Saving human civilization in order to kill it. How fossil fuel mining and burning is exterminating species, destroying the economy and your jobs

Civilization on growth hormones, in order to kill it.

By persisting in “business as usual”, and trying to keep our civilization running on full growth ahead, by subsidizing maximum growth in fossil fuel mining and burning, we are losing global climate systems to which our agricultural systems are adapted, the ecosystems which evolved with us, and ultimately we are destroying the basis for our economy and jobs, on which our civilisation depends.

Table of Contents

2 Political Response >

2.1 Liberal climate change policy >

2.2 Australian Labor Party climate change policy >

2.2.1 Carbon price minimization or nothing? >

2.2.2 Larger investment in climate mitigation is required, and faster >

2.3 Is continued exponential growth compatible with climate change mitigation? >

2.4 We have a choice >

4 What can be done? >

4.1 If business as usual continues >

4.2 Fossil fuel civilization is being maintained in order to kill it >

4.3 Opportunities still exist to change our fundamental energy base >

4.4 Carbon Capture a costly pipe dream >

4.5 A plague of humans to feed >

4.6 Most likely response to climate emergency >

4.7 Its all up to the voters >

1 The situation

1.1 Australia's negative climate change mitigation efforts

Whatever Australian government policy on climate change actually is, happiness and well-being in the future will decrease, because its climate change and clean energy policy statements have had little effect on business as usual. Global warming has reached nearly a whole degree for average land temperature. Oceans have warmed more. Fossil fuel emissions continue to increase until catastrophe will intervene. Australian government climate policy, as managed by the ALP, has confined itself to a timid political possibilty. A marriage of a minimal cost version, with a political small target version. It has succeeded. This is still far better than the pure business as usual promised by opposition leader Tony Abbott, of the not-very-Liberal party. To achieve politcal power, he promises to undo all pieces of significant ALP legislation that feather touch on the toes of big business. He needn't bother. Business as usual is quite safe.

1.2 Banks going for broke on civilisations last exponential expansion of coal and gas business

In an orgy of climate change un-mitigation stupidity, the big Australian banks are pouring billions into new coal and gas projects. ANZ bank, in particular is handing out enough new loans to fund a world of global warming all on its own. The Australian Federal government, has made a few baby steps of limited climate and clean energy policy. Meanwhile our banks are promoting, and state governments are being run by, business as usual. These are major expansions of the harmful behavioural causes of global warming, and completely negate all good intentions of the 2010-2013 ALP minority government.

There are dangers in making such long term planned investments, especially during a mining boom bubble. As the amounts of money show, they are getting more expensive. There is a risk that a transition to renewable energy might gather pace, as it should, and global coal demand, and its price fall, below the amounts expected for profitability. Indications that this might happen soon have occurred. The largest global coal consumer is China, and China has recently announced that it intends to expand its coal consumption no further. (China flags peak in coal usage)

The public response of the coal industry, has been of disbelief, that China can manage this, possibly for the benefit of share holders. But China appears to be better at controlling its huge population and economy, than Australia how manages the business investments of its state governments and banks. If the coal growth bubble does collapse, that leaves a large part of Australia's decades worth of investments in a state of financial collapse, much like the mortgage securities crisis originating in the USA in 2008.

If only Australian banks could be required to invest as much money in new renewable energy projects as they do in coal and gas. Then there just might be a chance of a transition to renewable energy. Better still, no money to coal and gas development. And no more billions of dollars in direct and indirect government subsidies for fossil fuel industry, amounting to 6 billion dollars a year in 2010. (Australian Fossil Fuel subsidies)

1.3 Global Greenwash

Guy Pearse has documented in detail, in his book “Greenwash. Big brands and carbon scams.” the extent to which corporations and governments are going through the process of projecting a "green image". Even dirty coal has been advertised as clean, cool and sexy. Banks are able offset their operational emissions, or claim cuts in emissions, claim a clean green image, but invest billions in large coal projects.

Corporations claim to be carbon neutral, by disowning emissions of their supply chain, or use of products. By sourcing in developed countries, the extraction of raw materials, and processes and manufacturing as well, a company externalizes its emissions. Coal export companies in Australia count the emissions from energy used to extract the coal. Once it leaves port to another nation, the emissions are not counted any more. The emissions use to create imported manufactured products and ship them to Australia are not counted in Australia. There is no carbon price involved in buying these products. This is an effective means of exporting pollution, carbon emissions and carbon price costs to developing countries.

Regrettably, the profitable path of least resistance for almost everyone involved is to continue green-washing. Yet if the science is right, this is a very dangerous path indeed, and now is not the time to delude ourselves that great progress is being achieved.

So its not surprising that governments are getting in on the greenwash game. Everybody is doing it. The Australian carbon price is greenwash, in that it is far to small and limited to stop growth driven increase in carbon emissions. Other renewable energy schemes have limited encouragement. Until the Australian government sets to phase out the coal and gas mining industries, and invests seriously in large scale renewable energy technology, its efforts so far amount to greenwash.

1.4 Externality killers

Australia is investing and banking for a hotter world, investing in more drought, floods, heatwaves, and bushfires, so that the rich business and share-holder elites can get a nice percentage return on their holdings before they die. This class of people are running defacto climate policy in Australia, and it is probably the same in most other nations, including the USA, Canada, China and India. On the principle that human greed and stupidity is the same the world over, where ever there is a lot of money, there is a glut of investment in global warming. Of course it won't be classified as that. It will be called progress, economic growth, or energy independence., or jobs. It may be respiratory failure on death certificates in choking Beijing, but that's a market externality. I conclude that, in Australia at least, there is still a lot more money going into projects that cause global warming, than projects that mitigate it. This is not surprising, because a large part of the inequality of our national wealth ownership, is invested in fossil fuel extraction and export.

1.5 Australian renewable energy innovation left behind.

Global growth has occurred in many fields of renewable energy, but from a low starting base. Australia is getting further behind in the innovation and learning curve. New concentrated solar energy projects are getting bigger, and coming on line elsewhere. The USA has invested several hundred million, on a current world's largest concentrated solar power tower (110 MW) using molten salt storage. (Solar Reserve - Concentrated Solar Power)

1.6 Piles of money wins

ANZ alone has been party to current funds totaling more than $20 billion dollars in loans, for no strings attached loans for coal expansion in NSW and Queensland. This is much more money than the $10 billion Australian Federal Government allocated to the clean energy funding for 5 years, with strict conditions attached. (ANZ funds big coal boom) (Double standards for solar and coal)

1.7 Population x Consumption = Global Warming

For its small areas of decent rainfall, soils, and comfort, Australia has a big and growing population to keep happy, to maintain the developed world luxury to which its fossil fuel pampered population is accustomed to. Despite a modest and declining birth rate, Australian population will more than double by 2050 due to the official Australian immigration policy of 200,000 plus each year. The policy can be described as keep out asylum seekers and third world hangers on, and promote economic growth by overloading the employment pool of workers.

1.8 Mining resource economic dependency

The dirty coal and gas trick being pulled, is that Australians are supposed to find the boom expansion of coal and CSG acceptable, because each government party (L & L) needs to balance its budget on the mining taxes and royalties, to keep up public facilities, social services, and lots of roads. As Martin Ferguson likes to put it, "how else do we pay for new hospitals, etc".

Many other sectors of the domestic economy experience pressure to decline, likened to the term "Dutch Disease". This refers to side effects, like exchange rates, from a growing dependency on a resources boom. (Wikipedia on Dutch disease)

The wikipedia article concluded that recent research showed that it wasn't the abundance of a resource that was the problem, it was the dependency of the economy on price of few commodities, and volatility of that commodity price was a problem. Global economic activity is now dependent on oil price. Price spikes upwards are followed by global depressions, which effect other global raw commodity demand and price. If the entire Australian economy is dependent on the price of coal, then nothing can save us when it goes awry. Balancing the budget, or obtaining that magic surplus, now too obviously depends on mining commodity earnings.

1.9 Declining agriculture and tourism

Other income and survival industry earners in Australia face challenges. Agriculture faces more extreme climate. Current agricultural productivity is likely to decline. The reasons are water shortage from climate change, and rising oil price.

Manufacturing competes with China, fueled by our coal.

Tourism of the Great Barrier Reef , and many unique Australian regions is doomed to die, unless tourists find residual blue-green slime attractive, and tours of open cut mines enthralling.

1.10 Mining energy costs increase.

We may need the mining income just pay increasing oil bills and extraction costs. The coal and gas mines have large oil bills, which will keep getting larger. Coal extraction requires a lot of portable oil energy, for trucks, air-conditioning and electricity, to keep the extraction going and transport the good stuff, and pile up the overburden. The result is likely to be that profitability struggles to improve, despite increasing volumes of raw export. If export market price for the raw product falls, the business may have to cease operation.

1.11 Last shale oil found in South Australia

Despite the headlines of billions of barrels in South Australia, it is classed as a Shale Oil discovery, also known as "tight oil". The oil is expensive and rate-limited to extract, and profits depend on high and rising oil price. Extraction requires water thirsty fracking techniques. According to initial news reports, the discovery might achieve 50 wells at a time, with 1000-2000 bbl per day. Thats all of 50-100,000 bbl, about 10% of current Australian demand. Australia's current oil consumption is over 1 million barrels of oil per day. These tight oil wells tend to last a year or two, and then need to be moved. The find will prop up Australian domestic oil supply for a few years. These are not oil gushers. Oil price will continue to rise.(Australias growing oil imports)(Why shale oil is not the game changer)

1.12 Costs of fossil fuel energy will rise

Oil price is tipped to rocket during this decade. National income may rise, but so will the energy expenses, and the cost of exports and imports. National population growth from immigration, is likely to exceed national growth in net income. It seems that we have run faster to stay in the same place. People end up working harder, for less net income. This is good if it encourages a transition to renewable energy, bad as it encourages profit seeking investment based on price, as renewable energy supply still has to grow from a low investment and supply base. In the extremes, when fossil fuel energy price is low, it competes over renewable energy investment. When fossil fuel price is high, renewable energy capital costs rise as well.

1.13 Planning for disasters: Costs of extreme weather from climate change are rising

On the east coast of Australia, in January 2013, record heat waves and bush-fires, soon followed by intense tropical cyclone, with destructive winds and flooding rain. Floods in Queensland in 2011 cost an estimated $5.6 bn, requiring a national levy to help pay. These events will become normal, but our ability to keep up with recurrent costs of rebuilding is unlikely to be normal. (Whats causing Australia's heat wave) (Planning for disasters)

2 Political Response

2.1 Liberal climate change policy

Our political leader for the negative of whatever, Mr Tony Abbott, has failed stop legislation being passed for a Carbon Price, and the Mining Resources Rent Tax. He has been successful in restricting legislative effectiveness, by relentless negativity, by being a blocking champion for the Australian Coal and Gas industry. He is backed up by a blockade of establishment media, who uncritically loud-speak his every anti-Labor, anti-Greens, and anti-climate change mitigation announcement. By keeping up a large public pressure, he has generated unreasonable fear of the costs of change. The effect is the 2010-2013 Labor government has been backed up against the wall, by the echoed fears from the community and a fear of voting backlash against government MPs. The result has been a back down to minimally effective legislation, pleasing to big business backers.

The Liberal party still has "Direct Action" as a proposed climate change policy. It does not seem to have been altered signficantly since first release, as if no further reviews based on new science and feedback were necessary. Probably most of the Liberal Party don't understand it, since few of them admit to basic climate science literacy. There are many online summaries of basic climate science literacy, which require minimal intellectual effort for the open minded. (The science of climate change) (Climate Literacy) ParraCAN has some members working on its own version.

One of the more wacky of Liberal senators, Cori Bernardi (SA), was recently chided for not owning up to being a member of ALEC - American Legislation Exchange Council. This is a conservative organization for creating fossil fuel friendly legislation. It also promotes the closing of minds, by legislating that climate change doubt and denial must be taught in schools. Perhaps teachers are to be sacked if their students do not doubt or deny climate change. (ALEC bill requires climate change denial in schools) Cori Bernardi in a blog acknowledges that we are unsustainable situation (Cory Bernard blog on The Unsustainable Path), and blames this on “entitlement mentality”. This might not be meant to apply to government support for and subsidies of fossil fuel companies. The ALEC model bill, calls for the teaching of “critical thinking”, so that students will be able to fairly and objectively evaluate scientific ... controversies”. This is meant to imply that global warming is actually controversial, that is, our Liberal party members are still in a state of shock and disbelief.

I agree that we humans will be forced to look for technical solutions, to the problems created by our population numbers and technology. This must include more urgent transition to renewable energy. Believing that current predicaments can be solved by an evolution of business as usual is a just hang on and hope solution.

How many progress traps can be escaped by yet more technology? Each technology solution is also the cause of more problems. Nature has a final solution, and its called extinction. And if solutions like renewable energy are not yet commercially viable, in terms of returning the biggest investment profit over a short term, then the availability of technology does not guarantee its timely implementation.

Electricity prices rises have been blamed on the carbon price, but rises came mostly from perverse incentives for transmission companies to invest in over capacity, during a time of falling total and peak demand. Coal electric utilities face price competition from domestic PV, and more fuel unimpaired wind farms. The coal and CSG profits driven Liberal Party state governments are trying to kill both. This is strange, because wind and renewable energy companies are also businesses, so Liberal Party policy is just another biased market interference.

2.2 Australian Labor Party climate change policy

What the Labor party did, in order to achieve minority government power, was to negotiate with Greens and Independents, and compromise on their pre-election position of not having a carbon price. In negotiations and debate the resultant policy has been diluted down to become greenwash. Many in the Labor Party were happy to be pushed into the minimal policy position, by anti-science and business catastrophe scare tactics of the Liberal opposition. The ALP also appreciates big business contributions to its re-election funding. The "Right" wing faction, is happy with its own naval gazing and free-market fundamentalism. On a posed question about the effects of the carbon tax, Julia Gillard has answered (28 June 2012).

" . . . Coal mines will continue to work, and our coal industry will continue to expand . . . Our economy will be transforming over time into a clean energy economy . . . “

[The reader is supposed to think here, how can both of these be true at the same time? Answer: That is normal political thinking, to serve all masters at the same time. Only politicians think this is always possible.] The ALP is okay with climate change mitigation, as long as it does not interfere with coal and gas mining, export and burning.

2.2.1 Carbon price minimization or nothing?

Treasury modelling found the carbon tax impact was to increase consumer price index by 0.7%. This is not insignificant, and its mere existance is itself a message, but the quantity of revenue, and "free market" message is hardly enough to drive through a necessary rapid decrease in carbon emissions required right now to mitigate global warming. A domestic solar panel boom was aided by government subsidy, and feed in tariffs, but all govenment subsidy for that has been ended. The uptake of renewable energy installed at home has helped produce a signficant reduction in total and peak power demands, created savings for owners, over a period when demand was expected to increase.

The ALP has been allowed to tie down the future carbon price, to the evaporating low carbon price of the depressed European Union, which is very sick by normal economic standards, and not likely to get better in the forseeable future. A future Liberal party government promises to try and shoot the carbon price dead in its grave.

2.2.2 Larger investment in climate mitigation is required, and faster

The rate of yearly reductiom of global carbon emissions, for climate mitigation are now required to be at least 5% per year. Every year this target is missed, bumps up the reductions required in future years. If this reduction rate were possible, by 2050, using a reducing exponential function, global emissions would be about 12% of current levels. The reduction levels required, cannot be achieved by a limited application carbon price of next to nothing, accompanied by low ambition policy in other areas. (RET, clean energy fund, stop logging native forests). The Stern report talked about investing a few percent of GDP. Beyond Zero Emissions stationary energy plan required 3% GDP over 10 years. The scale of growth of the global carbon emissions overshoot, is not matched by the scale of global effort.

2.3 Is continued exponential growth compatible with climate change mitigation?

The short answer is climate change mitigation is "in-compatible with population growth and how we live now", but worthwhile adjustments are not that hard, and may increase comfort and happiness. One can connect with climate reality, and become more relaxed and comfortable. Not so for the Australian Treasury modelling, where this sort of question is not worth asking. Exponential growth and consumption are still implicit in its models. Such model predictions are political fairy tales, rather than a realistic look at our climate catastrophe future.

2.4 We have a choice

We humans are not as clever or as powerful as we like to think we are. On global warming, we may be fooling ourselves with greenwash and failure to change our ways, but we are not fooling nature. There is a real societal choice, between investing in new fossil fuel projects, and massive investment in renewable energy projects. The second options requires submission to natures management requirements for a safer climate. In the long run it is the far cheaper option, in terms of keeping some form of human civilization around, given our wishes for harnessing external energy sources.

3 Civilization is Agriculture

Our unsustainable civilisation, like it or not, tries to maximise its total flow of both renewable and non-renewable resources. The definition of renewable is somewhat elastic, as we participate in degradation of land, soil, water, and air, but we take them for granted. Renewable energy strictly means derived from the current energy flux from outside our planet, in the form of Sun and Tides. We compete with evolved ecosystems for renewable energy. Agriculture is the process of replacing evolved ecosystems, with human harvested ones, or worse, with the paved cities, dwellings and roads it requires and supports. This is sad, because it was the evolved ecosystems, that slowly created the bioproductivity of land, soil, water and air, and maintained it. Global impact is large, as civilisation requires all the best land, and overfishes the most productive ocean areas. Nearly everything else can be taken away, but civilization collapses without our food production and distribution.

3.1 Evolved biosystems maintain our planet

This has been anthropomorphized as Gaia. As it applys to our atmosphere, the high level of free oxygen molecules, and the near absence of oxidised carbon, is due to globally abundant energy capture by the living plants on our living planet, and their production of free oxygen. All of living chemistry, and much inorganic chemistry of oceans and geology, involves the cycling of carbon, in its many versitile forms and combinations. Life is carbon chemistry, combined with water, and other elements and compounds that also recycle through the earths regions. By taking over so much of our planet, and burning so much stored carbon, we have altered the reactions and quantities of carbon chemistry everywhere.

3.2 We are carbon based life

Carbon also interacts with oceans, rocks and minerals (it doesn't distinguish between life and non-life). Over the earths living time, the living and non-living chemistry has regulated atmospheric carbon dioxide within safe limits, so that earths surface temperature is right for plenty of liquid water, and prolific biological activity. This might be grounds for great complacency on our part, to think that we can change the atmosphere carbon dioxide all we like, and nature has a way of bringing it down to safe levels. But these negative feedbacks, as they are called, work slowly, and are crude. They also depend in part apon the evolved ecosystems being healthy and abundant. We are in the process of finishing off all intact forests on our planet. Our carbon emissions caused extremely rapid rise in ocean acidity and its warming has something to do with a rapid depletion of phytoplankton mass, the basis of the ocean food chains.

3.3 Life is powered by renewable energy

We have replaced complex evolved ecosystems, with ourselves as the main beneficiary of “Primary Production”, that is the yearly input of solar energy that feeds all life. Wether we like it or not, our lives are already dependent on renewable energy. All our biosphere life, and its adaptiveness and evolution, is driven by the external energy provided by Sun and Tides. The sun, and not coal mines, really powers our lives. Our food is from solar primary energy production. Coal powered electricity, and fossil fuel powered agriculture, is a human luxury.

3.4 CO2 regulates planetary temperature, life helps regulate CO2

The planetary temperature regulation process is crude, and critically varies on atmospheric carbon dioxide, as a primary greenhouse gas. Atmosphere CO2 depends on a number of processes working over many different time scales. Climate science has modelled all external influances, from the orbital variations that have produced wild swings of surface temperature from ice age to inter-glacial, and accounted for solar variability, and cosmic rays.

It is just as well that the negative feedback processes that remove CO2 from the atmosphere operate over the longest timescales. It is a built in safety. Life process slowly sequester carbon from the atmosphere and the ocean. Over the evolutionary eons, it is likely that biological efficiency of CO2 removal by the biosphere has increased, which is a reasonable response to gradual increase in solar output and available energy. At the same time it has allowed more abundent and energetic animal life. Small trace amounts of atmospheric CO2 prevent our planet from completely freezing all over. Life would cease to exist on earth if a process existed that could remove all CO2 in a relatively short period of time. It is easier to generate CO2 than it is to remove it from the atmosphere.

Over this planets life-time, occasional catastrophes affecting global climate temperature have co-incided with massive species extinctions. Extinction is also a feedback process, when a species contributes the demise of its supporting environment. Our latest planetary catastrophe is, that in a short time, our civilization has grossly damaged the evolved ecosystems (forests and oceans), and the thermoregulation properties of the atmosphere (carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases). If it was a human body, it would be the equivalent of cancer taking over the vital organs for life support, such as kidneys, liver, lungs and heart. Global warming is the equivalent of a sick human being with organ failure and a high fever.

3.5 The climate forecast worsens

Each decade that passes without a significant reduction in global carbon emissions results in a serious unstoppable increase in the rate, final peak, and duration of global warming. Now the forecast is for 4 degrees average increase by 2100. What will be the forecast in ten years time?

3.6 Australian policy is still hooked on growth.

Australian Treasury Modelling estimated that future gross national income will grow averaging 1.1% to around 2050. Real income per person is predicted to increase. Also our population is predicted to increase. Population increase and scientific - industrial technology are responsible for our global warming predicament. Together they make up most of gets to be called "economic growth", which could be also called the progress of the human cancer. Over 40 years, 1.1% exponential growth in national income (which is different in some ways to GDP), is a 55% increase in gross nation income.

3.7 Population growth requires increased greenhouse gas emissions.

Current rate of population increase is 1.6%, primarily due to immigration. Over 40 years this multiples to a 189% increase, or nearly double. Therefore this population growth, if maintained, can outstrip the notional growth in national income by 3x, and therefore, this national income per person will be falling. Over the past 200 years, since 1800, global population grew from 1 to 7 billion, and the impact per person multiplied by about 7-fold. Overall, human impact grew about 50 times, using the simple equation of population x (impact per person). Energy use has grown an estimate 40 fold. This is the historical continuation of the industrial revolution, fueled by a seemingly endless and more efficient extraction and burning of fossil fuels, starting with coal, and then accelarated by massive oil discoveries. Australian growth has been strong from 1975 to 2001, with 3.2% GDP overall. This comprises 1.9% growth in per capita GDP [1]. Applying the equation to the amount of growth, annual population growth has been 3.2 - 1.9 = 1.3% So population growth is a signficant factor (40%) of total environmental impact growth. The other 60% of increase being growth in per capita GDP also has a component caused by population growth.

1

Presentation by Dr John Coulter. Sustainable Population Australia.

Per person impact is calculated from an aggregate by division by its population size. Total impact is driven by the necessity to support each person, and their social combinations. Cultural history and the adoption of cheap fossil fuel technology determines how far into the agricultural and industrial trap each nation has descended.

Total Impact on evolved biosystems = Human population x average carbon emissions per person.

Because of our varying cultures, and regional lifestyles, local populations of humans can be compared on this cummulative destruction (extinction and/or degradation), of evolved biosystems.

3.8 Infrastructure growth requires more carbon emissions

Large numbers of new arrivals require infrastructure. Homes , new suburbs, use of schools, more parking spaces, road space, and corresponding support services. Growth of human infrastructure and activities adds to rates of environmental destruction, both to the bits we value and deplete, and the vital parts to the biosphere functioning that we do not value sufficiently. Additional greenhouse gas emissions occur, for the extra energy required to build the infrastructure and services required for more people, as well as to run the increased size of the facilities.

3.9 Population shrinkage helps overshoot

A long term trend of declining world population growth is predicted. Actual reductions in population takes longer, unless catastrophes intervene. This scenario assumes continued growth of empowerment, education and choice by women, except perhaps in Afghanistan. It is much easier to reduce total greenhouse gas emissions with a long term declining population. Shrinking requirements for infrastructure help recycling. Reducing population means that infrastructure catches up with population size. Inefficiency from stress and congestion is reduced. Transport systems become adequate. Total consumption is reduced. The potential for everyone having enough increases. It is so good, there is a danger of premature resumption of population regrowth, as the perception of having more than enough, is a stimulus for having bigger families.

4 What can be done?

Recognize the interlinked nature of the

Add Comment

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first!