Forging a Better Tomorrow: Challenging Common Conceptions
Abstract
It is born into the very reality we all inhabit, that time moves in one direction, at only one speed. It’s a physical law of existence that we’ve all come to accept without realization because it’s just how the reality operates. Indeed, the concept of time is so very ingrained into the way we perceive reality that it exists almost without our knowledge entirely. Each moment blends seamlessly with the next, and although we might distinguish between moments — using seconds or minutes or hours or days — no natural boundary ultimately separates one from any other save our own conception of the nature in which they pass. These measurements we’ve come to accept upon the basis of usefulness, such that we can make logical sense of existence within their contexts, and talk about events and things, as they exist within their confines with some semblance of specificity.
I bring up the concept of time, because frankly nothing we humans experience in life ever happens within a vacuum. From within this context of time we can see that our lives are somewhat like brief windows through which we have time to exert force on the direction of things as they move determinedly through it.
As such, we must seek to understand the way in which it is that we inherited the earth from all beings who’ve preceded our time here, and the state in which we’d ought to pass it on to those who come after. (6)
Foreword
I want you to imagine you’re walking down a road. It’s an ordinary dirt road, none too exceptional, lined on both sides by thickets of evergreen and willow — the smell of fresh pine and the satisfying crunching of gravel underfoot with each step. Walking is both simple and enjoyable. Very little thought required: you systematically put one foot in front of the other and achieve forward motion. But… what happens when the road begins flooding with water? (13)
You continue walking and this works for a time — as it reaches your knees, you’ll continue to wade through until, perhaps, it reaches your waste. At this point you’re wondering where the heck all this water is coming from; and you’re probably somewhat scared and confused.
What we consider to be normative can, and often does, change at the drop of a hat. Circumstances are always shifting with the progression of time — we adapt to the situation we’re presented with and do what is necessary in order to meet the requirements of the reality we face. To ignore reality and continue business as usual is irrational, and indicates something in the mind is not working properly for one reason or another, or that we otherwise lack the knowledge to do what is required of us given the circumstances we’ve befallen — which generally constitutes we will drown.
Change takes time. Sometimes a lot.
Yet there are a large number of factors that inhibit our ability to change states, particularly as a collective entity — organizing our efforts into a coherent movement from one metaphysical place to another. To face change is to face the unknown, and presents us with the risk that the decisions we make won’t be the right ones in face of circumstance. If we do make a mistake, it’s important we acknowledge it in some form or another and proceed to learn from the experience such that we can hone in on a more accurate method by which to assess said circumstances, and to achieve the desired outcome. (11)
At the end of the day, the humanitarian crises of the next century affects each and every one of us, regardless of any line by which we could be divided. Earth is home to all of us — and we don’t have anywhere else to go if we fail to change our behavior.
Part I: The Challenge Ahead
Many of you will be familiar with the carbon cycle. This is the process by which CO2 in the atmosphere is transferred by plants and flora into O2, and is then, by animals, inhaled and exhaled again, reversing the process. I suppose that’d be the basic premise, anyways — though it’s a bit more complicated than that, I suppose.
In recent years, humans have destabilized this process by way of excessive combustion — projections have a lot of environmental experts concerned. In this graph presented by Elon Musk at the University of Paris on December 2nd, 2015, displays the nearly vertical incline of global atmospheric carbon concentrations since the industrial revolution. (3) You’ll notice the rate of incline really begins to take off around the year 2000, and predictions are estimating this exponential rate of annual growth is continuing to increase. Quite simply, releasing carbon long locked within the earths crust, in the form of fossil fuels, into the atmospheric system is unbalancing the homeostatic nature of the planet.
The basic consequence is a gradual warming of the troposphere — and amounts eventually to such ultimatums like the ice caps melting, sea levels rising, and by 97% of specialists’ predictions: for the intensity and possibly the frequency of extreme weather events to greatly increase. (2) Allowing these effects to run their course is to also assume ourselves responsible for the relocation of roughly two billion people, as the result of their native homes being swallowed up by the sea; and the potential failure of many agricultural projects on account of droughts and wildfires caused by changing weather patterns. (7)
Elon’s presentation was profound, in the sense that it sought also to justify a movement towards renewable sources upon, not only the basis of immediate necessity, but also upon the undeniable eventual end to the finite supply of fossil-fuel-supplied-sources of energy on earth. (3) With both of these challenges ahead, we need to begin to make progress on the transference of our energy reliance onto sources of renewable energy generation and low carbon emitting methods of transportation — and otherwise limiting ourselves from emitting superfluously where we’re able — and that’s regardless of political affiliation or the vestiges of personal or national interests. It is upon the basis of survival, or otherwise convienience.
We have the Technology. Why oughtn’t we employ it?
The following critique on the “wedge strategy model” established in Pacala et. Al’s Solving the Climate Problem (10) serves the function of making the question of carbon emissions an almost manageable affair. That said, I think we’re becoming increasingly aware of the severity and scope of the problem that lies ahead. Climate change is poised to determine the outcome of a vast majority of the decisions we’ll make as an international community, as nations, as states, and as individuals from this moment onward until long into the foreseeable future; as President Barak Obama recognized in his address to the 2015 Paris Climate Conference. (2)
Ultimately Elon is correct in his assessment that fossil fuels are, of course, a finite resource. Regardless of the economic ramifications—despite Oil and Gas being one of the US’s most valuable export resources—we’ll be facing much larger problems than economic downturn if we fail to act and allow the climate to deteriorate beyond a definitive ecological threshold. (3)
Furthermore it doesn’t seem at all reasonable to presuppose that economic prosperity and renewable energy generation can’t work in tandem; I should rather like to project we’re already shooting ourself in the feet for not jumping on the opportunity that renewables represent.
Part II: Exploring Potential Solutions
The industrial revolution and the discovery of mechanical power from combustible fuel sources forever altered the course of human history. In 2016, nearly everything we produce and consume relies ultimately upon the fundament of industrial power in one form or another — from the food we eat, the way we transport ourselves from place to place, and even how we see the world at night.
This figure displays the disparity between what annual emissions are projected to be if business is to continue as usual, versus what an optimal emissions future looks like were we able to stabilize our rate of annual emission, implying the eventual goal of reducing gross annual emissions, until finally, with a zero carbon emitting future in place, to return to pre-industrial levels of atmospheric CO2 saturation.
Just to clarify, these graphs do not display the cumulative amount of carbon in the atmosphere, but rather the annual gross contribution to it. Just trying to put the scope of the problem in perspective.
Undoubtedly we’ve decided that the first step to a carbon free energy future is to stop the annual growth of our global carbon emissions. It is the rapidity of this growth that ultimately delineates this phenomenon as a crisis. (10)
The ingenuity of the model discussed in Pacala et. Al stems from it’s aim to halt this growth through a variety of different methods — to separate the problem into parts, and to describe a solution to it as the sum of all those parts in order to fulfill the energy consumption needs of a growing global population. Pacala et. Al attributes the adaptations we need in order to eliminate the emissions represented by these 8 wedges had ought to be myriad variations on:
1) The development of renewable or non-carbon emitting energy sources
2) Better management of the fossil fuel sources we already use
3) Accounting for the carbon absorption methods inherent in nature (such as forests, soils, and oceans), and to promote them through human means. (like halting deforestation, and planting trees.) (10)
However, in The Ethics of Global Climate Change’s 9th chapter: Beyond business as usual: alternative wedges to avoid catastrophic climate change and create sustainable societies by Dr. Phillip Cafaro — Published by Cambridge University Press in 2011, Cafaro argues that the problem cannot be solved by growth alone — rather that conservation of fossil fuel had ought also to be a method by which we construct our energy future. (1)
Furthermore, he explores the idea that maybe the wedges could be smaller and more numerous than the first initial wedges proposed by Pacala et. Al; quite, the triangle above is easily divisible into as many wedges as makes logistical sense in order to combat the problem at each regional level, providing for the diversity of ecosystem services available to each containing the capability to produce electric current. Regardless, Cafaro’s most profound contribution was the notion that taxing services that produce carbon emissions could act as a natural deterrent — likely causing a general reduction in the size of the overall triangle to begin with. (1)
This seems to make economic and logistical sense in a myriad of different ways: not only because it ensures that people expending the most emission generating energy ultimately front the majority of the bill, but because it economically promotes people seek ways to achieve their ends without the use of carbon emitting strategies where possible—it promotes conservation.
Meanwhile, it also potentially produces sizable amounts of both private and public revenue that could be put towards securing the energy future of the next generations. It offers us the means to an end, which would be the creation of long-term renewable solutions to the issue of energy production and transportation by way of government subsidies, funding for research into new technologies and investment into industries we’ve already got up and running. In short, a carbon tax policy reduces the problem’s immediate size in the short-term and simultaneously serves as the collecting tin to make easier an inevitable, more permanent transition.
After all’s said, handing somebody a shopping list, but failing to provide them with money, isn’t going to produce any groceries.
What we’re on about here is pressure. No economic force is being exerted on the companies and industries that rely largely on carbon emitting services to push them towards shifting their investments and production efforts towards greener technologies, which makes the ethical challenge of making environmentally conscious economic choices an “uphill battle” both for the individual, and for the companies who are seeking to expedite positive change. (3) Putting economic pressure on both industrial leaders and individuals in this way will ultimately lead to the results we seek: innovative technologies that are more efficient and less wasteful.
It also represents a gradual shift of capital from the wealthy private to the public sector of the economy, where it can be used to purchase materials (from the private sector, no doubt, stimulating economic growth and job creation) that could be put to work in re-constituting the US energy grid, increasing the number of lithium-ion storage facilities on both local and regional levels into which the energy from any and all sources could be stored. Not to mention: if private PV generation is promoted the overall needs of society decrease exponentially:
Increasing the economic initiative for homeowners to install solar panels represents, in effect, a revolution in the way we produce and consume energy. It decreases individual reliance on the grid — until it acts only as a safety net of collective security, and to supplement personal production during hours of peak energy use. It also ensures that any personal production of energy during peak hours that exceeds the capacity of a personal lithium ion storage system will be kept in a place where it’s accessible to the community that produced it, and that the producer will be, in turn, compensated for their energy thriftiness.
New technologies in the automotive sector like Chevy’s Volt displays well this new kind of ingenuity—by which fossil fuels are used to power human contraptions only when emission-free methods have been expended. I think this kind of mentality represents the best-case scenario, at least for the short-term transformational period; until our energy security is met through renewable, carbon-free means alone—Such a time might realistically be more than a century away — however it has been perceived that such technologies produce far less emissions; in the realm of fractions on what their current day equivalents do which emit carbon at all times of operation.
For instance, “the grid’s self sufficiency is down in these regions to this particular level, which dictates we should generate this much power over the course of the following time scale from these specific sources” — becoming increasingly less necessary as the grid is supplemented with more and more sources of large scale renewable energy generation — Wind, Hydro, and PV; and as the range to which these sources can be broadcasted becomes greater. Regardless, procuring state revenue to subsidize these kinds of projects is likely the definitive step towards realizing their creation and development.
The common belief is that decreasing the global economy’s reliance on fossil fuels will damage the American economy — but I argue that tomorrow’s green technologies that will replace carbon emitting technologies of today represent just as much economic promise — if not more as the rest of the world seeks to develop using greener methods. (2)
Quick side note: I wouldn’t mind a high-speed national passenger rail line… I always thought that’d be pretty cool.
Part III: Indicating Success
Initially the industrial revolution began with the wish of increasing productivity and comfort. I think it quite evident that it’s been successful in that way: central heating, electric stoves, internal combustion engines — not to mention the sizable variety of foods to choose from at most local grocery stores. At the same time, we also acknowledge that the natural beauty of the world has taken a fairly noticeable blow, as we navigate concrete prisons with digital directions from a small square beacon in the darkness, aglow with mysterious light.
It’s an issue that’s viewed from a number of different perspectives and at several various degrees of angle. For one, we have to concede that human production has increased 10 fold; we move faster and with more freedom about and from place to place, and that our homes are heated and lit with the wonders of electricity, but can we honestly say we are more free?
There certainly seem to be ways in which the problems of the past seem to have simply distributed themselves unto other aspects of life as a result of these perceivable steps forward seemingly indicating we’re merely walking in place. We become easily deceived by the illusion of motion through physical space, though we’re still locked in place metaphysically. (4)
Our bodies and minds are fast deteriorating under the influence of mass medias and unethical nutritional habituation, and we then often waste endless hours working on our figures to compensate. Our use of electricity and internal combustion machinery is slowly poisoning the atmosphere, and will eventually make the outdoors a tragically undesirable place to be.
There exists a stigma in Western culture, that all things simply represent an economic value. Money this, profit that — what room is left for the inherent goodness of actions, of people, of things? GDP, as we understand it, is the equivalent of Goodness in capitalist society. As such, I’d like to start our next discussion by saying that measuring the success of a society based upon its cold-cut gross statistical economic output seems highly inadequate and otherwise irresponsible when it comes to cases of universally accepted codes of moral conduct. (12)
The purpose of life is, or rather should be, to be happy — not to attain currency and things — but I think from a very young age we’re kind of indoctrinated with the pervasive notion that accumulating wealth and things will bring us happiness—that these two conceptual constructs are one-and-the-same.
It’s an unfortunate and fairly unhealthy idealism to run one’s life by. We’ve developed the tendency to hoard wealth far beyond what seems morally considerate, and often at the expense of foreign laborers whose existences have been reduced to 11 hour days at a factory to afford a spot on the floor in a cement box that sleeps six; and there are undoubtedly international stigmas that are associated with that. I would be hard pressed to say that the US would feel so isolated and alone in the world if we had healthy foreign relations with the rest of the world. (12)
I argue that many Americans have, in the things that used to hold value, allowed their desires to become oversaturated by having grown up in a society that promotes unadulterated consumerism in the spirit of unlimited economic growth. We value material above and beyond what is necessary, and it hinders our ability to make healthy social relationships both domestically, and abroad amid the conflict that arises due to the extent to which we covet it— so much so, that it often eclipses our concern for other people’s wellbeing.
As such, I argue using GDP as the sole determiner of our comparative international success leads us down a road towards a kind of moral obesity that’s simply incongruent with happiness . What’s left is a kind of materialistic despair in it’s place; a depravity of human connection—much like being in a room full of people and yet still feeling completely alone.
Alone within his castle black
But shadows does he seek
Whilst all the world about him
Is the reward he’d ought to keep
But without the light he stumbled
Falling far from things once known
And from the air he turned his head
For nought but mirrors and smoke
Part IV: Here at the Root of All Things
The brevity with which this report seeks to assess a vast myriad of various practical socio-economic points of interest is woefully insufficient to truly explain or thoroughly solve any of them. I’ll concede myself to having a tendency to spew light-hearted and optimistic projections; perhaps because, for my own sake, I have to believe there’s still hope.
So often overlooked in light of reason, hope, like a lily among thorns, is perhaps the definitive quality what differentiates humans from robots. It’s our capacity to act upon the basis of emotion and empathy that makes us who we are—damning the odds in beautiful displays of irrational and bloody passion. We’re human because we feel.
The reason why the world is breaking is because the centripetal axis upon which it revolves is one of greed. It is a disease of the spirit by which we are plagued, in such a sense that we are experiencing a deficiency of mutual care and concern for one another.
After all is said, isn’t it ultimately love that makes life an experience worth having?
Part V: Global Homogeny
As the world developed there were nations. They were enormous families that sought to bring the unbridled convictions of men into harmony, and to set them to common purpose. The world was forcefully taken under the dominion of the strong, because they thought themselves capable of protecting the weak, and creating prosperity for all.
But in time those intentions slowly deteriorated. Within the depths of the annals of antiquity lay countless trespasses — humans treating each other no fairer than animals in the natural hierarchy of predatory instinct; but I’ll outright refuse to believe all of humanity’s sacrifices were for nothing.
The mind is a powerful tool when unbridled by the limitations realism imposes — whether used for good or evil:
What we believe to be possible often is.
By way of collective effort, there are very few limits to what the human race can accomplish. It is ultimately what we tell ourselves — the information we believe in — that limits us from action, or frees us from inhibition.
Given the circumstances we face as a global community, it seems imperative that we abandon the fragmented structure we’ve assumed in the form of numerous nations, to form one global civic entity — with one constitution, one currency, one military and policing force; one minimum wage. The capability of our combined efforts outstretches, by leaps and bounds, anything we might seek to accomplish on our own, and contains the potential to fulfill the purpose of distributing prosperity and happiness alike to all beings on earth if implemented in the proper format.
Ultimately everything humans have devised once existed only as an idea — a nation is not a physical entity, but rather represents a subscription to an ideological set of standards that dictate what is normative. It sets rules and regulations that are followed upon the premise of common convenience, such as the manifestation of the concept of currency; which effectively standardizes a system of fair exchange. (6)
It is a fair assessment to propose that through our ideas, the world we perceive is made manifest. The problem is not in the world — the problem is within each and every one of us, and the ways in which we conceive of what is normative. As such, in order to change anything in the world, we must first change within ourselves.
Imagine what we could accomplish utilizing one common vision unto which our efforts could be exerted — one which serves the best interests of all people, not just relying upon the simple yet sporadic solitary wishes of each individual; it’s like staring at your own distorted reflection in broken glass.
We’d ought to aim to utilize under-estimated human resources like the Peace Corps to implement real benevolence in the world — and not on the basis of of it’s economic value, but because of the amount of benefit it has the potential to generate for the people who need it most—building things and helping people instead of blowing them up…
In the state we’re in, we’re working at odds with one another.
Alone the man seeks shelter
His basic needs fulfilled
What cause has he to wonder
What others’ hands had milled
Afterword
There is a natural balance to the universe that defies description in language. People have personified this force in hundreds of different ways —be it god or nature or whatever—and yet these are all simply entrances into the garden where it resides — none of them can accurately describe it’s true nature, because it cannot, by nature, be described. The way in which we seek to explain this force is irrelevant, so long as we understand it’s meaning. (6)
We, in our wakeful state, walk the earth as if blind — seeing only those constructions that our own minds have created, like believing the interior of a blindfold were the world. I implore all people to take off the blindfold, and to see the world as it really is — the purity and beauty of things as they are — and to abandon your obsession with the things that do not matter.
At the end of the day, we are animals; we love sleep, and food, and love and rest — we like hard work that fulfills a necessary need in society, and we like beautiful images and sounds. Our society has indoctrinated us with unnecessary desires for things we do not need, and taught us that “success,” and the generation of wealth, is more important than being happy — that pleasure is more desirable than love.
As we near the end of an era defined by intolerance and ruled by self interested people, we must question the principles upon which we build our civilization, and ask ourselves genuinely: at what point does protecting one individuals right to life, liberty and property infringe upon the rights of others to do the same?
The body and spirit divided
Beyond the golden gate
The descendants of King Midas’s gift
And his fortuitous estate
So we pirates; our cursed coins
Like the mariners of old
But to remedy our greed we must
Return our stolen gold
Works Cited
1. Cafaro, Phillip. “Beyond Business as Usual: Alternative Wedges to Avoid Catastrophic Climate Change and Create Sustainable Societies.” The Ethics of Global Climate Change. By Denis G. Arnold. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. 192–215. Web.
2. “COP 21: Obama’s Full Speech at Paris Conference — Live.” YouTube. YouTube, 30 Nov. 2015. Web. 14 Dec. 2015. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCWKy9zN90A>.
3. “Elon Musk Talks Climate Change and Carbon Tax at the Sorbone (12.2.15).” YouTube. YouTube, 2 Dec. 2015. Web. 11 Dec. 2015. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iavquu6PP9g>.
4. Fukuoka, Masanobu. The One Straw Revolution: An Introduction to Natural Farming. Trans. Wendell Berry. Ed. Larry Korn. 1st ed. Tokyo: Rodale, 1978. Print.
5. Glassner, Barry. The Culture of Fear: Why Americans Are Afraid of the Wrong Things. 10th ed. Philadelphia: Basic, 2009. Print.
6. Ivanhoe, Phillip J., and Bryan W. Van Norden, eds. Readings in Classical Chinese Philosophy. 2nd ed. Indianapolis: Hackett Publising, 2005. Print.
7. IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)], IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 151 pp.
8. Laozi. Tao Te Ching. Trans. D.C. Lao. 1st ed. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1982. Print.
9. Mantel, B. (2015, June 5). Energy. CQ Researcher. Retrieved from http://library.cqpress.com
10. Pacala, S., and R. Socolow. “Stabilization Wedges: Solving the Climate Problem for the Next 50 Years with Current Technologies.” Science 305.5686 (2004): 968–72. Web. 14 Dec. 2015.
11. Schulz, Kathryn. Being Wrong: Adventures in the Margin of Error. 1st ed. New York: Ecco, 2011. Print.
12. Tobgay, Lyonchoen Tshering. Keynote Address on Gross National Happiness. The International Conference. Gross National Happiness. Web. <http://www.grossnationalhappiness.com/2015GNHConference/HPMSpeech_2015GNHConference.pdf>.
13. Tolkien, J. R. R. The Lord of the Rings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1967. Print.