Fires are happenning in Siberial just as on the west coast of the USA. Even if CO2 were stabilized immediately, it would make no difference to the intensity of future fires. ‘Forest management’ never happened in Siberia, but as in California, Oregon and Australia, they are suddenly much worse than they have ever been. The link gives the lie to Trump’s ‘forest management’ narrative.
Not that there is any prospect of CO2 stabilization. Paris 2015, Attenborough, Thunberg, and XR notwithstanding, fracking, coal mining, deforestation in Brazil and Indonesia (and much else) all proceed without interruption.
My last few blog posts have debated whether it is too late to do anything effective to stop destruction of the ecosphere. I agree with Professor Jem Bendell’s conclusion, but look in vain for practical answers.
But it transpires that the British government shares our pessimism. Unlike Professor Bendell they do have a plan: military readiness. (Thank You Jane Tims for the link)
If, as is becoming steadily more likely, the ecological crisis leads to armed conflict, it seems unlikely that any victors will have anything beyond survival to celebrate, but the fate of any others does not bear thinking about. This is the first ‘Tragedy of the Commons’ where the perpetrators have the power to destroy the entire ecosphere..
At the very least, whatever the previous pros and cons of Brexit, Britain’s only hope if it does come to fighting is as a member of a large block.
Most readers dismiss the unconditional basic income (UBI) as a hare-brained answer to the ecological crisis. Does it really compare unfavourably with the British government’s preparations?
The likeliest upshot assuming anything does survive a full blown eco-crisis is something resembling Feudalism: latter-day barons (CEOs of transnational companies) paying henchmen, at first to kill, then keep the rest under control. But there is a ray of hope. There would be problems with Milton Friedman’s precise version of a UBI,. The Negative Income tax theoretically has the same effect as a UBI but would only work if you alread have savings. But Friedman’s insight indicates that it will quickly emerge as preferable, even for the CEOs..
Do we really have to go through so much unpleasantness first?