I agree with ~Atomsk~ here... I disagree to a point that overpopulation has nothing at all to do with AGW, becaues of the way we use energy,, fossil fuels,, it certainly does matters how many people are here.

However; prior to the year 1800, the atmospheric Co2 level had been stable for hundreds of thousands of years at near (280 ppm) and the increasing world populations during that past 6,000 years had not altered it... There were a lot of people on the earth then, no one knows how many, because in most parts of the world they didn't conduct a census.

In the Americas for example there were millions of people .. Some believe most of North America was pretty much uninhabited,, but in fact there were millions of American Indians, before the Europeans gave them small pox and near starved them to death by killing off the buffalo and chasing them off of good farm lands, etc.

Most villages,, cities,, town,, counties,, many states,, rivers and lakes In the US are named after many thousands of American Indian tribes... There were many,, Ohio,, Michigan,, Iowa,, Utah,, Dakotas,, Delaware,, Missisippi,, Kansas,, Missouri,, Arkansa,, Saginaw,, Genesee,, Miami,, Arroostook,, Sioux City,, etc, thousands of times over.

The Indians didn't drill for oil and mine coal and uranium, lead and copper and raise cattle, hogs, chickens and sheep... And they didn't pollute the precious waters with chemicals, radop-active atomic waste and coal soot... The fish, clams, shrimp, wild rice, etc were safe to eat and were very plentiful.

If we stopped our ways of producing energy and develped clean energy, (*not nuclear energy*), clean power sources,, which are readily available with no cost for the fuel and we have the technology to develop clean energy.. Do that world wide and the planet could support billions more people.

That is, if we stopped destroying our forests around the world and used green manure for fertalizers, used totally bio-degrable hemp for it's 5,000 commercial uses, which include plastics,, fuel,, paper and cloth products and managed our bread basket areas of the world... It would be better if married couples had less kids however... A pair and trips makes a full house.

But that isn't how it's been done... That is not the way of the 1 percenters. It could be,,, and they could still be billionairs, breathing fresh clean air and not have to buy bottled water in poisonous plastic bottles and make a fortune for Pepsi and Coca-Cola. .

Most of the rhetoric in this thread seems to come from people who have not yet (1)learned to use systems analysis and/or (2) have not informed themselves about the Durban agreement.

Anyone who can look at the present state of this planet's life support system and assign blame to *one* element of human society remains mired in Cartesian rot.

Descartes said,"To think, my mind does not require my body." Descartes was able to dissect living animals without anesthetic and deny they felt pain from it.

That level of reductionist thought drives most of the blame here, it seems to me.

What the Durban talks showed me was the profound fragmentation of the the human species.

It's as if we don't yet understand that we are the owners of a common fate.

Dividing humans up into winners and losers is the resort of those who have reached the limits of the belief systems through which they view the world.

There are no winners, human or otherwise, on a planet that goes to 2C. That's 450 ppm, where we lose the oceans as carbon sinks and they become carbon emitters, immediately removing the buffer zone between the time carbon is emitted and when it becomes an active driver of climate change/global warming.

2C is the tipping point, the point where climate change becomes "catastrophic and irreversible."

So the best thing in the Durban agreement, besides having every country in the world signed onto the same agreement, is the Green Climate Fund that can get people to work immediately upon being funded. Here is where the mitigation will take place first, in the places where climate change is already driving people out of their home lands (tens of millions of climate refugees in 2010 in Africa alone). In places where there is no organized resistance to forms of mitigation.

In the meantime, as the efforts of the GCF buy time, the world's governments learn to work together.

Having in common a single document focused on properly dealing with human waste is more powerful than anyone here seems to realize.

By accomplishing a signed document in Durban, fossil fuel energy infrastructure became anachronistic, and the scenario drawn by the IEA's 2011 report will not occur. FFEI not now under construction will not be built, because just up the road, they will be legally forced out of operation. The Durban document, bottom line, is legally binding, even though the language is left euphemistic for the time being.

The entire species is included, by choice, in a single document, perhaps the most important human artifact ever created.

As of last night, human life on Earth has a new chance to avoid extinction by 2050, or whenever 600 ppm is reached.

If your politics is too reductionist to see this, you might think about analyzing reality again - and do it on your own, without relying on the ideology of dead people. I recommend Howard T. Odum (quite dead but never ideological), and particularly his book, "Environment, Power, and Society." After reading this book 3 or 4 times (I've been reading it since 2001, over and over), embark upon your new analysis.

Join the solution - restore the garden.

Most of the rhetoric in this thread seems to come from people who have not yet (1)learned to use systems analysis and/or (2) have not informed themselves about the Durban agreement.

Anyone who can look at the present state of this planet's life support system and assign blame to *one* element of human society remains mired in Cartesian rot.

Descartes said,"To think, my mind does not require my body." Descartes was able to dissect living animals without anesthetic and deny they felt pain from it.

That level of reductionist thought drives most of the blame here, it seems to me.

What the Durban talks showed me was the profound fragmentation of the the human species.

It's as if we don't yet understand that we are the owners of a common fate.

Dividing humans up into winners and losers is the resort of those who have reached the limits of the belief systems through which they view the world.

There are no winners, human or otherwise, on a planet that goes to 2C. That's 450 ppm, where we lose the oceans as carbon sinks and they become carbon emitters, immediately removing the buffer zone between the time carbon is emitted and when it becomes an active driver of climate change/global warming.

2C is the tipping point, the point where climate change becomes "catastrophic and irreversible."

So the best thing in the Durban agreement, besides having every country in the world signed onto the same agreement, is the Green Climate Fund that can get people to work immediately upon being funded. Here is where the mitigation will take place first, in the places where climate change is already driving people out of their home lands (tens of millions of climate refugees in 2010 in Africa alone). In places where there is no organized resistance to forms of mitigation.

In the meantime, as the efforts of the GCF buy time, the world's governments learn to work together.

Having in common a single document focused on properly dealing with human waste is more powerful than anyone here seems to realize.

By accomplishing a signed document in Durban, fossil fuel energy infrastructure became anachronistic, and the scenario drawn by the IEA's 2011 report will not occur. FFEI not now under construction will not be built, because just up the road, they will be legally forced out of operation. The Durban document, bottom line, is legally binding, even though the language is left euphemistic for the time being.

The entire species is included, by choice, in a single document, perhaps the most important human artifact ever created.

As of last night, human life on Earth has a new chance to avoid extinction by 2050, or whenever 600 ppm is reached.

If your politics is too reductionist to see this, you might think about analyzing reality again - and do it on your own, without relying on the ideology of dead people. I recommend Howard T. Odum (quite dead but never ideological), and particularly his book, "Environment, Power, and Society." After reading this book 3 or 4 times (I've been reading it since 2001, over and over), embark upon your new analysis.

Join the solution - restore the garden.

I've never heard or seen a single mention or visual of anything that went on in Durban, on cable news. Nada, neant, nil. And just tonight there was a 60 Minutes interview with Obama himself, and not one question or word spoken about climate change, Durban, Obama's commitment to fossil fuel production and total ignoring of alternatives. The only interesting thing to talk about were the polls saying Obama isn't all that popular these days among voters, and what will he do about Newt. Easily brushed aside was the one question about why no Wall Street banksters have gone to trial, been indicted, gone to jail. Obama: Most of what they did wasn't illegal, and it isn't his job to go after these guys. That's the Justice Dept's job. Next question?

But again, nothing about Durban on MSM. Nothing about climate change on the 60 Minutes interview. Ignore such inconvenient states of things, and they don't exist. Poof!

"As part of the package of measures agreed, a new climate fund will be set up, carbon markets will be expanded and countries will be able to earn money by protecting forests."

This really worries me. From all I've heard of the REDD & REDD+ agreements, they spell disaster for the forests of the global south. So a supposed "cure" for global warming is just going to make things even worse.

We need to say no to carbon colonialism!!!

Read more at Transition Times:
http://bethechange2012.wordpress.com/2011/11/30/carbon-colonialism-just-say-no/

The recent announcement that in the past year the CO2 burden increased 5.9 per cent is regarded by some experts as signalling that we may have already passed the tipping point. More urgent action is needed. Such as this:
http://www.thenation.com/article/164497/capitalism-vs-climate?page=0,5
A positive aspect of it is that in the U.S. the economy needs a stimulus. Under the principle that the government should be the employer of last resort, a positive spin can be put on it. Also, funds should be availabe for developing more efficient solar panels. the energy required to construct wind mills may entail a very long delay until the net enrgy-saving threshold is reached.

I would submit that the following is our only best way out of the environmental crises we currently face, and that if these following are not accomplished there will be some permanent damage to this planet and will hinder the evolution on this globe for eons to come:
1) Force governments (from grass-roots) to support all the most progressive, sustainable technology and full life-cycle product manufacturing. This will require reduction of redundant, unnecessary, and often toxic products that fill up distribution and storage space.
2) Push in all ways possible for research and bring out new clean sources of energy which are currently being suppressed. See the work of Marko Rodin, John Bedini, Tom Bearden and Nassim Haramein, and others. From the inventors to theoretical new physics paradigm developments WE NEED NEW RADICAL TECHNOLOGY. Powerful vested interests have been and are actively suppressing these efforts.
3) Work in all ways possible for the development and dissemination of the above technologies from all facets of political/social/economic developments.
4) Current carbon-based petroleum/gas/coal sources of energy are not only fixed/limited/non-renewable, even the current marginal gain with 'renewables' is not meeting the world's energy demands and will, without radical energy output gains, never keep up. Nuclear has not noly unadmitted releases and dangers, but some possibly unknown (see Walter Russell's Atomic Suicide book).
5) Support and facilitate the coming new economic order which will protect sovereign nations and communities by protective trade tariffs and monetary exchange rates so pirates can no longer plunder at will and gut communities and nations. The current system WILL FINALLY CRASH, and be reorganized. It is unsustainable.
6) Over-population is primarily a function of lack of education. Global initiatives should be supported to provide universal education, health care, sanitation, and adequate, healthy, organic food supplies.
7) Health care will have to include true preventive and holistic/complementary health practices and services (also see 'eclectic medicine' for a very interesting history of how we got into this mess), rather than the current reliance on toxic allopathic medicine, which is only helpful for acute/crises conditions. We need a single-payer system and strong regulation of health care with caps on premiums that get out of control with industry fear-mongering (see 'tort deform' as Nader calls it). We need incentives for health care services to maintain patient health rather than profit off of sickness.
8) The principle involved in all of this which will save the world is SHARING. SHARING leads to JUSTICE, which leads to PEACE.

Now that we've had a day to catch up on what went down in Durban, it's worth taking a moment to summarize.

According to the responsible consensus, worldwide carbon emissions must start declining before 2020 in order to avert a dangerous (> 2°C) level of global warming. By delaying meaningful reductions until 2020, the Durban agreement makes this goal virtually impossible to achieve.
The toxic legacy of previous climate agreements has been financial legerdemain intended to bribe developing nations, and to create the illusion of meaningful action while victimizing residents of areas slated for "green developments." The Green Climate Fund of the Durban agreement shifts this climate corruption into overdrive.
A key accomplishment of Kyoto was the recognition that nations which have benefited most from carbon energy, and contributed most to carbon emissions, bear a greater level of responsibility going forward. The Durban agreement substantially dismantles this principle, without which further progress respecting climate justice will be blocked in future negotiations.

In my opinion, the results of the Durban agreement will be much worse than the results of a complete collapse of climate talks would have been. The agreement started out as an EU proposal from Connie Hedegaard, but Obama's people have been in control of the whole process, and they got exactly what they wanted: blowing climate diplomacy to smithereens.

"Nature" has a write up on Durban.

http://blogs.nature.com/news/2011/12/climate_negotiators_huddle_for_1.html

"To recap, the final language states that countries will begin new negotiations on "a protocol, another legal instrument, or an agreed outcome with legal force," which apparently falls somewhere in the legal spectrum between a binding treaty and a nonbinding decision. Both India and the EU promptly dropped their objections."
--------------------

It's too soon I think to draw too many conclusions.

Canada has officially stated it is formally withdrawing from the Kyoto Protocol, but the statement above, from the "Nature" article, leaves open other legal possibilities, perhaps sooner than later, depending, I would imagine, on Abraham Lincoln's "public sentiment", on which, according to Abe, everything depends.

Without a doubt we still live in oppressive, colonial-like times, with power and privilege concentrated in the hands of the few, and, as always, anti-life, where injustice is writ large - and all can see this - all know this, as we have always known this - and a permanent solution has evaded all thinkers, all doers, in all ages.

In other words, same old - the ongoing legacy of hierarchies dating back thousands of years.

So let's not wring our hands too hard.

I was surprised and very pleased, awestruck actually, at the speech by the young woman, (Anjali Appadurai: Don't Betray Our Generation. Get It Done.),
who addressed the climate conference as a youth delegate, and at the thunderous applause she was accorded. Her 'Mic Check' was an act of genius, reminding us of the OCCUPY movements all over the world, which did not exist at the time of the previous climate conferences, and reminding me that there are young men and women who are capable of inspiring the world.

Then there was and is Naomi Klein's "Climate vs Capitalism", published in "The Nation" recently, another extraordinary contribution to public debate - to the global commons.

The science is ever clearer, ever more apocalyptic in its diagnosis, not only of the climate, but of biodiversity loss, of water scarcity, of food threats, and on and on, across the entire spectrum of the Earth System, or, if you will, of Mother Earth.

As we the public change - so will our governments and institutions.

As we mature out of the adolescent phase in which modern power and privilege would keep us, but cannot, we will act in our own individual and shared interest - and it looks like we will do this on a global scale.

The natural world is unmistakably changing state - and for the worse - for us - and for many species.

Increasingly all will see this up close and personal -

There is no way I can think of of avoiding multiple and ongoing catastrophes and crises in this, "The Long Emergency" (James Howard Kunstler).

We must prepare as best we can - and work to connect the dots for those of our fellows still in the denial stage.

Perhaps it is even time to become a lot more humble in the face of the awesome power of the natural world - to reacquaint ourselves with Gaia, and our own miraculous, irrational, and beautiful selves.

Manysummits
========

.~Allycon~ and I have been having an argument here about how to shut down the coal fired power plants in the United States and how soon it could be done.

Burning coal is the about the dirtiest form of Co2 pollution and one of the greatest emitters of Co2 world wide... It is also causing acidification of our oceans which if not stopped will soon kill all of the coral reefs, which are the beginning of all life on Earth.

I say Alycon's suggestions are not going to help prevent (runaway), irreversible global warming and Alycon says all of my suggestions are not credible. Al says ("I want to have my cake and eat it too"),, by replacing the coal fired plants without losing our normal power supplies from the coal fired plants.

That is a dishonest distortion of what I have suggested must be done to attempt to prevent runaway global warming... We could not possibly have our government say we are shutting down all of our coal fired power plants immediately... The rioting would end up with all of the country on fire... And such a suggestion by Alycon is just senseless blather anyway and is nothing I have ever suggested we should do.

Global warming should and must be considered by our leaders to be the most serious issue humanity has ever faced, it is worse than a world war such as we had twice in our past... It is worse than two Fukushimas. It is as serious as an incoming asteroid the size of which would cause a mass extinction of life.

Therefore we must declare war on global warming if we hope to ever prevent irreversible, runaway global warming.

Our government must initiate such a "war" on GW and have a program such as the WPA and put millions of the unemployed back to work, supervised by West Point graduate engineers and some of our top scientists. Teams of workers across the nation would build geothermal power plants, large solar power plants and some massive tidal power plants and as each is put on line shut down a coal fired plant.

The program could be finished within four to five years time, then continue on and shut down all oil and nuclear fired power plants while at the same time give our dying economy a huge boost.

As I have previously posted here, such a war effort would be mild in comparison to that which was accomplished during WW2... It would cost less and be a hell of a lot more beneficial... Even WW2 wasn't such that a mass extinction of life was going to occur but we went to war just the same or surrender to Japan, Italy and Germany. ... We must have a war effort against global warming.

We do not have another 30 or more years to prevent runaway global warming. We may not have ten more years to prevent it. But we must not just not do anything at all to prevent that soon to come disaster.

~Alycon's~ proposals won't work in the first place and if they were credible would not be timely enough to prevent runaway GW... If no one believes me it doesn't matter. Runaway GW will occur anyway if nothing is done very soon to prevent it.

Finally ~Alycon~.. It is almost humorous that you say I want my cake and eat it too. Because that is exactly what you are proposing… Do a little bit over a long period of time and keep our power supplies running full bore till we can replace them ,,, replace them with what? ... We don’t have the time you are proposing Alycon.

~Alycon~ you still awake? __ You wrote that I don't like numbers. Wrong again Alycon,,,, I love numbers.

Here are a few numbers that you may find to be of interest and I will use the information to fortify my assertions that we could replace all of the 1,200 coal fired plants within four to five years.

About the Empire State Building… From the time the first shovel of dirt was dug the building was ready for occupancy 18 months later with up to 3,500 men working during it's peak construction period.

In two months, architectural and engineering drawings were prepared,,, the massive Waldorf-Astoria Hotel was demolished, the foundations and grillages were dug and set, 57,000 tons of structural steel were fabricated and milled to precise specifications.... Ten million common bricks were laid,,, 62,000 cubic yards of concrete were poured,,, 6,400 windows were set,,, and 67 elevators were installed in 7 miles of shafts... Interiors were equipped with 6,700 radiators,, 2,500 toilets and sinks,, and 51 miles of plumbing pipe, and all was finished and the building opened for renters and tourists.

It would not be required to have 3,500 men working on a single construction project to build a solar or geothermal power plant, let's say 800 at the most… If we can build the fancy Empire State building in 18 months, we can build a solar power plant in 18 months.

We put 320,000 people to work and start building 400 clean energy power plants every 20 months... 800 people at each site... In 60 months we have 1,200 new clean energy power plants operating and using the turbines and generators from the closed down forever coal fired plants.

In addition; we put another 500,000 unemployed to work and open some of our closed ship building facilities and start building 500 ships,,, huge ships designed to scoop up and compact those massive plastic garbage dumps floating in the Pacific Ocean... Power those ships with wind tunnel sails and ship towing parachutes... Yep they work very well... Electrical power is by towed water turbine generators… They work just fine also.

A peer reviewed MIT study determined there is enough geothermal energy which is readily available in the United States to supply ALL of our electrical needs for the next 50,000 years… I really like that number Alycon... I like solar too, I personally don't favor wind power for a couple of reason... Tidal is great but very expensive to build, but the tides are predictable for the coming centuries and a tidal plant could drive huge generators.

Anyway Alycon, it could be done with a war type of effort. We have the people power, the engineering and scientific skills to do it... We'd better do it,,, soon, very, very soon.

~Alycon~ I do not want any hard feeling with anyone here and sometimes we get into discussions and things are written that are hurtful.

I don't agree with much of your opinions and you don't agree with much of mine. So what? Who really cares? Not our 536 DC elected for sure.

Actually I believe most of the commenters here at CD who comment on the GW issues are frustrated and don't really know what to say. I'm frustrated and angry about the fact that our elected won't listen to the scientists.

Our elected aren't doing squat to help the situation. The climate conferences have been a sorry-ass joke for the most part... Nothing has improved since the Kyoto conference. In fact things have become progressively worse... To be perfectly blunt our elected are fools.

We both realize neither of our suggestions are going to be considered by the leaders, who have the power to act on the most serious issue ever to hit mankind. Womankind and all of the world's children too.

When scientists say, “Shit methane is now releasing from the Arctic by more than 3 billions tons a month and it will cause a catastrophic disaster and likely raise global temperatures by 4 degreed C this year alone“,,, then maybe our elected will wake up.. But it will be too friggin late.

Even then; some elected will still say, "It's the sun, or cosmic rays, or the earth has always warmed and cooled, or we are near a cooling ice age period.".

I think we are just flat out screwed and will have to live with whatever happens… The far to right Evangelicals will buy white robes and sit on mountain tops waiting to be "ruptured" and the corrupt TV preachers will make tons of money.

And finally ,I wish I were wrong about my opinions about the releasing methane threat.. But If I'm wrong, then all of the scientists I have always quoted are wrong... We'll see.

Btw, Alycon,,, your program will work if there was a ruling king or queen on the planet. You aren’t wrong, it just isn’t workable without a dictator or a king or a queen ruling us.

Alcyon & WayneWR!!

Interesting and fruitful discussion - a lot of time and energy devoted to the blogosphere - Thank You both - this is what is needed in the global commons - and here on Common Dreams, as well, I am sure, on countless sites in cyberspace - the needed is taking place, just like here.

Maybe we hold ourselves in too low esteem?

Think of Louis Armstrong and his "What a Wonderful World".

Think of Boney M, Simon & Garfunkel, Pavorotti singing Ave Maria - of all the artists who touch our souls.

They could not touch what isn't there.

This is not a technical problem - the mess we are in. We are skilled technicians, and always have been - it's our 'advantage'?

Most tribal indigenous communities of a small size learned the hard way to live in some sort of balance with the natural world, and enshrined these hard won lessons in their mythology.

Some large native communities, like the Mayas, Incas and Aztecs, spun out of control, like we are spinning out of control, and collapsed, like we are collapsing.

Our hard lessons are about to begin, and, in the worst case, we will not make it.

But even in this worst case, there is still a life to be lived, and ongoing and some entirely new catastrophes to be endured.

We are adolescent in our thinking and in most of our actions, of this I am convinced. For some reason, civilizations, large hierarchies, have this effect - they arrest the development of the individual in almost all cases.

I had to climb mountains full time for seven years to rid myself of some of this baggage - and it is not yet all gone.

As I climbed, 'for to admire an' for to see', and not to add to the tick list, I saw people transformed between the city and the hills, into something more human, and then, returning to the city, they morphed back into civilized human beings - something less human, but very real - very powerful.

Even children know what is right and wrong, so Lysander Spooner reminds us. It is called natural justice.

But civilization, again for some reason, arrests this 'knowing', which even a child is capable of, and we act perversely, i.e., against our own and everyone else's interest - a death spiral.

For what it's worth, a comment or two less philosophical, and more to the point:

We can cut demand here in the western world dramatically, thus dramatically reducing our footprint - and not just our carbon usage.

But Naomi Klein is right - this would entail a more or less complete re-ordering of the capitalist system, I think in ways we are not smart enough to predict, for the human being as superorganism (civilizations), is also a non-linear chaotic system.

Our single best guide, in my opinion, is our instincts - our heart if you prefer, or our soul.

But it is not so easy to get in touch with your instincts, with natural justice, embedded in high civilizations.

Maybe we could learn, as a start, to live with a song in our hearts, and recognize that we are not cogs, not rats in a race, in short, think well of ourselves, which is the same as thinking well of others?

Manysummits, with a kitten playing under our Christmas Tree
========

Meanwhile, over at the American Geophysical Union meeting, Semiletov is discussing some interesting recent observations:

The scale and volume of the methane release has astonished the head of the Russian research team who has been surveying the seabed of the East Siberian Arctic Shelf off northern Russia for nearly 20 years.

In an exclusive interview with The Independent, Igor Semiletov, of the Far Eastern branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, said that he has never before witnessed the scale and force of the methane being released from beneath the Arctic seabed.

Shock as retreat of Arctic sea ice releases deadly greenhouse gas

Oh well. This looks, like, really bad. Neven's highly respected Arctic Sea Ice Blog offers some perspective on this ominously awful story:

I vowed not to talk about this because it literally makes me sick to my stomach, but it's too important to deny.

Arctic methane: Russian researchers report

This is a newspaper interview, not a scientific report. There isn't much hard data on offer here. Semiletov's remarks clearly convey his anecdotal impression that Arctic methane releases are rapidly increasing. Previous reports have held that an abrupt methane hydrate feedback loop is unlikely in the near term (i.e. this century). These recent observations are startling, to put it mildly.