Category Archives: Web Article Review

U.S. vs. China War?

Here’s an article called How to Avoid a Sino-American War. I think this is a great idea because I have a sense that the world just can’t afford a major war. Global economic progress has never really recovered from the 2008 financial crisis. Maybe it just takes time, or maybe progress is fighting headwinds of food, energy, and water constraints brought on by climate change and natural capital depletion. If the latter is true, perhaps a major war would be the last straw that we just can’t recover from.

Some people thing such a war is a distinct possibility:

In 2001, when an American EP-3 spy aircraft operating over the South China Sea collided with a Chinese air force interceptor jet near Hainan Island, Chinese and US leaders managed to defuse the situation and avoid a military confrontation. Today, such an incident in the South China Sea, where China and several southeast Asian countries have competing territorial claims, would almost certainly lead to an armed clash – one that could quickly escalate into open war.

Last month, at the annual Shangri-La Dialogue security conference, Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong conveyed the deep apprehension of the countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations about the potential for an armed conflict between China and the United States.

So does this article tell us how to avoid a war. You be the judge, but these words don’t mean much to me:

By activating top-level diplomacy, building strong crisis-management mechanisms, and enriching the rules of engagement in the South China Sea, a war between the US and China can be avoided. Given the vast damage that such a conflict could cause, this approach is less an option than a necessity.

Collapse

A 2012 article in Scientific American quotes Dennis Meadows and Jorgen Randers (it’s a little unclear which is speaking when) on how they think a collapse will play out:

For the coming few decades, Randers predicts, life on Earth will carry on more or less as before. Wealthy economies will continue to grow, albeit more slowly as investment will need to be diverted to deal with resource constraints and environmental problems, which thereby will leave less capital for creating goods for consumption. Food production will improve: increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will cause plants to grow faster, and warming will open up new areas such as Siberia to cultivation. Population will increase, albeit slowly, to a maximum of about eight billion near 2040. Eventually, however, floods and desertification will start reducing farmland and therefore the availability of grain. Despite humanity’s efforts to ameliorate climate change, Randers predicts that its effects will become devastating sometime after mid-century, when global warming will reinforce itself by, for instance, igniting fires that turn forests into net emitters rather than absorbers of carbon. “Very likely, we will have war long before we get there,” Randers adds grimly. He expects that mass migration from lands rendered unlivable will lead to localized armed conflicts…

Meadows holds that collapse is now all but inevitable, but that its actual form will be too complex for any model to predict. “Collapse will not be driven by a single, identifiable cause simultaneously acting in all countries,” he observes. “It will come through a self-reinforcing complex of issues”—including climate change, resource constraints and socioeconomic inequality. When economies slow down, Meadows explains, fewer products are created relative to demand, and “when the rich can’t get more by producing real wealth they start to use their power to take from lower segments.” As scarcities mount and inequality increases, revolutions and socioeconomic movements like the Arab Spring or Occupy Wall Street will become more widespread—as will their repression.

sharing apps

Here’s an article in Washingtonian about new transportation sharing apps and delivery services, and how they are changing the demand for car-dependent neighborhood design in Washington D.C. It’s a feedback loop that just continues to pick up steam once it starts. And this is before computer-controlled vehicles really come into their own, which is going to change everything.

That process works like this: First, it gets easier not to have a car. In recent years, things such as improved public transit and 69 miles of new bike lanes in the District alone have made Washington an easier place to navigate without driving.

Next, new digital businesses—Uber, Instacart, Car2Go—capitalize on this market. (Google has even made noise with a far-fetched idea to roll out a ride service featuring driverless cars.) One of the things these services collectively do is make up for some of the things you lose—say, access to a wonderfully big, suburban-style grocery store—by not driving.

Then the rate of car ownership tumbles: For the 18-to-34 demographic across the region, the share of people who drove to work fell by 7 percentage points between 2000 and 2013, according to the US Census. The District alone gained 12,612 car-free households between 2010 and 2012.

Finally, as a result, lawmakers and regulators have no choice but to catch up—which means even more bike lanes, liberalized transit rules, and denser neighborhoods whose residents make appealing customer bases for bike sharing, and cars by the hour, and novel delivery options for economy-size packs of toilet paper. It’s a cycle that reinforces itself.

Mckinsey

McKinsey lists “four powerful forces [that] are disrupting the global economy”.

  • “shift of economic activity to emerging-market cities
  • “acceleration of technological change. While technology has always been transformative, its impact is now ubiquitous, with digital and mobile technologies being adopted at an unprecedented rate. It took more than 50 years after the telephone was invented for half of American homes to have one, but only 20 years for cellphones to spread from less than 3% of the world’s population to more than two-thirds. Facebook had six million users in 2006; today, it has 1.4 billion… The mobile Internet offers the promise of economic progress for billions of emerging-economy citizens at a speed that would otherwise be unimaginable. And it gives entrepreneurial upstarts a greater chance of competing with established firms. But technological change also carries risks, especially for workers who lose their jobs to automation or lack the skills to work in higher-tech fields.
  • demographics – the possibility that world population could plateau or actually start to fall
  • globalization

There are a few more things out there that could disrupt the economy for better or worse – renewable energy? biotechnology? climate change? risks to food and water supplies? ocean collapse? nuclear or biological war?

coal industry collapse

The stocks of U.S. coal companies have almost completely collapsed.

But times have changed, and the market value of coal companies has collapsed. The four largest coal companies were worth a combined $21.7 billion dollars in June 2010. Now they’re worth $1.2 billion. Two other large coal concerns, Patriot and James River, have both filed for bankruptcy in recent years. And one market analyst told the Financial Times in February to expect “multiple bankruptcies in US coal over the next 12-18 months.”

They blame it on a combination of low natural gas prices and government regulation. I think it has more to do with the former – natural gas is cleaner and newly cheap, so there is just no reason to stay with coal. The regulators have probably been emboldened because they see that there are clear alternatives. There is no mention of renewables in this article, but I suspect they play a role.

 

MERS in South Korea

“Middle East Respiratory Syndrome” has popped up in South Korea.

A deadly virus with no known cure — Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, or MERS — has infected 13 people in South Korea since mid-May. The fast spread of the disease, from the first case confirmed on May 20 to more than a dozen by Saturday, is prompting criticism of health officials for not moving faster to quarantine suspected patients…

MERS is from the same family as the virus that triggered China’s 2003 outbreak of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, or SARS. Scientists first identified it in 2012, and since then, more than 1,100 cases have been reported in 23 countries, with the bulk majority of cases occurring in the Middle East.

So far, not only is there no known cure, there’s no vaccine to prevent it, either.

climate change impacts

Here are a couple projections of climate change impacts.

The World Health Organization projects “Between 2030 and 2050, climate change is expected to cause approximately 250 000 additional deaths per year, from malnutrition, malaria, diarrhoea and heat stress.” This sounds awful, and of course it is. But if you compare this to other preventable causes of death like traffic accidents, smoking and air pollution, you could probably save a lot more lives with a given amount of money focusing on the latter group than exclusively on climate change.

A more sobering projection, at least to me, comes from an organization called DARA.  Although the report includes some truly awful and incomprehensible infographics, there is a very clear graphic on p. 21. Under a “no action” scenario, climate change subtracts about 3% from world economic growth in 2050 and 7-8% in 2100. If you believe technology will lead to a massive acceleration of economic growth, we may be able to afford even this (although our children will be learning about Earth’s original native ecosystems in history class). If long-term growth stays in the sub-5% range where it has been recently, this will mean the decline and fall of civilization as we know it.

air pollution and diabetes

Here is a long article citing evidence that air pollution is at least correlated, and quite possibly a contributing factor, to diabetes. The website is called diabetesandenvironment.org, so I don’t know if it is an unbiased source of scientific information. The scientific studies it cites are certainly real.

These authors suggest that oxidative stress, which involves an excess of free radicals, might be one mechanism whereby air pollutants could influence the development of type 1 diabetes. Ozone and sulfate can have oxidative effects. Particulate matter carries contaminants that can trigger the production of free radicals as well as immune system cells called cytokines (involved in inflammation), and may affect organs that are sensitive to oxidative stress (MohanKumar et al. 2008). Beta cells are highly sensitive to oxidative stress, and free radicals are likely to be involved in beta cell destruction in type 1 diabetes (Lenzen 2008)…

The children of mothers exposed to higher levels of air pollution while pregnant have a higher risk of later developing type 1 diabetes. This finding comes from the relatively unpolluted area of southern Sweden, and was found for both ozone and nitrogen oxides (NOx) (Malmqvist et al. 2015)…

A number of long-term studies have found that exposure to traffic-related air pollution is associated with an increased risk of type 2 diabetes in adults. For example, a study of African-American women from Los Angeles found that those who had higher exposure to traffic-related air pollutants (PM2.5 and nitrogen oxides) were more likely to develop diabetes (as well as high blood pressure) (Coogan et al. 2012). Adults in Denmark had an increased risk of diabetes when exposed to higher levels of the traffic-related air pollutant nitrogen dioxide (NO2)– especially those who had a healthy lifestyle, were physically active, and did not smoke– factors that should be protective against type 2 diabetes (Andersen et al. 2012). A study of adult women in West Germany found that women exposed to higher levels of traffic-related air pollution (NO2 and PM) developed type 2 diabetes at a higher rate. This study followed the participants over a 16 year period (at the beginning, none had diabetes) (Krämer et al. 2010). A long-term study from Ontario, Canada, found that exposure to PM2.5 was associated with the development of diabetes in adults (Chen et al. 2013). From Switzerland, a 10 year long study found that levels of PM10 and NO 2were associated with diabetes development in adults, at levels of pollution below air quality standards (Eze et al. 2014).

So does it make sense that we are obsessing over chemicals like trace agricultural pesticide residues in food and “microconstituents” in drinking water, rather than air pollution, which is 100% proven to be extremely harmful? I am not suggesting that we shouldn’t be concerned about all of the above, but in a world of finite resources and time we should calibrate our amount of concern and action to the biggest, most proven risks, while continuing to learn more about the others. The internal combustion engine is killing us and our children, slowly through the air not to mention through sudden, violent death on the ground.

A few more interesting air pollution notes:

  • China may have reached peak coal, with its consumption actually falling last year. World energy consumption has been known to fall during recessions, but this is supposedly the first time it has fallen during an economic expansion. The economics of renewables seem to be playing a significant role.
  • Air pollution kills more people worldwide than tobacco.
  • A Chinese documentary about air pollution called “Under the Dome” was seen by 300 million people in less than a week before it was censored in China. The film maker was partly inspired by a rare tumor her daughter developed in the womb that she links back to air pollution.
  • Confusingly, Under the Dome was also the title of a recent Stephen King novel and TV series. In Stephen King’s 1982 novel The Running Man, which he wrote under the pseudonym Richard Bachman, children are dying right and left of emphysema and cancer caused by air pollution. The government is covering it up and keeping people distracted and entertained with reality TV shows.