“climate emergency” and “global heating”

The Oxford Dictionary has announced that “climate emergency” is the word of 2019. “Global heating” was a close runner up. They also explain why each of these can be considered “a word”.

Such multipart constructions, like “heart attack”, “man-of-war” or the 2017 American Dialect Society word of the year “fake news”, are commonly accepted by linguists as words.

Oxford Dictionaries

more on fully automated luxury communism

Here is the Amazon review of the actual book:

In the twenty-first century, new technologies should liberate us from work. Automation, rather than undermining an economy built on full employment, is instead the path to a world of liberty, luxury and happiness—for everyone. Technological advance will reduce the value of commodities—food, healthcare and housing—towards zero.

Improvements in renewable energies will make fossil fuels a thing of the past. Asteroids will be mined for essential minerals. Genetic editing and synthetic biology will prolong life, virtually eliminate disease and provide meat without animals. New horizons beckon.

In Fully Automated Luxury Communism, Aaron Bastani conjures a vision of extraordinary hope, showing how we move to energy abundance, feed a world of 9 billion, overcome work, transcend the limits of biology, and establish meaningful freedom for everyone. Rather than a final destination, such a society merely heralds the real beginning of history.

Amazon

Fully Automated Luxury Communism

This is an idea where computers manage the economy perfectly so we can all live lives of leisure.

The most ardent advocate for FALC, Aaron Bastani, a London-based media executive and writer, has written a new book on the topic. In it, he advances a curious, passionate argument, with a dire assessment of the present and a messianic vision for the future. Bastani believes that we are already living through a potentially epochal transformation of the economy, as epochal as the establishment of agriculture and the introduction of engines and electricity. Artificial intelligence, machine learning, and advanced computing might be about to eliminate the need for human labor in no small part, Bastani claims.

The Atlantic

This article doesn’t quite tell you what it is. Without reading the book, I imagine the idea might be that you invest in the right technologies to grow the economy while minimizing ecological harm, then reinvest some of the gains in an optimal way while paying an equitable dividend to everyone in the world. Maybe at some point, you work things out so that money is no longer necessary to keep the system in balance. That’s my guess as to what is in this book – maybe I should read the book and find out.

the latest on fusion power

According to the Washington Post, there are looming breakthroughs in fusion.

But the technical challenges of essentially creating an artificial mini-star have been daunting. Scientists have made fusion happen with various approaches, but more energy was expended in those experiments than was released. The turning point will come when more energy is produced than goes in.

The roadblocks have started to fall away in recent years, thanks to the use of supercomputers to model and optimize the design of fusion systems, and to a new generation of superconductors that increase the magnetic fields that contain the artificial star, thereby dramatically decreasing the required size of fusion devices. Advanced manufacturing techniques for specialized fusion materials have also been developed.

Washington Post

The title of the article is “The fusion energy dream is inching toward planet-saving reality”. Would this “save the planet”. Well, if it were clean, cheap, and safe, it could move us closer to that world of abundance some envision. The problem with fission has been that the infrastructure required to make it safe has been so big, complicated, and costly, that by the time it can be put into place it is already obsolete by a decade or more. And then there is the weaponization problem which has prevented widespread use in poor countries.

Let’s assume it will be clean, cheap, and safe. It could solve our carbon emission problems, air pollution problems, and generally free up a lot of resources for other things, making us quite a bit richer. Whole industries would be created and destroyed, which we could expect to cause some political and financial turmoil. It wouldn’t solve our land use, biodiversity, or water pollution problems.

let the twenteen retrospectives begin!

Here we are a month and a half from the end of the decade, so I assume we are in for a tidal wave of not just 2019 retrospectives but 2010-2019 retrospectives. I am not too hopeful that we will ever pick a name for this decade, considering we have not even agreed on a name for the last one (I vote for the British entry, “the naughties”.) But anyway, “twenteens” is my humble proposal.

The first retrospective I have come across is from the podcast BackStory. This is a podcast where academic historians discuss current events, which I think is neat even though they sometimes try to make everything about race and gender when not everything is about race and gender. Anyway, I thought they might review some of the major geopolitical events of the decade, compare them to major geopolitical events of the past, and speculate on how we might view them in the future. But what they came up with was…social media. Well yeah, I guess the internet and our interactions with information and communication did continue to evolve in the past decade. I think one thing we have seen over the past decade is the democratization of propaganda – now anybody can try to confuse and misinform us, not just big governments and corporations.

Anyway, after I felt a little underwhelmed by that, I found myself needing to make a list of major geopolitical events and trends from the decade. Here is what I came up with.

  • Evidence of accelerating ecological collapse, and some halting steps to do something about it. The Paris climate accord, followed by the US. backing out of the Paris climate accord. When we look back in a few decades, the Paris accord could be seen as a turning point where the world started to come together and address a problem. Maybe we look back and see that we built on these first steps and ultimately succeeded, or maybe we look back on this as the only time we tried, and ultimately failed. Of course, global warming and sea level rise are not the only ecological issues we face. The most shocking stories I have read recently are about the sheer magnitude of the losses in natural habitats and animals, from insects to birds to mammals. A big chunk of what the planet had has vanished in a matter of decades, and the trend is snowballing.
  • Events in the greater Middle East. The initial hope of the “Arab Spring” followed by the grind of brutal and ongoing conflicts across the region, including the Syrian civil war and Yemen and U.S. military involvement across the entire region from Africa to Afghanistan. The Osama bin Laden assassination. The U.S. nuclear deal with Iran, followed by the U.S. backing out of the U.S. nuclear deal with Iran. The Iran-Russia axis vs. the U.S.-Israel-Saudi Arabia-UAE(-Pakistan?) axis. The weird Saudi Arabia-Qatar spat. The fraying of the U.S.-Turkey alliance. Renewed protests in Iraq and elsewhere at the end of the decade.
  • Nuclear proliferation and rearmament. The U.S. and Russia abandoning decades of treaties and gradual progress toward risk reduction. The never-ending Iran-Israel, North Korea, and Pakistan-India sagas.
  • Evaporation of the UN and international cooperation in general. When the U.S. invaded Iraq in 1991, it went to the UN security council and got approval to march across the borders of a sovereign UN member state. I naively thought that would be the new normal in post-Cold War conflicts. In the past decade, that has completely gone away with little or no consequences. The U.S. and Russia are in Syria, a sovereign UN member state, with no consequences. Russia is in Ukraine, a sovereign UN member state, with no consequences. So being a sovereign UN member state seems to offer no protection against invasion by a more powerful neighbor, and powerful countries don’t feel the need to consult the UN before invading a neighbor. It seems to me that this is a huge change in international norms over the past decade that could really raise the risk of a major war in the future. (By the way, Bernie Sanders is the only U.S. presidential candidate I have heard even mention reengaging with the UN.)
  • A decade without a world war, nuclear war, global pandemic, famine, or severe economic depression. Because we shouldn’t take any of this for granted, and hey I wanted to end on a high note.

carbon sequestration potential of restoring degraded land

The UN Convention to Combat Desertification says there is a large and potentially very cost-effective opportunity to sequester a lot of carbon by restoring degraded farmland. This is not planting trees or trying to green areas that were historically desert, but trying to restore areas that used to be productive cropland or grazing land to their original condition or better. It’s also an opportunity to expand food production without displacing productive natural ecosystems.

Rene Castro Salazar, an assistant director general at the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, said that of the 2 billion hectares (almost 5 billion acres) of land around the world that has been degraded by misuse, overgrazing, deforestation and other largely human factors, 900 million hectares could be restored.

Returning that land to pasture, food crops or trees would convert enough carbon into biomass to stabilize emissions of CO2, the biggest greenhouse gas, for 15-20 years, giving the world time to adopt carbon-neutral technologies…

Key to returning dry lands to vegetation is the use of fertilizer, said Mansur. “Fertilizers are essential for increasing productivity. Good fertilizer in the right quantity is very good for the soil.”

Time

The Minnesota Diet

In this short story by Charlie Jane Anders, a relatively near-future (it refers to events “way back in the 2040s”) smart city is beset by supply chain problems with automated trucks that no human can seem to control. It also seems like nobody can leave. I’ll try not to spoil the plot but I’ll just list a few of the technologies woven into the story:

  • automated passenger and freight vehicles. Algorithms seem to determine who gets what in terms of food, and the government is not functional enough to step in. You can rent a car but where it can go depends on its software license.
  • jobs seem to be mostly professional tech and amorphous “business”, plus service jobs to support them. No truck drivers, construction workers, assembly line workers, etc.
  • “bioplastic” seems to be the key building material, produced by crops and/or genetically engineered fungus. Using crop land for this stuff rather than food seems to be part of the problem.
  • augmented reality goggles, but people are also still staring at screens
  • vertical farms producing maybe a sixth of the food supply. These seem to mostly or completely automated.

The title is a reference to the Minnesota Starvation Experiment, which was a World War II-era scientific study in which people actually volunteered to (partially) starve and then test out different ways to recover. According to Wikipedia it was a diet of about 1500 calories per day consisting mostly of potatoes, rutabagas, turnips, bread and macaroni for 24 weeks. It actually doesn’t sound all that terrible to me because these are relatively filling, satisfying foods. But 24 weeks sounds like a long, long time. I think I could handle this for 24 days if I was allowed unlimited seasonings and condiments, and maybe a beer or two on Fridays.

industrial policy

This article is about industrial policy. It worked for countries like Japan, Korea, Singapore and China. Basically, they were able to put vast pools of low-cost labor to work producing things to export to markets much bigger and richer than their own economies, using technology imported from those economies. That is no a recipe for success in today’s advanced economies. The article argues for investments in education, research, and innovation as the “industrial policy” of today. One interesting thing it does is draw parallels to the migration of manufacturing from the U.S. northeast to south.

In a recent International Monetary Fund working paper, we use these past successes to identify three principles that underlie what we call a “true” industrial policy. In the Asian “miracle” economies – such as Singapore and South Korea – as well as in Japan, Germany, and the United States, the government intervened early on to support domestic firms in emerging, technologically sophisticated sectors. The successful policies placed special emphasis on export orientation, and held firms accountable for the support received. Given the strong focus on cutting-edge sectors, this “true” industrial policy is essentially a technology and innovation policy (TIP).

Technology and innovation are key to economic growth. China’s Made in China 2025 program essentially emulates the strategy used by South Korea (and Japan before it) to escape the so-called middle-income trap. Likewise, the new UK and Franco-German industrial strategies focus on the industries of the future: renewable energy, artificial intelligence, and robotics.

Project Syndicate

progress on carbon capture technology

There is progress on carbon capture technology. Now I’m not scientifically illiterate, but I won’t claim to understand this story. What I gather is that earlier technologies used a lot of energy or required a lot of chemical inputs, or both, and this is an improvement.

Incumbent technologies are inherently inefficient due to thermal energy losses, large footprint, or degradation of sorbent material. We report a solid-state faradaic electro-swing reactive adsorption system comprising an electrochemical cell that exploits the reductive addition of CO2 to quinones for carbon capture. The reported device is compact and flexible, obviates the need for ancillary equipment, and eliminates the parasitic energy losses by using electrochemically activated redox carriers. An electrochemical cell with a polyanthraquinone–carbon nanotube composite negative electrode captures CO2 upon charging via the carboxylation of reduced quinones, and releases CO2 upon discharge.

Energy and Environmental Science

Sounds good. Of course, the moral hazard is that each technological advance like this is just seen as a license to pollute even more. I’m not going to stop yelling at those Exxon commercials where they talk about “plants a little more like plants”. YOU DIRTY MOTHERFUCKERS, YOU DELIBERATELY LIED TO US FOR 60 YEARS AND DESTROYED THE EARTH! NOW SHUT UP! Sorry, I lost control for a second there. I really hate that commercial. I never promised this blog would be 100% family friendly. Well, you know who is trying to kill your family and everybody else’s family? EXXON.

Fuck you Exxon

October 2019 in Review

Most frightening and/or depressing story:

  • A third of all of North America’s birds may have disappeared since the 1970s. (Truth be told, it was hard to pick a single most depressing story line in a month when I covered propaganda, pandemic, new class divisions created by genetic engineering, and nuclear war. But while those are scary risks for the near future, it appears the world is right in the middle of an ongoing and obvious ecological collapse, and not talking much about it.)

Most hopeful story:

  • I’ll go with hard shell tacos. They are one of the good things in this life, whether they are authentic Mexican food or “trailer park cuisine” as I tagged the story!  

Most interesting story, that was not particularly frightening or hopeful, or perhaps was a mixture of both:

  • A list of “jobs of the future” includes algorithms, automation, and AI; customer experience; environmental; fitness and wellness; health care; legal and financial services; transportation; and work culture. I’ll oversimplify this list as computer scientist, engineer, doctor, lawyer, banker, which don’t sound all that different than the jobs of the past. But it occurs to me that these are jobs where the actual tools people are using and day-to-day work tasks evolve with the times, even if the intended outcomes are basically the same. What might be new is that even in these jobs, you need to make an effort to keep learning every day throughout your career and life if you want to keep up.

There will still be openings for evil HR cats.