It is obvious that I view climate, the ecosystem, and humanity's options drastically differently from almost everyone else in the English speaking developed "climate aware" world.
"People won't..."
Yeah, about that.
What you're telling me is that, if someone went around all the
"People won't..."
Yeah, about that.
What you're telling me is that, if someone went around all the
2. parking lots where the car-housed live, and said, "Here, if you want, I'll set you up with a tiny house, five acres, a donkey, and supervision to heal that land and sequester carbon, and enough money to live on," there wouldn't be any takers?
Is that what you mean by
Is that what you mean by
3. "People won't"?
Or do you mean, "The people winning the high energy economy like it this way?"
Yeah, I know they do. They tell me so all the time.
Or do you mean, "The people winning the high energy economy like it this way?"
Yeah, I know they do. They tell me so all the time.
4. The universal assumption is that to deal with climate change, which is a stupid catch phrase anyway because the problem is so much bigger than just climate, but - we can't fix the climate without fixing it all, so call it whatever you want - but anyway,
5. The assumed way to deal with it, by President Biden and Vice President Harris and Secretary Pete John Kerry Michael Mann and - everybody who is anyone anywhere - is, First we decide how we will live. Second we will invent ways to do that without emitting so much carbon.
6. This is wrapped up in a view of the atmosphere as a bucket into which we pour carbon, and which has some automatic level of drainage, and we're exceeding the drainage rate which is why we have heating.
"A CO2 molecule stays in the atmosphere 100 years."
Well. Um.
Not exactly.
"A CO2 molecule stays in the atmosphere 100 years."
Well. Um.
Not exactly.
7. The atmosphere is one of three major sub-systems through which all the elemental carbon there ever was cycles. Those subsystems are, the atmosphere, living creatures, and formerly living creatures, and the mineral portions of Earth as aggregated in the beginning.
8. The roughly stable oxygen / carbon balance in the atmosphere throughout most of the Holocene was the work of photosynthesis in water and on land, largely as performed by organisms of one or a handful of cells. Phytoplankton.
But on land too. Trees and duckweed and what all.
But on land too. Trees and duckweed and what all.
9. We know this, right? I'm not asking for any colonies-on-Mars leaps of faith here, am I?
Because this is critical to the whole theory. If I'm wrong about photosynthesis being where the CO2 goes, then my whole theory falls apart.
Nobody has ever offered me a better hypothesis.
Because this is critical to the whole theory. If I'm wrong about photosynthesis being where the CO2 goes, then my whole theory falls apart.
Nobody has ever offered me a better hypothesis.
10. Another way I see the whole issue differently is, I see it in the present moment. I've basically been outside in Missouri for 74 years, in woods and fields and rivers and creeks, and I've been looking at it the whole time.
It's *way* different. Now. Today.
It's *way* different. Now. Today.
11. I read all these hand-wringing predictions about in ten years and at the end of the century and I'm like psst. Open the fucking window. Go outside. Work in the sun.
Ten years ain't the point. Tomorrow will be interesting enough. Let's do something in the present moment.
Ten years ain't the point. Tomorrow will be interesting enough. Let's do something in the present moment.
12. But we have made a prior decision how we will live. How big our houses will be, how big our yards will be, how far away our grocery store will be, how far away our job will be, how fast we will travel to get to those places - those decisions are a priori. The priority.
13. And because those decisions are the priority, and dealing with climate change a way far secondary issue (a year's worth of climate news barely beat one weekend of Jeff Bezos Fucks the Sky) there is no discussion whatsoever of reducing emissions in the present moment.
14. Because by 2100 and Sea Level Rise and...
Psst.
Open. The. Fucking. Window.
Look outside.
Do you really think we've got ten years of free emissions increases before we have to start reducing?
We don't see this the same at all.
Psst.
Open. The. Fucking. Window.
Look outside.
Do you really think we've got ten years of free emissions increases before we have to start reducing?
We don't see this the same at all.
15. I believe it is possible, in 2021 in the United States of America, for one family to live on the land at a net carbon sequestration rate. Below zero emissions. And produce food for humans, birds, bees, fish, fowl, bugs of every size.
When technology salesmen talk Net Zero,
When technology salesmen talk Net Zero,
16. that's different too.
Some billionaire sees a spot that's performing photosynthesis. He yells "Dibs!"
Then he says, "I've got dibs on this photosynthesis, and I'm not going to cut it down, so that means I get to emit *extra* carbon!"
Um. No, it doesn't work that way, really.
Some billionaire sees a spot that's performing photosynthesis. He yells "Dibs!"
Then he says, "I've got dibs on this photosynthesis, and I'm not going to cut it down, so that means I get to emit *extra* carbon!"
Um. No, it doesn't work that way, really.
17. Anyway. I don't see it like everyone else does.
Later.
Later.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
