Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGreen growth cannot be trusted to fix climate change
https://theconversation.com/green-growth-is-trusted-to-fix-climate-change-heres-the-problem-with-that-120785
... The IPCCs Special Report, released in October 2018, gives 90 scenarios that would be consistent with limiting warming to 1.5°C, while also continuing with economic growth. So far, so good. But almost every single one of these scenarios relies on a negative emissions technology called Bioenergy Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) thats completely untested at large scales. BECSS involves growing large plantations of trees, which draw down carbon from the atmosphere, then harvesting and burning them to generate energy. The CO₂ emissions from this process are then stored underground. To limit warming to 1.5°C, this technology would need to absorb 3-7 billion tonnes of carbon from the atmosphere every year. Thats at least 2,000 times more than its currently capable of doing. In order to absorb that much carbon, an area two to three times the size of India would need to be covered with tree plantations. Think about the difficulty of acquiring that much land, the pressure it would put on other land uses, like food production, and how much natural habitat it could erase.
No one can say that these feats are categorically impossible. But the evidence suggests that the chances of meeting the 1.5ᵒC warming target alongside continued economic growth are, at best, highly unlikely. Can we really take this risk relying on unproven technologies to rescue us from the threat of climate change? Given the consequences of getting the gamble wrong, surely the answer is no.
Where does this leave us?
Proposals for green growth that rely solely on technology to solve the climate crisis are based on a flawed idea. This is, that the limits to the worlds physical systems are flexible, but the structure of its economies are not. This seems entirely backwards and more a reflection of the importance of politics and power in determining what solutions are deemed viable, than any reflection of reality. So society should ask, are these global institutions promoting green growth because they believe its the most promising way of avoiding climate breakdown? Or is it because they believe its simply not politically feasible to talk about the alternatives?
If we can be optimistic about humanitys ability to develop fantastical new technologies to bend and overcome the limits of nature, cant we lend that same optimism to developing new economic structures? Our goal in the 21st century should be creating economies that allow people to flourish, even when they dont grow.
https://theconversation.com/green-growth-is-trusted-to-fix-climate-change-heres-the-problem-with-that-120785
... The IPCCs Special Report, released in October 2018, gives 90 scenarios that would be consistent with limiting warming to 1.5°C, while also continuing with economic growth. So far, so good. But almost every single one of these scenarios relies on a negative emissions technology called Bioenergy Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) thats completely untested at large scales. BECSS involves growing large plantations of trees, which draw down carbon from the atmosphere, then harvesting and burning them to generate energy. The CO₂ emissions from this process are then stored underground. To limit warming to 1.5°C, this technology would need to absorb 3-7 billion tonnes of carbon from the atmosphere every year. Thats at least 2,000 times more than its currently capable of doing. In order to absorb that much carbon, an area two to three times the size of India would need to be covered with tree plantations. Think about the difficulty of acquiring that much land, the pressure it would put on other land uses, like food production, and how much natural habitat it could erase.
No one can say that these feats are categorically impossible. But the evidence suggests that the chances of meeting the 1.5ᵒC warming target alongside continued economic growth are, at best, highly unlikely. Can we really take this risk relying on unproven technologies to rescue us from the threat of climate change? Given the consequences of getting the gamble wrong, surely the answer is no.
Where does this leave us?
Proposals for green growth that rely solely on technology to solve the climate crisis are based on a flawed idea. This is, that the limits to the worlds physical systems are flexible, but the structure of its economies are not. This seems entirely backwards and more a reflection of the importance of politics and power in determining what solutions are deemed viable, than any reflection of reality. So society should ask, are these global institutions promoting green growth because they believe its the most promising way of avoiding climate breakdown? Or is it because they believe its simply not politically feasible to talk about the alternatives?
If we can be optimistic about humanitys ability to develop fantastical new technologies to bend and overcome the limits of nature, cant we lend that same optimism to developing new economic structures? Our goal in the 21st century should be creating economies that allow people to flourish, even when they dont grow.
https://theconversation.com/green-growth-is-trusted-to-fix-climate-change-heres-the-problem-with-that-120785
Decoupling Debunked, the report: https://eeb.org/library/decoupling-debunked/
The EEB is Europes largest network of environmental citizens' organisations. We bring together around 150 civil society organisations from more than 30 European countries. We stand for sustainable development, environmental justice & participatory democracy. https://eeb.org/
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
0 replies, 381 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (1)
ReplyReply to this post