The Great Disruption
The Great Disruption has arrived.
Why didn’t more of us see it coming? After all, the signals have been clear enough – signals that the ecological system that supports human society is hitting its limits, groaning under the strain of an economy simply too big for the planet. But we didn’t and, as a result, the time to act preventatively has past.
Now we must brace for impact. Now comes The Great Disruption.
It is true that the coming years won’t be pleasant, as our society and economy hits the wall and then realigns around what was always an obvious reality: You cannot have infinite growth on a finite planet. Not ‘should not’, or ‘better not’, but cannot.
We can, however, get through what’s ahead – if we prepare. I wrote my forthcoming book, The Great Disruption, to help us do that. My conclusion in writing it was, not only can we make it through, we can come out the other side in better shape.
First, though, back to the present. There are countless analyses and metrics that clearly describe and record what is happening – our children will surely look back at what we can see now and ask, “What were you thinking?” One is oil prices, again on the way up, driven by surging demand in the developing world. Peak oil, long considered a fringe theory, is now widely acknowledged as inevitable, if not underway.
Leaked US diplomatic cables have revealed evidence that oil reserves have been overstated, along with German military reports framing the connected security threat and comments by the UK energy secretary that the risk is real. No surprises here. Consumption has been outstripping the discovery of new reserves for a long time and, as production peaks, prices will rise – probably dramatically – with major economic consequences. Obvious to those who look.
An even more obvious concern is food. More than anything else, I believe food will come to define our entry into this period. Food prices, after hovering around long-term highs for several years, are now passing the extreme peaks of 2008 as climate chaos takes hold.
With our population growing and our diets moving to more energy- and grain-intensive meat production, supply was already tight. So, when record heat waves and drought hit Russia, crashing their wheat harvest and leading to an export ban, the global price response was rapid.
Next was Brazil. Did you hear about the so-called 'one in one hundred-year' drought in 2005 in the Amazon? Well there was another one in 2010, but this time worse. It appears that the Amazon, last year, was a dramatic net emitter of greenhouse gases rather than an absorber. Strange days indeed.
But actually not that strange, and certainly not surprising – you increase the thickness of the earth’s blanket and it gets warmer. Despite the wishful thinking of some, the global climate is behaving as the climate models forecast it would – a bit worse than expected but broadly in line. Indeed, 2010 tied with 2005 as the hottest year on record and, by year’s end, the sea temperature off Australia was the warmest ever recorded.
With warm oceans releasing more water vapour, we saw floods of biblical proportions hit the agricultural regions of Queensland, killing 22 people and impacting an area larger than France and Germany. The floods were quickly followed by the most intense cyclone ever to hit Australia. Not good for food supplies, so expect prices to keep rising, especially considering that this was not a localised problem. Climate chaos is now worldwide, with an unprecedented 19 countries breaking temperature records in 2010.
Think that was just a bad year? Think again. Writing at Salon.com, Andrew Leonard argued recently that this may all come to a head in China. He quotes the UN, who’ve just warned that a severe drought is “threatening the wheat crop in China, the world's largest wheat producer, and resulting in shortages of drinking water for people and livestock." According to a Xinhua report, if serious rain doesn’t fall by the end of this month, the key grain producing region of Shandong will face its worst drought in 200 years. Of course, 200 years ago they didn’t have 1.3 billion mouths to feed. Imagine China facing a food shortage and, with plenty of money in the bank, going on a global shopping spree to feed itself. This, argues food expert Lester Brown, could be China in 2011. Enjoy your daily bread while you can still afford it.
Maybe it will rain again soon – but next time? People are starting to understand that this type of thing is not a one off. Commenting on rising food prices, Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman wrote in The New York Times recently: “The evidence does, in fact, suggest that what we’re getting now is a first taste of the disruption, economic and political, that we’ll face in a warming world. And given our failure to act on greenhouse gases, there will be much more, and much worse, to come.”
But don’t panic. We will wake up soon. Not because the ecosystem is showing signs of major breakdown. Not because people are drowning. No, we will wake up because something much more important to us is now clearly threatened. When you try to create infinite growth on a finite planet, only two things can change: Either the planet gets bigger, which seems unlikely, or the economy stops growing. It’s the end of economic growth that will really get our attention.
There is surprisingly good news in all of this. We as humans have long been very good in a crisis. We ignore our health issues until the heart attack; our unwise lifestyle choices until the cancer diagnosis. We ignore our badly designed financial system until the economic crisis; or the threat of Hitler until the brink of war. Again and again, we respond to problems late, but dramatically – and, crucially, effectively. Slow, but not stupid.
This is a good attribute, given what’s coming. We’re going to have to transform our economy very rapidly, including our energy, transport and agricultural systems. This transition – to a zero net CO2 economy – will soon be underway and the business and economic opportunities for those who are ready (and risks to those who aren’t) are hard to overstate.
That’s why China is getting ready to win this race, with significantly more impressive programs to capture the opportunity than most Western countries. They understand that in the new world that is unfolding, being a 'solar power' will define geopolitical strength. Maybe the United States will start late, but strongly, surging out of Silicon Valley with a technology boom ready to disrupt and reinvigorate the world again. Time will tell – and probably sooner than you think.
There’s much more to this than technology, though, with some exciting cultural and political challenges ahead as well. In a growth-constrained world, our current central economic policy of 'keep calm and carry on shopping' is looking increasingly wrongheaded. It’s certainly insufficient for continued human development. (More good news there, however, because all the research suggests that shopping, or more specifically accruing more money and more stuff, is a very poor way to increase your happiness, once you’re out of absolute poverty.)
In response to the now inevitable crisis, we will demand our governments think more deeply. We will have to adopt policies known to improve quality of life, like encouraging community, social inclusion and – the most heretical idea of all – greater equality and a steady state economy. Interesting times indeed.
Taking all this together, we can now say with a high degree of certainty that change is going to start coming thick and fast. Change in our economy, in our politics, and in our lives. Change that will be challenging, but that will ultimately lead us to a better place.
So get ready for the ride. The Great Disruption is now underway.
Comments on this article
I am happy to find this post
I am happy to find this post very useful for me, as it contains lot of information. I always prefer to read the
quality content and this thing I found in you post. Thanks for sharing
http://agico-karensun.blogspot.com/2012/05/buying-pellet-mill-leaves.html
Come on Climate Spectator!
Come on Climate Spectator! How about some articles we can learn something from, not just opinionated tripe poorly dressed up as an article.Stacia's Gourmet Pizza & Pasta
This topic is something that
This topic is something that I have been looking into for a while now and your insight is exceptional. Thanks for sharing this information. custom mirror
How does the carbon cycle
How does the carbon cycle work janet? - Google it!
Why are we fixated on CO2
CO2 makes plants grow. The last IPCC report said that there had been a net greening of the world with higher CO2.
One of the reasons for higher food prices is the move to ethanol to comply with renewable energy requirements in the western countries.
The world is very complex and there are many problems. One way people cope is to create one big problem - in our age it is manmade CO2 - and then pretend that all the world's problems will be solved if we manage this big problem. The human brain seems to prefer one big problem that requires collective action rather than many smaller problems.
In thirty years time CO2 will not be the problem of the day.
unclea about nuclear
Greg - enuff is enough. By the way, I agree regarding Thorium as the nuclear fuel of the future as it solves many of the issues associated with uranium - a small Thorium reactor ran without problems in the 60s. For the record, Thorium is radioactive and the process it uses to generate heat is nuclear fission, so it is a nuclear fuel. It is embedded in molten salt and requires similar containment to uranium powered reactors. A rupture from badly engineered/maintained plants would result in large scale damage to the environment although probably not as much as that caused by the large scale manufacture of solar cells.
The Great Disruption
OK, I have read the page one shock horror story, now where do I find the page 3 girl?
Unclear About Nuclear?
Folks, Australia has enuff solar and wind access to NEVER need any other form of energy to produce electricity. BZE's Zero Carbon Australia shows that. Secondly, those countries that aren't so wealthy in sun and wind will need another form of energy production and Uranium is always promoted as the nuclear solution. Dead wrong. Too many problems associated with waste disposal and weapons making potential. For this reason, energy from Thorium is the answer. No weapons grade waste, no possibility of meltdown, much shorter half life and so on. Check it out on http://energyfromthorium.com/ Again I say, we don't need any nuclear in Australia, is that clear?
I'm In 100% Agreement With Paul
Spot on Paul. I'm working actively in my local community of Phillip Bay through Sustainability Street and Climate Action Sydney Eastern Suburbs (CASES) to point out these facts. I believe it's inevitable that growth MUST cease. Community must prevail. Local supply of food must replace transported good from far and wide. I've had enuff of narrow minded, selfish people who cling on so desperately to their hollow materialism. Quality of life will only be maintained when we live lives of wholistic integrity in a vibrant and cooperative community!
Disunity is Death
As an open letter from 255 US National Academy of Science members noted in the May 2010 Science magazine, “no research results have produced any evidence that challenges the overall scientific understanding of what is happening to our planet's climate and why. The assertions of climate deniers therefore should not be given scientific weight ….” Their message is simple: "it IS happening, and it IS us". Not only can’t we can’t advance any such debate by trying to reason with climate change conspiracists, but also we must recognise that their aim is to wreck discussion and block the consensus necessary for dealing effectively with the formidable challenges ahead. Theirs is not harmless vandalism. But, but, climate change is only one challenge. As Paul rightly touched on, peak food is even more pressing, with peak oil, peak water and even peak commodities not far behind. In line with the irrational and sociopathic nature of conspiracisms, the Global 2000 report gave rise to another conspiracist sect - ” GLOBAL 2000 / Depopulation Program / The Plan to Kill Three Billion Entities and what you can do about it, if you don't like the idea.”
ha but that is not what I am
ha but that is not what I am saying - misconstrue my words as much as you like - truth is truth so I am not afraid. I work full full time so no time to choose my words or spelling - but I wish I did have that time - hopefully one day! if you go back to the November 26 issue of CS you will see that I believe it is far more complicated than that.
The Whitsunday Islands were mountains on a plain before the last Ice age Geoff and after the last ice age the sea rose above the continental shelf to a depth that allowed our beautiful G.B Reef to grow - so not sure what you are going on about how anyone thinks the climate has never changed before the 20th century!.
Since time began you say - mmmm and when is that for you Geoff - 6000 years ago?.Can I ask you Geoff, Did dynosaurs exist? Can I ask you how old you think the planet is Geoff?Can I ask you, does the total amount/volume of carbon in the planets system ever change Geoff?lets see how you go with those questions becasue I have a lot more questions for you Geoff
Climate Sceptics Believe in Climate Change
Michel says; "the climate 'skeptics' seem to be benefiting from walsing (sic) around with their chests out claiming that because they do not believe in climnate (sic) change that this makes them skeptics." Unfortunately for Michel, We DO believe in Climate Change. We do believe that climate has changed since time began.
It was the Global Warming Alarmists who tried to con people into thinking that Climate hadn't changed until the late twentieth century. See http://tinyurl.com/22os45m
No Nuclear
@ Roger Westlake
So Roger would advocate using nuclear as a alternative fuel source to coal. Where is the logic behind no longer producing green house gases and replacing them with an energy source that produces waste with a hald life of thousands of years. (no to mention what exposure to that waste can do to people and the environment - I am yet to see a steel drum that doesnt rust for 1,000 years)
We are the skeptics!!! - the
We are the skeptics!!! - the climate 'skeptics' seem to be benefiting from walsing around with their chests out claiming that because they do not believe in climnate change that this makes them skeptics. This is such a confusion. We who believe in climate change and inter-related issues are the skeptics as we are challenging the foundation that all the climate 'skeptics' stand upon - that some god will take care of everything and that there is no limitation to resources and that life on our planet does not need to be balanced. Not believing in climate change interwoven with population growth, irresponsible land and ocean management, outdated transportation etc etc does not make you skeptical it makes you in my opinion - ignorant and moronic. Can we please call them Climate Ignorants from now on!
brush strokes
I note Tony Kevin doesn't mind if Paul Goilding "gets a few brush strokes wrong". Bit of a worry if the themes that follow are based on these wrong brushstrokes, might even undermine and discredit the themes, you may think.
I also note that Tony Kevin doesn't mind Paul giving his book a plug on this forum - does that mean we can use this forum as a free classified ad service? In that case, I manage a networking and internet security company. Got any problems? please call me on 04205.......
REDIRECT MILITARY SPENDING
Redirect 1/8 of the world's annual military spending to build an energy efficient econmomy, restore the earth's support systems, eradicate poverty & rescue the failing states as well as control population. EASY!!
Paul Gilding's "Great Disruption""
I liked this piece! Paul Gilding is a big-picture man and I don't mind if he gets a few brushstrokes wrong, provided that his main themes are sound. Parts of his piece reminded me of that marvellous movie doing the rounds ''The Age of Stupid" - see it if you have not yet - but refreshingly Gilding, an existential optimist, thinks there will be time to change course at the last moment. Maybe!
I am also reminded of Clive Hamilton's piece in Crikey today, which said at one point:
' ...like most Australians some environmentalists find it hard to accept what the climate scientists are really saying. They do not believe, in their hearts, that things could be as bad as the science indicates. Like all of us, they are prone to filter the science to rob it of its sting, to engage in wishful thinking, and to cling to false hopes'.'
There was a bit of this in some of the comments here. Clive might put this article in the category of false hopes. They seem to agree on the science - they part company on whether our political response will be adequate and in time.
I do not mind in the least Paul flogging his book (great title!). How else will we get to know of it ?
Deserting a sinking ship.
Paul says: "There are countless analyses and metrics that clearly describe and record what is happening..." (to complete that sentence) ....from both sides of the debate. As the "CO2 causes AGW" Climate Cabal and their CRU watch their fraudulent science collapse around them, as the United States vote to stop funding the political, pseudo-science body of the IPCC, we learn that Australia's Chief Scientist is bailing out.
http://tinyurl.com/PSackett
After being presented with the NIPCC report, Ms Sackett went on radio and said she knew of no peer-reviewed paper contrary to the AGW hypothesis. She was presented with more than 1000 in that report.
Here Here - Paul
Our inaction in the west against false beliefs and tyranny leaves evolution no other alternative besides war!!! Our complacency and irresponsibility with the higher truths of today means YES the Great Disruption has begun!!!
How dare we of the Australian public clap to the utterings of Barnaby Joyce last night like this is a joke - totally sick and sad that one day when we may have to defend our country on our own soil that I will be shoulder to shoulder with the likes of some of you.
No-one to blame except ourselves!
Roger Westlake - not even worth a comment! WASTE Roger the NUCLEAR WASTE what do you do with it???
Bernard Walsh - do you know what the 'Bell curve' is - when you drill and strike less and less that means you are at the back end of the bell curve!!!! pretty simple
will we never tire of doomsayers?
What is it about human nature that we continue to give credence to these Malthusian Jeremiahs (such as Paul Gilding) who can only hypothesize about the future because that have always been proven wrong in the past?
Shame on the editors who let this article appear.
There is so very much wrong with this unhelpful hysterical diatribe that it's impossible to know where to start. Go back to school and do your research again looking from more than one aspect and one source of research.
The editors should know better than to publish this sort of hysterical writing.
It is unhelpful to everyone including the other alarmists in our midst and especially as it is so plainly and proven incorrect on so very many levels about most if not all points of relevance to the current, past and future of our planet and country written about in the article.
Energy Change
We do import a lot of oil, Some say go nuclear. Some say go renewables. An issue is that all of these other forms of energy are much more expensive than oil. And for Australia, an inconvenient truth is that we are a coal super power. Seems crazy that there is such a rush to get away from our competitive advantage of cheap coal to race to the most expensive forms of energy. "Cheap energy" as a justification of renewables is a bunch of 'doublespeak' that hopefully soon with technological advancement will be reality.
Eventually, the laws of suppy and demand will push up oil prices where other energy is a better deal.
The great disruption
No sane person would argue that the world is not overpopulated, or that we are depleting our resources at an unsustainable rate and that we must stop polluting our home. Any efforts to correct these prime causes for concern should be applauded and supported.
When incorrect information is used to bolster a case, credibility is lost and folk become cynical. For exanple, and there are many inaccurate claims in this article, Yassi (929 hPa) didn't even rate in the 29 most intense cyclones to hit Australia since !898 (hPa 900 to hPa 920). There were more, and more damaging floods in SE Queensland in the 19th century than in the 20th and 21st combined. Don't take my word for it - check at the Australian Government meteorolgy site: www.bom.gov.au. While Paul Gilding's arguments are compelling for a more sustainable future there is no need for wild and inaccurate claims.
I also believe that using this forum to promote the sale of a book is inappropriate and should be moderated.
The Answer
@Michael Ryn
"can we afford to continue to have an electrical energy economy?"
Yes ! With Nuclear Power
@Bernard Walsh
"which, of course, then leads to the problem of generating electricity from something other than coal...)"
No problem, just go Nuclear!
Energy independence?
So, Grant Mason, you say that the Chinese are pursuing alternate energy programs for energy indepence and to be able to breath fresh air.
Is there some reason you think these are not admirable goals for Australia to have? Or do you like the idea of importing $70m worth of oil *per day*?
Personally, I think we can do better things with that $25 billion per year. At $40k a pop, it'd pay for two-thirds of Australia's new vehicle purchases each year, and that would cover the price of fully-electric vehicles (which, of course, then leads to the problem of generating electricity from something other than coal...)
Oil reserves may be large, but not cheap
Neville states that "oil reserves have not been overstated". I suggest a google image search, "world oil production". Find me one graph amongst the hundreds that come up that shows oil production *hasn't* stagnated over the past 5 years?
Given that oil prices are higher than ever before, why wouldn't the oil companies be pumping it faster than are? After all, every extra barrel is another $100 or so in their pocket.
The point is not that there isn't still a lot of oil out there. It's that it will become very expensive, and increasingly difficult, to extract it. Witness the deep water drilling going on (e.g. the Deepwater Horizon was drilling in water that was 1,500 metres deep). It's not cheap to do that kind of work, and not easy. If it costs you $20m and three months to drill a well, instead of $5m and two weeks, what's that going to do to production volume & cost per barrel?
Even disregarding the climate issues, we need to wean ourselves off oil. Throw in CO2 emissions, and we need to wean ourselves off *all* fossil fuels, yesterday.
A Refocus Please
Disruption sure on its way will be 100%+ increase in electricity prices and unintended consequences of greens programs.
The pro climate action people have been on calibrating their 'responses' and recommendations for climate action based on an emissions indicator that shows Australia very unfairly: emissions per capita. I have argued for a Net emissions figure per capita that takes in emissions per capita and deducts emissions absorbption per capita. This one would correctly account for Australia's great land and girt by sea area and relatively low population. And perhaps show the relatively densley populated European countries less favourably.
Another better indicator for Australia would be the global impact on emissions for each country if they reduce emissions by 5%. The U.S., China, and India have to be at the top and Australia toward the bottom in terms of relevance of action.
China is 'ready to win the race' not for global climate reasons but for new industries to dominate in exports to leverage exisiting strengths in this area (that Australia has little hope of matching); energy independence; and to be able to breathe relatively fresh air.
wrong again
Oh yes they have....... OPEC increased its reserves figures in the 80's by between 50 and 100% without finding one single extra drop, and even more amazing, as we increased consumption ever since, not one of those numbers has dropped! AT ALL! Magic...??
"An oil company geologist in Australia, in a drunken rambling in 1976 after three months prospecting, claimed that the known oil reserves in Australia and New Guinea then were greater than the stated oil reserves for the entire planet" Hahahahahahaha!!! he must've been seriously pissed alright....! Australia will likely run out of oil within five years.... that's totally, none left, at any price you or I will afford....
The party's over, get used to it.
Change will be at last forced apon us
Much of what we can do now, we will not be able to do in the future. Many jobs and industries will fail from high energy costs, especially those that we can collectively do without. The costs of food, electricity and transportation become the critical paths of our economy. Actual total energy consumption is forced to decrease. Only to the extent we can replace fossil fuels with solar, can we afford to continue to have an electrical energy economy.
I am a little puzzled as to
I am a little puzzled as to why Neville admits that his post is based on drunken ramblings back in 1976. Fortunately most people want more competent confirmation of their understandings lest they become emotion based "prejudices".
Up in Queensland there are many who must wish now they had taken out flood insurance - That is really all we are asking the world to do - insure through precautionary action against an increasingly probable risk. Makes commercial sense to me. Everyone in this matter is an underwriter and should hedge his bets.