCC (the ‘Paris’ 1.5, max 2.0C global warming).

In places in the world where citizens have the privilege to choose who will lead them, people tend to vote for people who promise to take care of them, protect them, and put them and their kind first. I get it, it’s a soothing idea. The same leaders often also tell the electorate not to worry about global issues. Global warming is a hoax. And those wars are not as bad as the media make you believe and solvable overnight. Sounds good, doesn’t it.

Given the political developments in the west and the geopolitical developments spearheaded by Russia, China and the USA I have given up on the possibility of a globally coordinated response to the polycrisis. Would it have made sense to coordinate and collaborate? Yes it would, but apparently it does not fit with the zeitgeist.

So, if the United Nations are not going to solve our problems, what can we hope for? Surely, ignoring the issues, as populists suggest, won’t help.

I think we must trust that many individuals and families will want to contribute to a good life for their children and grandchildren. Similarly, communities will want to preserve their way of life. And countries will want to secure their future power-base and cultural integrity. More or less functional alliances, such as the EU, OECD, the upcoming BRICS, and increasingly the African Union, will want to collaborate on issues of shared interest. So, I think, there is hope for collaboration, just not at a global level, at this moment in time.

The climate crisis however, is very much a global issue. A CO2 molecule emitted in the USA affects the climate in Africa. Threatened livelihoods in Africa cause mass migration to Europe. European and US imports drive emissions in China. Etcetera etcetera. My points here is that when we want to focus on domestic issues it might be most effective to make investments abroad.

Regarding the climate, I believe there are five things we need to focus on:

stopping fossil carbon emissions,
developing a post-growth culture and economy,
sustainable land-use,
ecosystems protection and restoration, and
avoiding irreversible climate tipping-points.

The past decade I have explored more sustainable lifestyles in ecovillages and educated myself about our potential to regenerate rather than destroy ecosystems. Can humans do that, you may wonder. Yes we can. Just like any other organism we can fulfill beneficial roles in ecosystems. In that regard I found permaculture inspirational, even to the point that I decided to build a (mostly) natural home, make a garden, plant a food forest, and dedicate large areas for wildlife on our property.

This is all enormously full-filling, but as you might be thinking, also rather elitist. There is no way 8 billion people can live the “permaculture lifestyle”. There is simply not enough suitable land to make that happen. And besides, I still largely depend on the global economy for my subsistence.

Rather recently I felt the urge to refocus on the more technical issues: emissions and climate repair. I am the first to admit “climate repair” is a euphemism for geoengineering and am okay to call it such, as long as we recognize that CO2 emissions are also geoengineering. Given that the current world economy was built with fossil fuels and still depends on fossil fuels for about 80% of it’s energy needs, emissions are much harder to solve than making a placard that says “Just stop oil”. Yes, we must stop oil, coal and gas but it will take time. Way too much time.

I think we must get more more serious about how we will actually stop oil, or at least stop dumping the waste from oil use in the atmosphere. It is outrageous we are dumping fossil CO2 in the atmosphere for almost two centuries. The gas being invisible and odorless at low concentrations doesn’t help, I suppose. But still. And worst of all CO2 is not just any molecule. It absorbs heat radiation and lingers for centuries. In fact CO2 is the main controller of the global climate. Clearly, this gas should be restricted and that’s why I advocate for a carbon takeback obligation (CTBO) for fossil fuel producers.

The other pressing issue I am focusing on is the technical potential to avoid deadly heatwaves and irreversible climate-tipping points. If you’d asked me 10 years ago whether we should try and cool the planet I would have told you, you are mad. “Haven’t we messed up enough?!” I would have said. But now I see things differently. I have come to realize that we have already caused so much damage to the climate system, by continued GHG emissions and short-sighted land-use practices, that now we need to at least assess the options for interventions.

It is a sad reality, but ignoring the issue won’t help. What do we tell ourselves, and our children, if we refuse to intervene and are confronted with severe climate impacts? How can we morally justify, not to assess intervention options that might have prevented the severe impacts from affecting us and other life on Earth?

Exploring Emergence

Discussion about this post