"A process of participatory planning, rightly evolved to represent interests other than government technocrats and wealthy developers, has also created a culture of Nimby-ism that thwarts even modest proposals."
"Our conversations seem increasingly cramped, mean and small. Is our society just too frayed to come together around basic material needs?"
In an age of growing and combining climate, ecological and economic risks, the inability to most fast and build big is effectively the same thing as an inability to act at all.
Process designed for once-good reasons becomes a massive vulnerability in its own right.
"A nation steeped in individual liberty and Manifest Destiny is not accustomed to thinking about prevention or retreating from places too unsafe to occupy or too costly to save."
There's another problem.
The kind of slow, incremental action process often produces often doesn't lay the ground for later, bigger changes.
It often involves a form of triangulation—protecting current priorities and plans from an urgent need to change.
Billions of us are about to go thru a fierce shock of temporal dislocation — of waking up to realize we've been swept up in a vast, heartless discontinuity, one that has been accelerating for years, one we've either ignored or imagined happening sometime in someone else's future.
The cultural, political and psychological impacts of this dislocation are beyond calculation.
I've spent a lot of time studying history, in graduate school and since. I believe there is no analog.
I find that deeply concerning.
I find our unreadiness for it totally terrifying.
I wish it were clearer to me where and how the practices of desperate societal-scale triage and of loving kindness meet.
Folks really don't get the scale of change that is now arriving.
So many powerful interests have a stake in minimizing the urgency/downplaying the scale of discontinuity.
So many people find it easier to denounce the idea of discontinuity than face failed cultural assumptions.
Here in the U.S., almost no part of our debate is fully engaged with the realities of inexorable, discontinuous change—or the disruptiveness of the actions that have now become inevitable.
But we've got lots of predatory delay, downplaying, goalwashing & triangulation.
A major symptom:
How much concern there is for protecting people from the costs of action and how little there is for protecting them from the staggeringly larger harms of inaction.
“When it comes to the planetary crisis, the most important question you can ask yourself is 'Where?'”
That's because climate chaos and ecological collapse are hitting differently in different places, and some places are better positioned to weather the storm than others.
"We must begin by understanding the nature of the crisis."
We've entered a crisis so large and complex that it is no longer an issue, but an era. It is a discontinuity with everything we're used to thinking of as normal.
You should immediately mistrust any linear projection of positive climate impact, such as "Alaskan agriculture will benefit from warming temperatures."
First, tho models are improving, there's always the chance that specific, long-term local impacts may work out differently than expected, for complex reasons.
"Our model indicates temperatures will rise" is different that knowing, for sure, that temperatures will rise steadily.
Second, variability is at least as important as trend. If nine years out of ten there are warmer conditions, but the other year there are unprecedented and catastrophic floods, the net result is not a gain for farmers.
This is a fine piece of climate journalism, focusing on efforts to hoard the future by buying up supplies of cobalt, a mineral critical for making a number of low-carbon technologies.
Amos Hochstein, State Department senior adviser for global energy security, calls access to solar panels & EV batteries "a national security imperative."