20 Comments

Thank you B🙏

Expand full comment

Ah yes the gospel according to Guy McPherson and Paul Beckwith. All based on the assumption that CO2 is a driver of something. I love the way we now could have a couple of centuries of an ice age before the warming starts.

For those who would risk being called a 'climate denier' or 'science denier' or some other thought terminating cliché I highly recommend watching "Climate : The Movie" for an alternative viewpoint by highly credentialed scientists mostly retired (they have no stake in whether they are defunded for having a contrarion view).

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A24fWmNA6lM

Also I'm looking forward to the section where you address the 450+ reactors and thousands of spent fuel pools that need to be maintained in the absence of industrial civilization?

Expand full comment

Profoundly, obviously, wrong.

Expand full comment

Yes, but you have to point out why exactly that is.

Expand full comment

Another good read. Thank you. A point often missed even by the science community is that Open, Highly Complex, Chaotic Systems (The Earth) are inherently unpredictable. Meaning that is a characteristic of the system and better models or more/better data does nothing to improve their predictability. We will be surprised. I think methane permafrost releases will be the big feedback, now that they have started the self reinforcing feedback could raise temperature by 5-8 degrees in a single decade as is evidenced in the long climate record. Now that would be a nasty surprise! So we may cook before we freeze.

We are like children playing with fire.

Expand full comment

Trying to explain how global warming could flip parts of the planet to ice age conditions will provide wonderful material for climate change deniers if nothing else.

Expand full comment

Already is… see @Diarmuid, above.

Substack seriously needs a "block" function as an antidote to Dunning-Kruger.

Expand full comment

Block away mate. I'm no longer offended by zealotry. I too was once a true believer. Then I discovered that very little can be known with absolute certainty and that the bigger scourge upon the planet is hubris.

It actually kind of amuses me that someone would feel the urge to block comments on another's substack post. What little dictators we are!

I've also noticed across the board that when dissent is being censored the likelihood is you've got a scam.

Nor am I quite sure what you may fear by my sharing certain information? According to McPherson and Beckwith et al what we have is a predicament. (ie nothing can be done!) They will tell you that the heating is baked into the cake - possibly another 10-15°C by their apocalyptic predictions.

Is it that you fear people might not tow the corporate party line in the meantime?

You seem to be aware of the concept of peak oil and peak resources so surely this is a more immediate catastrophe than any long range forecast for climate (already baked in)?

While I don't know with certainty if there is any meaningful anthropogenic heating I suspect it will be used as a narrative to manage degrowth.

Expand full comment

"“Europe is the fastest-warming continent, at nearly twice the average rate”. If you live there (as I do)… Europe would depopulate even faster in the decades and centuries ahead…"

So, are you planning to beat the rush? Or are you going to sit this one out?

"we’re already approaching peak net energy from fossil fuels…"

I think that ship has sailed. Check out Art Berman's explanation that, due to the high proportion of fracked oil and accounting gimmicks, a barrel of oil contains perhaps 5% to 10% less energy than it did just a decade ago. The market is afraid of the "peak oil signal," so they're "goosing" the numbers with things like "refinery gain" (which is actually a net loss, in terms of energy content), "natural gas liquids," and even sub-unity ERoEI synthetics, like biodiesel and corn ethanol.

So, we probably passed "peak net energy" in 2018 or 2019 or so… as the current "stagflation" (a trailing indicator) is telling us.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDBJdQnjE2o

Expand full comment

November 2019 was peak net oil and liquids, I think, then the "repo crisis" in September 2019, because the biggest banks in the world could not trust each other overnight and the Fed had to do the job. Then they used COVID lockdowns to "go direct" to infuse all the TBTF players without immediate inflation, because money was not moving, and so on and so on.

THIS world is what peak-oil looks like, and the culling of our species has just begun...

Sorry, this truly is my assessment.

;-(

Expand full comment

Do you have a strategy?

I don't pretend that there is just One True Strategy™, but I have rural and farming skills. But I think the age of the rugged individualist is over, and I'm on the high-side of the average farmer's age, so I'm looking for an age-diverse intentional "lifeboat community" in which to weather the storm.

Also, I emigrated to a country that is a net energy exporter.

Expand full comment

My practical considerations are and have been: learning to do some of what you might be required to do to live, like growing a large vegetable garden, which is a lot of tending, and saving/storing what you can. riding a bike for at least 4 hours/wk. Living in a smallish rural community, better if it has groundwater for a well, good if it has been stable for a very long time, good if the weather won't likely kill you if you don't have fuel... Considerations like that. We have been preparing a 1957 house on 0.6 acre in the Texas coastal plains for 5 1/2 years now. We rent half a small duplex in Austin during the week, and I put in vegetable gardens in both places. This is my gardening protocol (my old blog) https://www.johndayblog.com/2016/07/liberty-garden-central-texas-climate.html

Expand full comment

Nice! Good to see you've been at it for at least eight years.

Does the impending climate changes of Texas concern you?

I chose a part of Canada with mild winters, knowing I could always move further north, if necessary.

Expand full comment

Yoakum is about 85 miles in from the gulf of Mexico, which has weather mitigated by the gulf, but is less vulnerable to hurricanes. There are different climate-change scenarios. Under most scenarios it is a good spot, but not if the rotational axis of earth flips, which seems to happen in some 12,000 year cycle-transitions, but certainly not all.

The first 3 videos in this series explain that theory and take 19 minutes total.

Expand full comment

The 'rotational axis of the Earth' does not 'flip' - otherwise life would be extremely difficult for any species, not to mention the science of physics. The polarity of the earths magnetic field 'flips' but this has much less of an impact, unless you use it for migration, and migratory species seem to be able to adapt.

Expand full comment

Maybe you have nailed the effects of the AMOC stopping B, maybe you got it wrong. :-)

So, the AMOC stops. Will Europe get cold? What certainly will happen, is the equatorial Atlantic SST's will get very warm 80 - 90F warm. Hurricanes will go nuts. At the same time, the winds blowing off that superheated area will carry moisture and heat into Europe completely offsetting the fact that the Gulf Stream will no longer be carrying heat up there. Europe, rather than becoming cold will just get very, very wet.

Prove me wrong.

Expand full comment

Space weather matters a LOT. The sun flips magnetic poles every 11 years or so, yes, but there is a 12,000 year cycle which is catastrophic, and less so every 6000 years, due to a rotating galactic current/charge sheet, just as also exists in our solar system.

19 minutes of the first 3 condensed videos gets you the story: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLHSoxioQtwZcVcFC85TxEEiirgfXwhfsw

Expand full comment