Climate crisis

Come with me on a magical journey between Sydney and Melbourne. No, not via the airport… but starting at Sydney’s Central Station, aboard a newly refurbished all-sleeper night train.

[…] 

So my perfect journey is a dream – but why can’t Australians enjoy such a pleasant way to travel, given sleeper trains are going through a major resurgence in Europe, partly in response to climate change? It’s a good question, and there’s a simple answer: because the New South Wales government doesn’t want you to.

Every day, you have to hold two contradictory ideas in your head. On the one hand, you have to accept that you're living through the collapse of industrial civilization. You have to deal with the moral injury that comes from realizing that many of your friends and family don't care enough about you to do a few simple things. You have to deal with a government that isn't just funding genocide but is actively participating it in it, while lying to you when it comes to... just about everything that pertains to your survival.

On the other hand...

This collapsing civilization isn't going to give you a break. It requires your participation. You still have to go to work. You still have to smile at customers, even through a mask, if you're allowed to wear one. You still have to go through the motions. You have to observe superficial politeness. You have to pay for rent and groceries. You have to pay taxes.

It's a lot.

Long sentences handed to two Just Stop Oil protesters for scaling the M25 bridge over the Thames are a potential breach of international law and risk silencing public concerns about the environment, a UN expert has said.

In a strongly worded intervention, Ian Fry, the UN’s rapporteur for climate change and human rights, said he was “particularly concerned” about the sentences, which were “significantly more severe than previous sentences imposed for this type of offending in the past”.

He said: “I am gravely concerned about the potential flow-on effect that the severity of the sentences could have on civil society and the work of activists, expressing concerns about the triple planetary crisis and, in particular, the impacts of climate change on human rights and on future generations.”

The nagging problem is this: Space sucks.

Most of the solar system will never be settled, and the least-bad places still have high radiation, dangerous soil, and low gravity with unknown medical effects. Also there’s no air, no running water, and despite cost-drops and new tech, the best options are far away, insanely expensive, or both. 

If you can do something in space, you invariably can do it more cheaply and easily on Earth. This isn’t only a financial problem or a dying-in-space problem—space proposals are environmentally dubious too. Rockets are about 80% propellant, all of which is burned on the ride to space. Advocates sometimes note that in principle, propellant can be generated using only renewable energy, but in practice, this isn’t yet happening. Adding vast numbers of megarockets to the needs of a grid already struggling to go green seems, to say the least, more likely to contribute to climate change than solve it.

Despite what many of its proponents believe, space is neither a solution to current environmental challenges, nor an escape hatch in case of environmental calamity. We’re here to cast some skepticism on the most popular ideas, not because it’s what we want to believe, but it’s where the data led us. 

e360: I’m intrigued that, in talking about such matters, you don’t generally speak about “restoring nature.” You speak instead of something you call “regenerative design.” What’s the difference?

Orff: Restoring nature is trying to bring back nature for nature’s sake. As much as I, too, am guilty of that desire at times, this is simply not possible because our water quality has changed, and our air and water temperatures have changed. What I’m trying to do is rebuild natural systems in a strategic way that reduces climate risk for communities.

If wet bulb temperatures exceed 31°C (88°F), people cannot consistently perform physical labor without endangering their lives; in temperatures that exceed 35°C (95°F), a healthy human can die within a few hours without access to water or shelter. The authors of the PNAS study analyzed "wet-bulb temperature thresholds across a range of air temperatures and relative humidities" using bias-corrected climate change models. Their conclusions were sobering.

"Some of the most populated regions, typically lower-middle income countries in the moist tropics and subtropics, violate this threshold well before 3°C of [global] warming," the authors write.

“We conclude with a high degree of confidence that Gulf Stream transport has indeed slowed by about 4% in the past 40 years, the first conclusive, unambiguous observational evidence that this ocean current has undergone significant change in the recent past,” states the journal article, “Robust weakening of the Gulf Stream during the past four decades observed in the Florida Straits,” published in Geophysical Research Letters. The Florida Straits, located between the Florida Keys, Cuba, and The Bahamas, has been the site of many ocean observation campaigns dating to the 1980s and earlier. “This significant trend has emerged from the dataset only over the past ten years, the first unequivocal evidence for a recent multidecadal decline in this climate-relevant component of ocean circulation.”