This week the IPCC (International Panel on Climate Change) is releasing its latest report, the “Working Group II Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report.” Like many past reports, there is again the prediction of apocalyptic consequences if mankind fails to give the UN the power to tax and regulate CO2 emissions. The report goes on to tell the woeful tales of how food supplies are likely to suffer and how there is scant hope save either a Malthusian break from modern energy dependent technologies or deliverance from the emission evils by switching to alternative energy.
Along with the report come calls for a proposed cap on new CO2 emissions to allow only another half a trillion tonnes of CO2 emissions in this century which with the $150 or higher carbon tax price required to hold it there places the cost of climate change in the many tens of trillions of dollar range.
It is pretty clear that the cabal of people who contribute to the august IPCC body are all heavily committed to and dependent on those trillions for their own largely academic livelihoods. So it is not merely curious that while the report begins to open the doors to the possibility of “geoengineering” it even more clearly, according to some of the principal authors, proclaimed as a troublesome option. However by lumping all manner of activities under the same umbrella of “geoengineering” the report clearly aims at spin-mastering any fair discussion on the individual options under that umbrella.
Take for instance the notion of shooting rockets into the upper atmosphere to spew noxious clouds of sunlight blocking sulfurous gases which any sane person would have to think is sheer madness as one example of “Geoengineering. Then to tar with the same horrifying “geoengineering” brush the merely outrageously expensive but benign mechanical CO2 scrubbers that might remove CO2 chemically from the air is one tactic.
But by far the worse propaganda evidenced by the IPCC spin mastering devices is to identify ocean ecosystem restoration, they call it iron fertilization, as yet another form of “geoengineering.” How they come to the conclusion that the act of sanely and safely replenishing and restoring ocean pasture ecosystems to the condition of health and abundance they were in 50-100 years ago is lumped in with the rest so as to discredit it is simply diabolical. Likely the reason ocean pasture restoration is treated in such a disdainful and biased manner by the IPCC cabal is that it offers the single most effective and inexpensive means to re-purpose a few billion tonnes of CO2 from its death dealing form in the oceans to become ocean life is the grave threat it poses to the economics of $150/tonne carbon management.
What is clear is that the IPCC acts more like a guild than an association of free thinkers. Whether they have the secret handshakes and codes we may never know but it is clearly apparent from their reports that they ride very close herd on the group and allow few maverick thinkers to have their thoughts and ideas see the light of day on the pages of the report.
Here’s what The Economist has said about the report and it’s cabal. “The new study synthesises 73,000 published works (a quarter of them in Chinese). This represents a 100-fold increase in about 30 years. But consensus remains elusive. Richard Tol of Sussex University, in Britain, disparagingly appraised the report’s conclusions as “the four horsemen of the apocalypse”. The final version appears to have been fought over paragraph and comma between those (such as Dr Tol) who want to describe dispassionately what they think is happening and those who want to scare the world into taking action.”
But even with all its faults the IPCC reports are about the only chart that the world at large has to follow. Eventually if that chart turns out to have described a flat earth and technological society is led to fall off of the edge that time still, according to the report is some decades of stormy contentious debate off.
So for a few like those who work with me it is up to us to keep working to develop and deliver working methodologies and technologies that actually make a substantial difference in todays real world. Ocean pastures are in such a state of decline that if they can be substantially replenished and restored to the state of health and abundance they and we enjoyed a hundred years ago the few billions of tonnes of CO2 re-purposed into ocean life instead of ocean death will help slow the damage done by industrial CO2 until other technologies can catch up to solve the remaining problem. One thing is for certain those billions of tonnes of CO2 that are re-purposed by healthy thriving ocean pastures will yield billions of healthy nutritious fish to feed the hunger of humanity and that cannot be a bad thing.
The cost of this work is easily and readily recaptured in through a tiny part of the value of the fish that it produces. The worriers amongst those who so avariciously decry any and all ideas that threaten to make the many trillion dollar sized carbon tax pie smaller can relax. There is no need to throw another apocalyptic hypothesis on the table or as “click bait” to the horror of those in the thrall of the IPCC and climate change cabal. You’ve made far worse enemies to your financial fantasies than those few of us who are simply working to save the world’s oceans and make just a pittance of money you seek in doing so.
Bringing the Fish Back