Essay by Eric Worrall
Rich nation consumers who have been deceived by clever marketing into demanding material wealth and modern conveniences are stopping greens from saving the planet.
Human ‘behavioural crisis’ at root of climate breakdown, say scientists
New paper claims unless demand for resources is reduced, many other innovations are just a sticking plaster
Rachel Donald
Sat 13 Jan 2024 23.00 AEDT…
“We’ve socially engineered ourselves the way we geoengineered the planet,” says Joseph Merz, lead author of a new paper which proposes that climate breakdown is a symptom of ecological overshoot, which in turn is caused by the deliberate exploitation of human behaviour.
“We need to become mindful of the way we’re being manipulated,” says Merz, who is co-founder of the Merz Institute, an organisation that researches the systemic causes of the climate crisis and how to tackle them.
…
They claim that unless demand for resources is reduced, many other innovations are just a sticking plaster. “We can deal with climate change and worsen overshoot,” says Merz. “The material footprint of renewable energy is dangerously underdiscussed. These energy farms have to be rebuilt every few decades – they’re not going to solve the bigger problem unless we tackle demand.”
…
“We’re talking about replacing what people are trying to signal, what they’re trying to say about themselves. Right now, our signals have a really high material footprint –our clothes are linked to status and wealth, their materials sourced from all over the world, shipped to south-east Asia most often and then shipped here, only to be replaced by next season’s trends. The things that humans can attach status to are so fluid, we could be replacing all of it with things that essentially have no material footprint – or even better, have an ecologically positive one.”
…
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/jan/13/human-behavioural-crisis-at-root-of-climate-breakdown-say-scientists
The abstract of the paper;
World scientists’ warning: The behavioural crisis driving ecological overshoot
Joseph J Merz, Phoebe Barnard, William E Rees, Dane Smith, Mat Maroni, Christopher J Rhodes, Julia H Dederer, Nandita Bajaj, Michael K Joy, Thomas Wiedmann, Rory Sutherland
Abstract
Previously, anthropogenic ecological overshoot has been identified as a fundamental cause of the myriad symptoms we see around the globe today from biodiversity loss and ocean acidification to the disturbing rise in novel entities and climate change. In the present paper, we have examined this more deeply, and explore the behavioural drivers of overshoot, providing evidence that overshoot is itself a symptom of a deeper, more subversive modern crisis of human behaviour. We work to name and frame this crisis as ‘the Human Behavioural Crisis’ and propose the crisis be recognised globally as a critical intervention point for tackling ecological overshoot. We demonstrate how current interventions are largely physical, resource intensive, slow-moving and focused on addressing the symptoms of ecological overshoot (such as climate change) rather than the distal cause (maladaptive behaviours). We argue that even in the best-case scenarios, symptom-level interventions are unlikely to avoid catastrophe or achieve more than ephemeral progress. We explore three drivers of the behavioural crisis in depth: economic growth; marketing; and pronatalism. These three drivers directly impact the three ‘levers’ of overshoot: consumption, waste and population. We demonstrate how the maladaptive behaviours of overshoot stemming from these three drivers have been catalysed and perpetuated by the intentional exploitation of previously adaptive human impulses. In the final sections of this paper, we propose an interdisciplinary emergency response to the behavioural crisis by, amongst other things, the shifting of social norms relating to reproduction, consumption and waste. We seek to highlight a critical disconnect that is an ongoing societal gulf in communication between those that know such as scientists working within limits to growth, and those members of the citizenry, largely influenced by social scientists and industry, that must act.
Read more: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00368504231201372
What a hideously misanthropic vision of the future. Why should we give up one iota of all the consumerist toys we have created? Why should we give up having however many children we want, when there is plenty for all?
At least the study authors are honest about the immense material footprint of renewable energy.
Nuclear power is not subject to these kinds of green limitations. France runs a modern, consumerist economy which derives just under 70% of its electricity from zero carbon nuclear. Even if reducing CO2 emissions turns out to be necessary, by embracing nuclear we could create a zero carbon economy which doesn’t involve people learning to love wearing rags.
Even better, nuclear energy will eventually open the way to retrieving an effectively endless supply of resources from non-terrestrial sources, when we finally exhaust Earth’s resources. Space drives of immense power such as Nuclear Thermal Propulsion and Project Orion (enough power for a manned starship, let alone an interplanetary transport) could make science fiction levels of non-terrestrial extractive industries economically viable – an option for resource acquisition and exploitation this sad green vision of the future will never deliver.
There are no limits to growth, other than those we choose to impose on ourselves.
Like Marxists and other totalitarians, the authors see the only solution to be changing human nature. When one looks back over human history, perhaps a better solution would be to encourage innovation or adaption; especially of one’s own thought processes.
But there I go, again, assuming that an eco-loon might actually have an independent thought process; and not an intravenous propaganda drip! My bad!
Sometimes I’m a bit slow but very recently, one of those ongoing ‘jigsaw puzzles’ inside my head came together, concerning ‘Wind Power’
The pieces were:
Cold weather in Texas, blackouts and the stoppage/failure of windmills
That windmill we saw recently where the blades ‘just fell off’
That a (normally) very soft/flexible hosepipe in my garden had become an Iron bar
That submarine thing that got crunched while visiting Titanic
The word ‘engineering’ in this story
A bit like thermometers at airports: Where everyone visualises ‘fun-loving’ airline pilots blasting white-hot jet engines at hapless little Stevenson Screens, just becasue they’re feeling a bit pissed off one day and, simply because they can.
It’s a bit more subtle than that, not a lot but still ‘more’
It’s because windmill blades are effectively ‘made of plastic’ and when plastics of any sort get cold, they go hard and brittle.
Hence why the (carbon fibre reinforced) plastic submarine collapsed when it got near Titanic – it’s cold down there
Is that why the turbine we saw shed it’s (non-rotating) blades in a fairly boring but chilly blast of wind. Was it raining at the time, what strength was the evaporative cooling on that thing when it broke?
So, is that why (Texas) wind turbines shut down during cold weather?
Likewise in the Noth Sea – a hideously cold place even before the wind picks up with a sleet shower coming in at 50+mph and those blades have a tip-speed ratio of (typically) ten ##
I found a glossy pdf (from Sweden) gushing about glass-fibre telecomms masts can withstand minus 50Celsius
(##) What would be the Wind Chill Factor at 500mph, as the tips of turbine blades find themselves.
While being hit by pellets of ice
(haha – that’s what sank Titanic innit – a ‘pellet’ of ice – just not at 500mph. It still hurt though.)
If anything on this Earth needs flexibility it has GOT to be wind turbine blades
(As air-plane wings and doors are required to have, Boeing: please do tell)
And in the cold, wind turbine blades like all plastics, will turn to glass and if left working/spinning will shatter.
How many people know that and are not telling – they just switch the things off and wave their arms instead
What am I missing here, how can this entire planet have become sooooo very dumb
Mass hysteria is a well documented condition. It simply requires an inspirational leader and critical mass of opinion to be reached.
I think Mark Twain hit the nail on the head when he said, ‘it is easier to con people than to convince them they have been conned’.
Peta, when you go for a walk (in a nice if not idyllic England setting in my yank imagination) does your internal dialog stay internal? I sometimes think of you as one of those eccentric Brit science gentlemen that simply don’t think quietly.
Theoretically, they could be heated. Wasting power from the grid whether they produce or not, of course.
But it’s even worse than that. Windmills with blade like passenger plane wings are far too big and imbalanced to survive much precession. They must rotate constantly or nearly so, just to keep their parts symmetric conditions, otherwise bearings and axles will deform asymmetrically and may fail when start moving again. While uneven heating from sunlight deforms the wings unevenly, with the same risks. This consumes power. Plus power for maintenance / “hotel load” things, like rotating into the wind (relatively modest, but must be readily available, and adds up).
But of course moving parts need lubrication, and these oils tend to have temperature restrictions, especially the cheap ones. So, do all moving parts of a windmill have proper cold-resistant lubricants everywhere they are needed, and/or are kept at optimal temperatures (consuming more power)? If not, well, in these conditions it probably will be worse than merely unpleasant sound from gearbox while heat of friction returns it into acceptable range at the cost of modest wear. So it will break if it runs, and it will break if it ever stops.
There were a few articles and comment threads on WUWT about how the bird-grinders need to consume power during insufficient winds:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/01/11/the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-of-renewable-energy/
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/02/06/monday-mirthiness-diesel-powered-wind-turbines-yes-really/
The ones that don’t have emergency diesel generators attached and ready, they are likely to be cut off when their grid meets a hiccup in during weak winds, and possibly will never work again.
So the argument is that unless we start to live like we’re in the stone age, climate change cant be conquered?????
Only us… not them. !
The inability of the experts to solve a false existential problem (climate) is blame shifted on our affluence. This means the problem is us. The existential problem is we consumers of the world. The solution is to take away our money to to reduce the stuff we can buy to useless crap. These people have no idea how seriously leveraged they are. If they were not leveraged, no one would fund the publication of endless bunk like this article.
Marketers have always sold stuff we don’t need. Since the end of WW-1, selling stuff we don’t actually want or need turned into big psych science and big a business. Both have in many ways united the world into one virtual market place.
Today the big game is anti-marketing…. creating a lack of desire and want for stuff people need. Mind control shapes and limits the focus of desire and scope of understanding. It inhibits innovation at the level of family and shifts it all to experts into centralized intellectual corporation/think tanks.
Shift the problem from the existential: Climate to the teleological: Cheap energy.
We all want and need cheaper energy regardless of the input (Coal, oil, NG, renewables etc)
What the Green Radical Environmentalists, the Grid people and Big hydro-Carbon fuel cartels don’t want is the tech that would create cheap energy on a decentralized, (Nano, micro and macro, mega scales)
This is the reason for the thought control. It is way to empowering to allow the real market of human desire flourish. We might suddenly happen to consider energy costs are a problem and want cheap energy. This would create a demand for true innovation.
Climate is an existential issue based on fear that brings self righteousness and a grid of stupid behaviors that ruin communities. Cheap energy is a teleological concern that empowers local communities with innovation.
Pair solar or any other energy input with a reliable, affordable efficient scalable electrical storage and distributions system …..would be a cheap energy solution for many around the world. Who needs a grid if you can do it all at home cheap? We’re talking serious innovation motivated by mass desire for cheap energy.
The problem is the tech, it ain’t here yet, nor is the possibility of it being here being marketed Instead we have oil companies and others lobbying states for carbon taxes and anti-off grid laws.
And we have stupid expensive renewable systems subsidized by taxes to solve an existential problem based on fear of some possible future event…. not what we really need now.
The big boys and girls want the problem to remain existential. They do not want the populace to regain it’s teleological concern or even begin to feel empowered enough to consider solutions for cheap energy for themselves.
The other problem is political. Politics turns all issues into existential issues.
If all American’s are looking to politics and corporations to solve all their problems, then all they will get in return is a loss of liberty and products that don’t meet their needs.
this is the new world we live in. The average American used to stay focused on how they could improve their blight by moving westward, starting a business, inventing something people needed etc. Today we are glued to our devices to the point that our deepest desire and longings no longer get played out in the real world. Governments and corporations no longer have to cater to a demand of innovation for products we really need…. because they have to power to shape our desires and keep us happy with stuff that is generally useless.
Capital is no longer in the hands of average Americans… the phone is anti-capital it creates nothing of any real value nor solves any real problems.
This is the reason the slogan cheap energy sounds so antiquated…who cares.
Um, ‘Rick Will’ or ‘Scissor’:
EVs have nice uses, such as service vehicles that start and stop often or go to a location and spend hours there. Examples include:
(I don’t know what a ‘BEV’ is.)
Similarly for solar and wind – remote locations can use the generating devices.
For example, the telephone company in B.C. used solar panels for mountaintop repeaters several decades ago. (Lifting diesel fuel up there, and technician to service the engine occasionally, is costly.) I don’t remember if also used small windmill, simple windmills have long existed. Batteries were simple lead acid, have to check susceptibility to freezing. (The company operated a VHF telephony system for travelers and workers, that’s line-of-sight so needs repeaters.)
Another use of EVs is commuting to work, as a second vehicle in a household. Charge at residence during the night (oh! the grid ;-). A small Honda EV would be a choice as easier to park.
What do “nice uses” have to do with a well-developed support system that the much of the world embraces? Keep in mind that the public has enthusiastically adopted radio, television, cell phones, ice cream and video games without government mandates or subsidies.
The POJ software Anthony uses changed ‘niche’ to ‘nice’.
Otherwise, I agree with eliminating government force including via subsidies. (Loans like TheMouthX received are a subidy.)
But the question is whether or not many people would adopt EVs in a free market. I say they are a niche product.
Nothing new about them – gold carts have existed for several decades, stop-start use, some used in closed retirement communities where they do not need range.
The big problem is the lie that humans are causing runaway warming, which is not and cannot happen.
What makes you think all or even most “households” have the means, or parking for that matter, for “second” limited use vehicles? Or want to pay for the insurance for them?
what makes you think that all the resources used to build such “second” limited use vehicles are not far more wasteful than simply using a single vehicle that satisfies all needs?
I think BEV means “Battery Electric Vehicle”. At least that’s how I’ve always read it.
Argh! The POJ software Anthony uses changed ‘niche’ to ‘nice’.
One of the payout for protesters operations is Solidarity Fund – Plenty Collective. That one is in the Victoria BC area, gets a grant from a charity that has been broadening into Marxism-based politics: Financial Information – Plenty Collective. Note executives were paid to attend an anarchist book fair.
Notice its web pages include popular activist themes these days, such as ‘food security’ – which Marxism never provides.
“Rich nation consumers who have been deceived by clever marketing into demanding material wealth and modern conveniences are stopping greens from saving the planet.”
The Marxist doctrine of false consciousness making an outing, painted Green. It’s just Communism revisited.
The study points out some obvious flaws with modern cultures: buying too much utter junk, fashion fads and fashion sneakers, disposable instead of durable goods.
But the authors reveal their underlying misanthropy in attacking “pronatalism” [ “the policy or practice of encouraging people to have children” ]. There are nations decaying and dying through the failure to to encourage their citizens to have children and their failure to support families as a social good.
The don’t stop at attacking childbearing — they want to stop it: “the shifting of social norms relating to reproduction”.
Which is only of concern if you think ‘fixed pie’ as Marxism teaches and don’t want people to be responsible for their foolishness.
The inaugural issue of The Ecologist magazine called humans ‘parasites’.
Fixed pie economics means every added mouth takes food from somewhere else.
Yet Marxism never fed anyone – Canada and the US gave food to the USSR.
Since 2007, seems the attachment to devices in Western Counties has been very successful at reducing birthrates by 23-25%. Not sure what that means. The dystopic narrative, such as the one this post is addressing didn’t really pick up until 2016.
Seems 55% of Genz do not expect to marry of have kids…..they’ve all been traumatized by life on line consuming this tripe. (tongue firmly in cheek).
My guess having a smartphone and broadband is ok for the Rad left Environmentalists as long as there is no meat, no children, no natural gas stoves, or dryers, no cars, no fuel etc.
Thomas Malthus would be so proud of this lot. He too predicted doom for humans if they continued to try and populate the Earth in comfort. He too ignored human intellect and innovation. He too made predictions that were entirely wrong in the passage of time. The current lot however had the benefit of hind sight, had they chosen to pay attention, but they simply repeated the errors of those who preceded them – doubly ignorant.
Yes, we’ve been blatantly conditioned to want to be able to afford to heat our houses. My retirement fund is disappearing fast paying for heating oil and increased electric bills. But these are unnecessary luxuries according to these wacknut climatistas. Apparently these fools have never considered that many people buy a hell of a lot more heating oil/gas than auto gas in a year.
I don’t think I’d like to live in a place where I had to heat my house.
I wonder how many “modern conveniences”, this nut job has given up?
Everybody knows greed, selfishness and disinformation are the only reasons we aren’t living in a global socialist fossil fuel-free utopia. It’s so obvious we don’t need to show any proof.
“Evidence? We ain’t go no evidence. We don’t have to show you no stinkin’ evidence!”
At least they are starting to come around to the idea that the stuff they need to build the renewables fantasy is a bit of a problem.
If the last nonsense Brother Jonathan made up does not work, it must be sabotaged by the curses of hidden witches. Some things never change.