The modern version of ‘Let them eat cake’

19 11 2016

In this spontaneous conversation between two of Britain’s most vocal scientists on climate change and engineering, we see a frank analysis of the details that belie inconvenient truths for each one us……

Our current carbon pollution rate is taking us towards a planet that is on average 4ªC warmer than today with regional variations far exceeding this and changes to the natural world that will be so profound that it is fair to say, this will not be the same planet.

Carbon sequestering technologies

Anderson: “Carbon sequestration works at very small levels. Whether you could scale it up to 35 billion tonnes… this is where you suck the CO2 either out of the atmosphere or out of chimneys from power stations and then you store this as liquid CO2 somewhere for the next thousand plus years. To store this quantity of CO2, this is a huge challenge. Yet, this is normalised in almost all of the models that are advising policymakers… every single scenario that has been discussed, at this event in Paris that I have heard, assumes, without actually mentioning it up front, that this technology works. It is highly speculative!”

Carbon Budget

One of the big omissions from the Paris Accord is the mention of the carbon budget. Anderson discusses why this is so important. The remaining 900 billion tonnes that analysts say we can burn before exceeding the carbon budget for safe climate change (a figure that should not be taken as absolute fact, but rather, based on ‘scenarios’ that are themselves dependent on carbon negative technologies, that currently do not exist, and emissions reductions that should have started years ago) is meant to be divided up in a fair and equitable way, placing emphasis on the world’s poor to give them a better quality of life and resilience to climate changes in their region.

By taking out the mention of the carbon budget in the early stages of the Paris negotiations, the implication is that the conversation over who burns what can be sidestepped and the wealthy nations do not have to tackle this central issue straight on.

It is worth adding to this that achieving 1.5ºC as a safe limit of global mean temperature rise to ensure the safety of exposed regions (such as low lying lands and small island states), is only possible with aggressive and immediate decarbonisation over the next ten years. Thus, the number is only being treated as “aspirational” and not realistic.

Anderson: “The problem with carbon, it is in the dyes in my shirt. It is in the ship that brought my shirt here, it’s how we got to this event, it keeps the lights on, it’s keeping your computer running. Carbon is completely pervasive.”

The +2ºC world

Anderson: “It is highly unlikely that we will hold to 2º Centigrade. It is a choice. We know how to do this today but it does require this social and political change in the short-term.”

The reality of the issue is that we are losing the window of opportunity to stay below 2ºC. As we start looking to a 2-4ºC world, we are looking at planet that is likely to be wrought with famine, conflict, overwhelming migration and huge degradation of natural systems.

There are worrying feedbacks to warming the planet that should concern us all. One example is the collapse of global forests. A scientific study has shown that at 2.5ºC increase in temperature many of the worlds forests will collapse. These are huge carbon sinks and sources of oxygen. The world without trees is certain to be challenging.

Of course, we can add in all kinds of other impacts such as the collapse of ice sheets, melting permafrost, dying off of oceans, and they are all severely bad for life on Earth.

Social values and climate justice?

Hunt: “So, why is the mood here quite optimistic? It seems to me we may well have passed some tipping points. Time will tell in the next few decades.”

Anderson: “Part of the optimism comes from rich people in the northern hemisphere who think we can buy our way out of it…. you hear people use this kind of language… what this means is, ‘we’ll muddle through because we are rich enough to buy our way out of it, and the poor will die!’ If you look at the language we use and peel away the layers, and look beneath it, what we are saying is fairly savage!”

Hunt: “This is the modern version of ‘Let them eat cake’. We seem to be accepting that our lifestyles will not change very much. Somehow we have to put in a political framework, a legal framework, a governance framework to solve the problem, without affecting our lifestyles.”

“Geoengineering” the climate

Anderson: “Personally, my view on this is that we should do the research on these techniques and we should do the research on the techniques for sucking the CO2 out of the air, but all of our policy framing should assume they don’t work. So it is an insurance policy that has a very high probability of never paying out. So we should do the research and assume that they will never work. The problem is that we are not doing very much research and we are assuming that they work.”

Hunt: “The research that I have been involved in on the SPICE project (Stratospheric Particle Injection for Climate Engineering), a small test that we want to do, had to be stopped because of the concerns about the perception of what we were doing. It was not because of the concerns about what we were actually doing, but about the perception of what we were doing.”

“I think that this is a bit worry that the perception of what we are doing in pumping 35 billion tonnes of CO2 in the atmosphere seems not to be of any great concern, but the perception of research we might do into climate engineering is of great concern. I’m not saying that it is not a great concern but let’s get a balance.”

Anderson: “I take the view that we can actually make a big difference by making social changes now. We can still just make the 2ºC but it needs rapid and deep reductions by this relatively small set of big emitters. Because we are saying we’re not prepared to do that, therefor we have to think about the other sets of issues. I think we do need to reinvigorate the debate about social change in the short to medium term, whilst we put the low carbon energy supply in place.”

“All these other techniques are contentious and they may not work. If we could reduce our energy consumption today, that is not everybody on the planet but just a relatively small number of us. Then that definitely would have an impact on our carbon emissions very quickly.”

Optimism?

Hunt: “We are coming into a period of great stress. I think that our young kids at school now are going to be our new generation of inspirational people. I am not just relying on them rather hopefully. I just believe that the world we are going into will be very stressful and that people will rise to the challenge and great things will happen.”

Anderson: “I think we have all the tools we need to resolve this problem, pretty much at our fingertips, but we are not prepared to use them now. And the two I have mentioned are: Very significant social change for the few in the short to medium term, and engineers doing what engineers have been very good at doing for decades, if not centuries, and that is changing our infrastructure towards a very low carbon future going forward.”

“If you put those two together I think that 2ºC is still a viable goal for our society.”

Advertisements

Actions

Information

53 responses

19 11 2016
glenn

In short … clever folk were talking of solutions in the 60s then the 70s 80s 90s and early 2000s BUT the big issues just get worse every decade.

So why are our kids … mine included going to be game changers? This kinda blind unfounded optimism bores me shitless.

Glenn

p.s. learning to live self reliantly on slow energy in some kinda harmony with the environment takes a lifetime to learn. Just prepping ya firewood yearly is a huge job …

19 11 2016
Eclipse Now

“Carbon is completely pervasive.”
Except in France’s electricity sector.
Sure their transport is still addicted to oil, but that can change as well.

19 11 2016
Idiocracy

Somewhat ironic isn’t it that you should suddenly pop-up to comment on an article with “Let them eat cake” in the title? 😛

19 11 2016
Eclipse Now

I like it! 🙂 Let them! There’s enough for billions of years of abundant, clean, reliable electricity, and all the electric transport and synfuels you could want.

21 11 2016
20 11 2016
mikestasse

Even more ironic……

The French nuclear watchdog has called for the shutdown and inspection of five more nuclear reactors for safety checks. The reactors have a high level of carbon which could lead to various failures.
The Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) has asked nuclear power utility EDF to carry out additional inspections at Fessenheim 1,Tricastin 2 and 4, Gravelines 4 and Civaux 1 reactors, according to a press release. All these reactors are located across the whole France, close to towns and communes.

https://www.rt.com/news/363484-france-nuclear-shut-down/

20 11 2016
Eclipse Now

Good, isn’t it? The industry is transparent and even reporting these incidents. And these are still mainly Gen2 LWR’s, the oldest nuclear technology we have. They’re bound to have issues. So bleeding what? Never heard of old coal plants having issues? Never heard of brand spanking NEW coal plants having issues? Um, like … say… the world coal industry killing 2.6 million people, or 2 Chernobyl’s per day? As Monbiot said, in one week coal kills more people when it goes *right* than the whole history of nuclear power going wrong.

So again, I’m forced to ask — so bleeding what? There are 5 words that make it attractive, despite all the anti-nuclear hysteria of the unhinged. (Like “Doctor” Helen Caldicott, a self-referencing screeching harpy that writes way outside of her field and quotes her own un-peer reviewed papers. Nice work Helen! You’re a caricature of yourself.)

Those 5 words?

Abundant, safe, reliable, clean, forever.

20 11 2016
Idiocracy

“There’s enough for billions of years of abundant, clean, reliable electricity, and all the electric transport and synfuels you could want”

Ha! Pretty pointless when we wont have a habitable biosphere in which to piss all this totally awesome energy away on charging our bullshit devices, & powering massive roadside video adverteisments pushing the latest “reality” TV fad.

Or are you one of those Elon Space Cadets who think our future lies in the stars… so you know, fuck earth and all!

21 11 2016
Eclipse Now

Hi Idiocracy,
“Pretty pointless when we wont have a habitable biosphere”…
Why won’t we? Have you already given up on climate change? Isn’t nuclear power the point? Isn’t stopping all this the point? Abundant clean energy and giving everyone what they want is the answer. It all starts with energy. Maybe we’ll be too late, and Trump will nuke us all back to the Stone Age. I don’t know the future. But I doubt a nuclear-stone age would last long. I’ve seen maps that show where the fallout would go, and much American farmland is spared. They’d be back within a generation or so!

21 11 2016
Idiocracy

Now, let us be reasonable Mike… nobody wants unbridaled growth, that would be irresponsible (hyperinflation & all)! No, you see, “sustainable growth” is all the rage now… because you know, its totally sustainable!

The bullshit stories/meme’s produced by a civilisation in decline to convince itself otherwise do my fucking head in! 🙂

22 11 2016
Idiocracy

You sure do know how to pick and choose your arguements Eclipse…

Why didn’t you address Mike’s 6th great extinction point?

And clearly you totally fuckin’ missed my point – “giving everyone what they want is the answer”. Wrong, thats the entire bloody issue in a nutshell!

Also fuck the bullshit PC “climate change” rhetoric, it’s Anthropogenic Global Warming. To Glenn’s excellent point, what makes you/the talking heads in this article think we’re (i.e. Humanity) going to change anything now? Plus why focus on the climate, you do realise we are totally screwing the rest of the biosphere too right? How do your fancy pants, apparently “clean” (so no finite inputs at all throughtout their lifetime) reactors help in this regard?

You’re clearly a man of great faith Eclipse… which works out great for you either way really – if your technology gods fail you, your deity will at least have your back in the afterlife.

22 11 2016
mikestasse

EXACTLY……. “giving everyone what they want” is THE PROBLEM.

22 11 2016
Eclipse Now

It’s this simple. Mike keeps saying we don’t have a technology that can supply abundant clean energy and cannot transition away from fossil fuels. We can. That’s the first great step towards sustainability. There are many others, but that one is primary. Get that one wrong, and it’s game over. Then there are of course many other things we need to do: I call them the 10 Rules for Recovery, like more energy efficient cities, restorative farming, wildlife corridors, national parks, agriculture 2.0 (which you probably don’t know about, living in your own echo chamber), and many other things.

Lastly, I’m happy to call it Global Warming in the popular parlance from the 1980’s, climate change or climate science – the original scientific discipline (that the Bush regime admittedly reverted back to in the hope that it would soften the language), or AGW, or even CAGW. (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming). You do not own the language, and as long as the term climate change is used correctly, and the science respected, I’m happy. You can have a drop tantrum any time you want, but you’ll live longer if you learn to respect that the English language is quite fluid and terms change over time.

22 11 2016
mikestasse

Errrr……. I’m doing agriculture 3.0.

If we actually did “more energy efficient cities, restorative farming, wildlife corridors, national parks, agriculture 3.0”, then we could close 90% of all electrical power stations. We don’t need more.

22 11 2016
Eclipse Now

Agriculture 2.0 90% of our power off? Um, you sure you know what it is?

23 11 2016
mikestasse

Been doing it for twelve years buddy……..

22 11 2016
Idiocracy

I tried to address you Eclipse, but WordPress ate my comment (22807 if you can recover it Mike).

Somewhat frustrating, but then again, I realise it’s a pointless discussion, I only do it in the hope that it helps others see the BS you’re peddling for what it is.

Why do you even come here, why not join your peers in the techno-optimist echo chamber of reddit futurology or something? I’m sure you’d be much happier there.

22 11 2016
Eclipse Now

It sounds like you want to shout into an echo-chamber, and don’t want any inconvenient facts disrupting your opinion. You’re welcome to your opinion, but the facts remain. Dr James Hansen DOES recommend nuclear power, and 115 GW per year WOULD do the job SLOWER than the French build out rate in the 70’s. This is entirely doable. We’ve done it before.

22 11 2016
Idiocracy

Ha, ok – lets talk about inconvenient facts. I have no opinion/beliefs (unlike you churchie), I’ve long sought out ultimate truths.

It’s quite simple really – Forests proceed civilisation, and deserts follow civilisations.

I want a world of forests… you on the otherhand cling to this mode of being that brings only death. As does James Hansen, and all the rest of those talking heads. You and your peers sir (and sadly the vast majority of humanity) are the ones operating in an echo-chanber.

22 11 2016
Idiocracy

“abundant clean energy… That’s the first great step towards sustainability.” – Jevons Paradox is certain to bite you in the ass; increased energy consumption will = increased material consumption. Get this RIGHT and it’s still game over.

“10 Rules for Recovery” – recovery of what exactly (other than a little more time before inevitable collapse)? Boil it down to 1 rule for real recovery – End Civ!

Now, FUCK Cities & Agriculture version anything… Mike (and I and others) I would say are really shooting for Agriculture 0.5 or less (the lower the better). Something closer to/more harmonious with nature, permaculture/forest gardening, call it what you may. You on the other hand think high technology will save us. The greater control, the more domesticated, the more alienating, the better. It wont – as noted earlier, all it can do is buy time. And what will humanity do with that time other than fuck things up further?

In my imaginary perfect world I’m an indigenous person just sitting in a mango tree stuffing my face all day long (I too dream of a better world, it’s just mine is anachronistic, regressive, biologically diverse, and truly sustainable. Whilst yours is just a progressive, liberal, domesticated, technologically driven dead end).

And finally, for once you’re right… indeed I do not own the english language. The politicians, mainstream media, lobbyists, NGO’s, Economists, Interest Groups and rich pricks in general do. They’re responsible for bullshit terms like “climate change”, “sustainable growth”, “clean coal”, “the continuing recovery”, “balancing the budget”, et al! If you think terms like these exist because of the innate fluidity of the english language, then I’m afraid you’ve overdosed on blue pills and kool-aid like most folks have!

Here’s a timely primer on human bullshit from the brilliant Dave Cohen to hopefully aid in you recovery – http://www.declineoftheempire.com/2016/11/are-we-in-the-post-truth-era.html

PS: I think you’ll find organic produce, chemical free water, and fresh country air are best for longevity. And I’ve got two in spades, and I’m growing more of the third each year. So don’t be too worried about my health.

PPS: I’m far from raging out, and can happily troll you for as long as it pleases you, just keep feeding me fresh bullshit! 😛

23 11 2016
Eclipse Now

Hi idiocracy,
Consumption of what? Society is reaching higher and higher penetrations of recycled materials.
Indeed, everything in the local garbage dump can be recycled. We can just dump it all into a Plasma Arc Burner which is described as lightning on a stick. Rather than burning it in normal oxygen-rich air and oxidizing it into ash, the Plasma Arc runs in a low oxygen tank. This rips the waste apart at the molecular level and sorts it into light gases and heavy solids. The light gases are for the petrochemical industry and make everything from sunglasses and toothbrushes to motor lubricants and varnishes. The heavier slag slurps out the bottom like lava, and can make everything from bricks and roof tiles to fluffy rock-wool insulation and faux wood panels. In other words, the Plasma Arc Burner recycles household rubbish into about half the materials necessary to build the next house or car or boat! Dr James Hansen promotes this in his friend Tom Blee’s book, Prescription for the Planet. This is now a free PDF at the link below.
Chapter 7: Exxon Sanitation Inc, p189.
http://www.thesciencecouncil.com/pdfs/P4TP4U.pdf

“(I too dream of a better world, it’s just mine is anachronistic, regressive, biologically diverse, and truly sustainable. Whilst yours is just a progressive, liberal, domesticated, technologically driven dead end).”
I long for progress, science, art, culture, medicine, space travel, and polar bears on Mars. Once we’ve colonised Mars to the point where they have their own zoos, and maybe even down the track terraform it (it has PLENTY of thorium to power all this), then that’s true sustainability. We will have learned enough about ecosystems here to replicate them there. While you’re regressing, Elon Musk is taking us there. You’ve got to learn to think bigger and read wider.

23 11 2016
mikestasse

The comment re agriculture 2.0 or whatever I think means like a version of a computer program… he’s talking V2.0. but we’re at V3.0, well ahead of the curve….

23 11 2016
Idiocracy

You sure do know how to prove my points Eclipse. I even picked you as one of Elon’s Space Cadet’s! High Technology to the rescue… we will have our cake and eat it too… or bust! What a joke, you’re a lost cause… your proclamations get more absurd by the comment. Just one of many clowns playing their part in this great circus we call Civilisation. And your longings are so fucking bourgeois. You sit behind your keyboard within your privileged bubble and cluck your tongue at us dirty proles about how great the futures going to be… if only we’d think bigger & read wider we could understand this too! Whilst in the real world, today gets worse by the minute…

So thanks for the lecture on plasma garbage disposal. Now if we could just find a way to produce even more landfill, the world would be such a better place! I’ll think of you next time I’m using the plasma cutter.

Glenn summed it up nicely. It’s evolutionary (hard for Eclipse to appreciate, he thinks some bearded old dude in the clouds made us), like all species we consume and reproduce as much as we can… within the bounds of nature. However our big brains and ultimately some ancient black goo enabled us to escape those bounds and so now we are devouring the world (how many billion are we up to?). And it’s biologically impossible to stop it. That’s why the world I dream of is indeed not possible (for now at least – I just hope there’s enough planet left post collapse for some band societies) and why Eclipse dreams of Polar Bears on Mars.

Now Eclipse, while I’m out in the real world tomorrow, finishing my split post fence… how about you get out from behind your keyboard and help Elon build those rockets. The sooner we get both of you (and James bloody Hansen) off to Mars the better.

20 11 2016
Steven

Have those blokes been talking to Al Gore?

23 11 2016
Glenn

I must admit a techno fix for our E.E.E problems would be nice HOWEVER … based our history and current behaviour as clever human animals … there seems little evidence to suggest we are mature enough to do it in the right way … right?

I would simply like the human species to take a step back and find its place as equal members on this planet. However … in my mind … this WILL NOT HAPPEN. On a global scale we will take all that we can until we cant.

If the tech solution was gunna save our bacan it should have by now. A global economic collapse is our best short term solution for all living creatures BUT im guessing it wont come quick enough. As JMG says ” collapse now and beat the crowd.” And just enjoy our time for what it is.

23 11 2016
Eclipse Now

“On a global scale we will take all that we can until we cant.”
Except those places where we realise we shouldn’t, and do things like establish marine reserves, national parks, usage quotas, policing actions, trade embargoes, etc.

“If the tech solution was gunna save our bacan it should have by now.”
Why?

14 12 2016
Mark

“Except those places where we realise we shouldn’t, and do things like establish marine reserves, national parks”

And then we dump the spoil from dredging and the spoil then kills the marine park as the lighter material drifts and settles on the plant life.
Or rezone a national park to allow logging.

23 11 2016
glenn

Eclipes Now … yes marine reserves … national parks are wonderful things … etc etc etc BUT we are simply doing more to destroy life than preserve it dont you think?

Sadly the numbers just dont add up in favour of solutions and there are bullet holes in most of the supposed solutions. Bit of a gamble to hope tech solutions will save the day dont you think?

For example … we happily shit into a wheelie bin day in day out. Now go and ask any 100 folk out there in an affluent megacity if they would be willing to do this or smthing like it and they will mostly say no. Now if we still cant get that shit right in 2016 HTF will we bridge other more complexed issues? 15 years ago i might have agreed wth you … but now … sadly not.

24 11 2016
Eclipse Now

Rubbish processing systems are changing to recycle far more, and in some cases ALL the rubbish, into useful products.
https://eclipsenow.wordpress.com/recycle/

As for energy, according to Dr Hansen 115 GW reactors a year would do the job until about the 2050’s when the rate could drop off a bit. This is entirely doable. Indeed, when measured on a nukes per GDP ratio, we’ve already done it. The French have already *beaten* this build rate back in the 1970’s, and that was with older individual builds. Some of the newer reactors that will be released soon can be mass produced on the production line. Clean energy is the most important first step towards “one planet living”. Indeed, dirty energy alone is about half the entire ecological impact of the human race.

(See point 7: Does IPAT doom us?)
https://eclipsenow.wordpress.com/reduce/

24 11 2016
mikestasse

To recycle rubbish you first have to make some…….. and nearly ALL the waste is plastic, made with oil, ending in a town near you.

24 11 2016
Eclipse Now

All of which can be dumped in a plasma burner just fine…
https://eclipsenow.wordpress.com/recycle/

14 12 2016
Mark

As Mike says, could we not produce the waste to start with rather than build another tech toy to burn it down to it’s constituent components simply to reprocess it using more energy.

14 12 2016
Eclipse Now

Could we not produce the waste to start with? Well, if you come up with a way of satisfying human nature, denying people the right to give their kids toys, curbing our desire for stuff, and generally helping the entire human race to fall in love with peace-love-and-mung-beans baby, then I’m with you. But until then, I prefer to look at realistic solutions that can convert our existing landfill messes into useful products that can provide 80% of the materials to build the next house, boat, or car.

23 11 2016
Emperor Earth

I’m curious to see what is possible in the creation of micro climates. That is, if we can both rewild and plant vast agroforestry regions, they will be less susceptible to climatic shocks – as the trees play a role in retaining moisture, withstanding extreme weather and balancing temperatures. But these are only my layman observations

24 11 2016
Eclipse Now

Hi Emperor Earth, it’s not just your layman’s observations but the results of peer-reviewed research, practical application, private company investment, local-co-op investment, and the government policy of some African nations building the Great Green Wall across the southern Sahara!
https://eclipsenow.wordpress.com/green-deserts/

24 11 2016
Idiocracy

Well, WordPress yet again ate my comment from last night, but unsurprisingly Eclipse is still going the full techno utopian wingnut…

Tell us this Eclipse – what are your thresholds, your limits for technology? Or maybe you have none? Do you aspire to the full blown Zoltan Istvan Transhumanist Singularity, or do you think Deus Ex like body & mind augmentations should be it? If you have any such limits, doesn’t that just make you a hypocrite, a half baked wannabe technologist? How could you argue against those for it – aren’t you just the one who hasn’t learned “to think bigger and read wider” (to quote yourself)?

24 11 2016
Eclipse Now

Hi Idiocracy,
I’m not sure what your problem is, but you seem to deny we have fission, breeder reactors, and the potential for abundant clean energy. You seem to deny that we can plant trees. You seem to deny that we can recycle wastes, and even plasma burn all the final nastier bits after the recycling process. You seem to deny dozens of practical technological and legal and cultural and political things we can do. So go ahead and ‘poison the well’ by labelling me a Transhumanist. Boy, there’s a big word! 😉 Just throw junk out there. Just don’t discuss anything real, like the fact that many governments *are* actually trying to build the Great Green Wall! Yes, it’s slow. Yes, only 3.5 million trees have been planted so far, in just one country. But it’s a start on *one* project, and there are many others around completely different areas of sustainability.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Green_Wall
That you mention Transhumanism because I mentioned the Great Green Wall is actually quite revealing about your state of mind.

25 11 2016
Idiocracy

I was just replying off your last post so you’d see it. Of course there’s little to bloody nothing in common between tree planting and transhumanism you clown! Or tell me Doctor what exactly did it reveal about my state of mind? 😛

But it is VERY relevant to all your other techno bullshit and rather telling that you didn’t address my point (as usual you pick and choose). You label it junk/poisoning the well… how can you do that… you tell me I need to think bigger, I say you need to think beyond your immediate techno-fawnings and look at where it all leads to.

I’ve never denied that any of the stuff you go on about isn’t doable. But I very much do question WHY do it, what are the long term consequences, where does it all end, what is mans final destination in this great adventure we call civilisation. What do we have to gain and what will we loose along the way?

I know you’ll fling back a bunch of links from your blog, lecture me ad infinitum on this great technology or the other, or basically call me a lizard brain… that’s what you do. But I at least know what I want in this world… you seem but a child fawning of the latest games console.

Now if you’ll excuse me I’ve got a split post fence to finish…

25 11 2016
Eclipse Now

Then if all your objections are about what you want, you’re welcome to go split your post and run your own dinky little survivalist farm. Given that all our modern suburban sprawl and vast cities only take up about 3% of the land surface of the earth, us urban folk are quite happy to let you and your fellow survivalists have your plots of land. For a moment there I thought you were saying there were valid technical reasons the rest of us would not be able to find a series of technical solutions for our series of problems. But now you’ve recast it as a lifestyle choice. Live and let live then…

29 11 2016
Idiocracy

You come on here like a Missionary trying to convert the savages, and then when the spears come your way you decide to call a truce… but not before casting a few final stones of your own of course!

So… “lifestyle choice” huh… there’s a fuckin’ bourgeois term. Nice one hipster! And it’s funny how you cast everything within the techno-sphere – “technical solutions” can only be stop-gaps to the predicament (a situation in which there are no solutions) that is civilisation. All 32+ Civ’s before us collapsed, and now this hyper-complex/industrialised/globalised version is next. We’re not special, we’re not immune… hows that for a “technical reason”?

So with that out of the way, why don’t you go on pretending you know where you’re going & why (do let me know if you ever decide if you’re for/against the singularity) back at your own grand temple of a blog, living your modern urban lifestyle in a bubble (because apparently your 3% doesn’t need the other 97%)…

And leave us dinky little dirty proles here at DTM where we can get back to living in the real world.

30 11 2016
Max Green (Eclipse)

Hi Idiocracy,
There’s a lot I admire about the permaculture lifestyle that Mike and yourself have adopted. There’s a revaluing of time, of place, of not just blindly worshipping the consumerism that can sometimes destroy quality time and hides families behind so much junk and clutter. But I despise the doomerism that robs young people of hope. Unlike previous civilisations we have the scientific method, have power systems that can decouple our consumption from nature, and gradually reduce our footprints into ‘handprints’ of restoration. It’s time for environmentalists to back the Ecomodernist Manifesto and back the rallying cry for abundant clean energy, lower impact agriculture, and infinitely recyclable materials. There is no technical reason we can’t do this, or you would have raised it. It’s time. Sign on or stand back and get out of our way.

30 11 2016
Idiocracy

You’re so far off the mark it’s not even funny anymore – like most sheeple you can’t see the forest for the tree’s. Domestication… Civilisation… these are the true destroyers of bodies, minds and souls. The shallowness, the alienation, the suffocating void that is modernity… mass society… high technology… need I go on?

Consumerism is largely just an escape for most folks – the quick fix from an impulse buy provides a cheap thrill, momentarily easing the pain… but like any addiction sooner or later you’re back on ebay looking for your next hit.

And “Doomerism” is just a symptom displayed by those who see the world we’ve created (not to mention the one we’ve destroyed) for what it is – a fkn shit show… a friggin ungodly mess… full of stupid people, playing stupid games, constantly bullshitting themselves and others. Most just schlubbing along in their stale, homogenised lives and some narcissistically living it up on a wave of speculation and debt. All whilst everything gets worse each and every day. I mean FFS – the ONLY thing truly robbing young people of any hope, is people like you, those who think they can have their cake and eat it too. So give “doomer” kids some credit… they see the game and have figured that the dice are loaded – why wouldn’t they be pissed.

And where to start on your closing statement… Jesus H Christ my head almost exploded from a BS overload. “Unlike previous civilisations” (Jeez I wonder how many other Civ’s have said this), “It’s time”, “decouple our consumption from nature”, “back the Ecomodernist Manifesto”, ” Sign on”, “or get out of our way”… – hahahaha… ok I was wrong, you’re still plenty funny. Nice one bubble boy!

Well there’s clearly much work to be done on this revolution of yours Eclipse. I don’t think you’ll get too many recruits here at DTM (I thought you’d figured this out a few years ago, but for some reason you’re back?), so I suggest you take a detour to r/futurology.

Bye bye now…

30 11 2016
Idiocracy

By all means, go now Eclipse!

Please… I don’t know why you came back?

Your revolution needs you!

1 12 2016
Eclipse Now

So Idiocracy, you have nothing educated to say and you’re just another sneering doomer troll? How original. Mummy must be so proud.

1 12 2016
Idiocracy

No Eclipse, simply a matter of WordPress eating my comment again.

But because you choose not to address most of my points… and I tire of your BS… and finally decide to fob you off, send you back to wherever you came from… that makes me the sneering doomer troll?

You just don’t get it… you’re too human! You’re the sneering troll Eclipse, coming to “DAMN THE MATRIX” to sell Matrix brand Snake Oil.

Get the hint clown – go away. Nobody here cares about what you have to say. Hell – nobody cares about what you have to say on your own bloody blog.

So why are you wasting your time fool – if the time is NOW, then go… make your revolution Eclipse!

Otherwise, Mike – seems Eclipse is desperate for some more spears. WordPress ate my comment from before my last one at (21:44:44) if you can pull it out for our dear friend.

1 12 2016
Idiocracy

And if you don’t mind Eclipse, please do let me know where you congregate on a Sunday. I might just waltz in, interrupt proceedings, preach the good word of Hitchens, Dawkins, et al… and then when the pews erupt in objection, I’ll just call you all a bunch of sneering trolls and say “How original – Your Lord and Saviour must be so proud”.

1 12 2016
Eclipse Now

You’re right Idiocracy, I asked for that. I’m sorry I said that to you, but really, other than sheer sneering hatred, what on-topic, relevant, reliable facts and data have you actually tried to *communicate* to me, rather than just sneering at me? In like your last 10 posts? Seriously? As they say, if you feed the troll, you’re just going to end up dirty and the troll likes it. I’m sorry I ever engaged you.

6 12 2016
Idiocracy

If you go out looking for a fight, expect that you might come away with a bloody nose…

And you don’t get to decide the rules of engagement, or what is/isn’t relevant, reliable, or on topic.

Just because your biases prevent you from acknowledging/yet alone addressing points made, does not invalidate them.

7 12 2016
Eclipse Now

Hi Idiocracy,
I guess I should remind you that I stopped reading your posts about 3 posts ago? It’s just the polite thing to remind you of. Cheers.

16 12 2016
Idiocracy

Great, that’s a start. Now if you could just stop typing too then we’d all be happy… thanks!

25 11 2016
SaturnV

Eclipse_troll never mentions where all the energy would come from to effect this grandiose techno-douchery, nor where all the waste will go as a result, nor what other planet might fund it, because it’s sure as hell isn’t this one.

27 11 2016
Eclipse Now

Hi Saturn, I must say you are very quick to deal out troll insults before reading the rest of the comments here. You say I never once mentioned the energy source for all of this, which reveals how little you investigated this thread. Try reading it again.

14 12 2016
Mark

You have, the energy to make it will come from the new reactors, I just have no idea who will build them, fund them and then decommission them.
The reason for this lack of knowledge is every company who builds them goes broke just before they reach end of life and the units are more or less abandoned, ie left to the government to clean up.

This after claiming the power produced would be too cheap to charge for. Except the cost of running the nukes is increasing all the time and in France has surpassed the price of solar by about a level of 2-3 times wholesale.

And don’t pass this off as solar is subsidised, the French & British governments have given many billions to EDF to cover operating losses and between them now own 80% (?) of the company.
This is on top of the British gov taking over the decommissioning of closed plants.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s