Most frightening and/or depressing story: A gigantic incoming object could be the alien ship that will put us out of our misery. Okay, probably not. The interesting and scary thing is that as our ability to look at the nearby universe improves, we are seeing more surprising stuff. But how are we supposed to think about let alone do anything about a very low probability existential threat like this one? We are not even responding to the “somewhat likely” (nuclear war, pandemics) and “likely happening right now” (a climate tipping point leading to future collapse) existential threats in front of us. I suggested that the tipping point will be called in retrospect, and 2025 might be a nice round number for the history books.
Most interesting story, that was not particularly frightening or hopeful, or perhaps was a mixture of both: Designer babies are here, and the trend towards the rich and powerful accelerating their own evolution (and a few governments making this available to the masses) can only accelerate.
While there is a propaganda shield between news coverage of the global climate emergency and those of us absorbing news here in the US, the American Meteorological Society bravely continues to publish their annual State of the Climate report. I think “absorbing” is the right word because, while accurate news sources are not actually censored and are out there to be sought out, if you are just getting your news from headlines and sound bites and passing a monitor in an airport, you’re getting the impression that the ongoing collapse of our world’s biophysical life support system is not a front and center concern.
Anyway, I think of this report as sort of the interim annual report between whenever the IPCC gets around to their major releases. Here are some quick highlights:
Atmospheric CO2 stands at 423 ppm. This is the highest ever, it is growing each year and it is growing at the fastest rate recorded since the 1960s. So the world is not only turning the corner, it is not decelerating toward turning the corner. It is accelerating.
Record heat. Record drought. Record ocean heat. Record polar heat, ocean ice and glacier loss.
Record sea level. Well, this is not surprising because the trend is up, and this one I wouldn’t expect to fluctuate so much year to year. The summary in the article I linked to doesn’t say whether there is evidence of unexpected acceleration. But with all that ice melt, there is a mass balance situation here…
So it’s bad bad bad, dad. I don’t know how else you can spin this other than to say it’s important to put one year in the context of longer-term trends. But the long-term trends are all bad. And if we are hitting unexpected records, that suggests that the projections (which are bad) may not be bad enough. Increasingly it looks like the world may be at that tipping point – it will be called in retrospect rather than definitively in the moment, but it might be now. 2025 will be a nice round year to put in the history books.
This paper identifies a number of “positive tipping points” on climate change that can help counteract the risk of reaching negative tipping points such as glacier melting and methane release. They identify the shift to solar and wind power, electric vehicles, and heat pumps for heating and cooling buildings. These seem very market- and consumer-driven to me. So these are feedback loops that have been gathering some steam, and maybe governments can do relatively small things to reinforce them in the hopes of getting them to a takeoff point where they are self-sustaining and able to counteract the negative feedback loops that are out there. It is somewhat heartening to realize that the renewable energy and electric vehicle revolutions are farther along outside the US than inside, and we are not getting this impression I believe because of effective oil and gas industry propaganda here. Because those companies and their lobbyists understand these positive feedback loops too, and they are evil or at least amoral in the pursuit of short term profit at the long term expense of human civilization on Earth.
From what I understand (outside this article), adoption of heat pumps and building electrification is farther along in the U.S. than elsewhere. This is interesting – how did we manage to move away from heating buildings with coal, oil, and gas directly decades ago if this decreased the profits of the all-powerful fossil fuel industry? Were they just asleep at the switch, or were the economic incentives just that strong? Is it because we made the choice to fund electric infrastructure through a decentralized, regulated electric utility industry? And once we built that infrastructure, the economic incentives became too strong to resist. Whereas we have not built the infrastructure to support the electric vehicle transition, and the fossil fuel/automobile/highway construction industry is successfully fighting that tooth and nail through propaganda and (legalized, by our corrupt Supreme Court) political corruption. (Remember that currently, highway construction has dedicated funding from gas taxes. And auto dealerships make more money from servicing and repairing fossil fuel powered vehicles than they do from selling them.)
Note the oil and gas industry could have been decentralized and regulated too, that is just not the path we went down a century or so ago. It’s too late for this, but economic incentives are going to push in the direction of building the charging infrastructure, because it is just a better, cleaner, and cheaper way to get around overall. So by pushing for this policy, however strongly and effectively the forces of darkness have been pushing against it lately, we are working to reinforce a positive feedback loop that can eventually tip and become irreversible.
I know, a lot of electricity is still generated with fossil fuels at this point. It is still more efficient from what I understand. And slowly but surely, renewables are chipping away. Add modernized nuclear technology to this mix, like the small modular reactors, and keep pushing toward that longer-term dream of fusion power.
Most frightening and/or depressing story: In case we still don’t have enough feedback loops to worry about, loss of Antarctic ice could also trigger volcanoes under Antarctica.
Most interesting story, that was not particularly frightening or hopeful, or perhaps was a mixture of both: Policies to increase housing supply in the most economically dynamic cities can theoretically accelerate economic growth, since housing supply is not expanding fast enough and is therefore holding economic growth back. A lot of discussion has been focused around zoning, which is a local matter. But I offered some additional suggestions: investment in better transportation and communication infrastructure to reduce the friction of working across distances between homes and offices, effectively enlarging housing markets. And serious investments in construction productivity, which has been flat in the U.S. for decades. Ideas include more factory-based modular components. The U.S. has tried and failed at this before, but of course China is now leading the way. AI should also be pretty good at construction scheduling and logistics. The U.S. is somewhat successfully partnering with Korean ship-building expertise, at least on a small scale.
Mount Ngauruhoe, New Zealand, aka Mount Doom from Lord of the Rings (Guillaume Piolle)
This article in Planetizen says maybe not. But I think it is all relative, and they may be the best the U.S. has to offer. Cities mentioned in this article are Buffalo, Duluth (MN), Milwaukee, Cleveland, Chicago, Marquette (MI), Minneapolis, and Toledo.
Here are strikes mentioned against the region, with my thoughts in brackets:
invasive aquatic species [sad for aquatic ecosystems and sport fishermen, maybe not a big risk to human wellbeing. Great Lakes fish are not a big source of food that I know of, largely due to legacy industrial pollution. In other words we have already poisoned the ecosystem to a degree that we can’t and don’t rely on it as a major food source.]
nutrient pollution from farms and sewage [something I have expertise in, and yes it is a big issue. Agriculture is the much bigger issue because it is massive and essentially unregulated. The article focuses on untreated sewage overflow, which everyone can agree are gross, but treated sewage is the bigger player when it comes to nutrient pollution. People are just another big population of animals, and yes we have better wastewater treatment than the cows and pigs but removing nutrients to the degree needed is very expensive and has not been a historical focus. BUT see my comments above regarding sad for the ecosystem and water-based recreation, not an existential threat to humans. Water-based recreation certainly adds economic value, and I am not discounting this, just again saying not an existential threat.]
more intense storms [big issue, with daily tragedies unfolding around the country and world. This region is not immune, but certainly not uniquely vulnerable relative to others.]
wildly fluctuating lake levels. [This one is interesting, because the levels in the lakes depend on the seasonal balance of runoff and evaporation, which can fluctuate quite a bit. It’s similar to coastal flooding and sea level rise issues, but on a different time scale. To me, seems like a problem if you are very near a waterfront or in a very low lying area. Certainly an issue, but seems less scary/more manageable than a category 5 hurricane hitting your city with the energy of a nuclear weapon, and/or the slow but irreversible rise in sea level.]
pressure to divert water across basin boundaries to areas with groundwater depletion, population growth, and pollution issues. [This region has a strong international legal framework for resisting this pressure. Political pressure chips away at it, but the framework exists and the situation is much better than areas in the southeast (Florida-Georgia) and southwest (basically everywhere from greater Phoenix to greater Las Vegas to greater Los Angeles) that are much more water scarce and lack this strong framework. We have a similarly strong framework for the Delaware basin serving greater New York, New Jersey, and greater Philadelphia, and again not perfect but we do much better than areas without such a framework.]
Canadian wildfires [yes, big issue. Very bad for the atmosphere and certainly a short-term health hazard for humans while it is ongoing. Things like this are affecting many regions, and I would rather be inconvenienced in Chicago than scared to death in LA I think.]
Adaptation, resilience, and infrastructure investment may be lagging behind regions affected by more acute coastal flooding and fire crises. [Maybe, but no evidence for this is provided. Comparing my native Philadelphia to what I saw and heard on a recent visit to Milwaukee, I’m not sure I buy this.]
More extreme winter weather [mostly an inconvenience, but sure some people will die especially if power outages happen during extreme cold. Most areas of the country are dealing with extreme, cold, heat, or both. Is the electric grid in the Midwest in worse shape than other regions? Again, I don’t see this as a unique vulnerability.]
So my verdict is there is no perfect climate haven, but this region still seems like it might be the best the U.S. has to offer. You could point to Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine I suppose, but those are not major economic centers unless you count them as part of greater Boston, which is going to face severe coastal issues. In the Midwest you have greater Chicago and greater Toronto, which I see as too big to fail.
Climate change is scary. Earthquakes, volcanoes and tsunamis are scary. But these disasters are unrelated, right? Not so fast, says the Guardian. Losing ice in places like Iceland, South America, and Antarctica changes the pressure on underground magma chambers and can trigger eruptions. And apparently there are “at least 100” active volcanoes under Antarctica.
There is no discussion of how all this will affect the secret Nazi and alien bases under Antarctica.
According to a study, China’s electrification rate has hit 30%, significantly ahead of the U.S. and the EU and US where the electrification rate has plateaued at ~22% in recent years.
The study defines the electrification rate as the share of electricity in final energy consumption versus energy coming from fossil fuels. According to the study, the U.S. still leads the world in the electrification of buildings; however, China recently caught up to the U.S. and Europe in industrial electrification, and has overtaken both in the electrification of transport. In 2024, electric vehicles (EVs) made up approximately 47.9% of the total passenger car sales in China, a huge increase from 2020, when plug-in EVs accounted for just 6.3% of total sales. In comparison, electric vehicles accounted for less than 23% of new car sales in Europe over the timeframe.
I’m all in on electrification. For one thing, it reduces air pollution and carbon emissions even with our current energy supply mix, as I understand it. But it also allows us to substitute cleaner fuels for electric generation over time, starting with natural gas for coal and oil, and moving towards nuclear, renewables, and as an aspirational goal, maybe even fusion.
I’m not surprised the US is lagging on electrifying transportation, because the oil, auto, and highway lobbies are politically powerful and have money at stake. The regulated electric utility and nuclear industries don’t have the same political pull. (There is no particular reason oil couldn’t have been a regulated public utility.) It surprises me a little that the US and Europe are at the same level.
Most frightening and/or depressing story: The India-Pakistan conflict seems to have died down a bit (or did the media outlets I pay attention to just lose interest?). But both the potential nuclear conflict and the long-term loss of glacial ice billions of people depend on are terrifying.
Most hopeful story: I came up with four keys to my personal happiness in the moment: sleep, coffee, exercise, and down time. What, no family, community, career accomplishment, or making a lasting difference in the world you ask? No, those are about reflecting on life satisfaction, not being in the moment. No “fun”? Well, my idea of fun may be different than your idea of fun. I wish you joy and happiness as you pursue your idea of fun, only try to have some empathy and don’t force your own idea of fun on others. So there.
Most interesting story, that was not particularly frightening or hopeful, or perhaps was a mixture of both: The U.S. approach to R&D is a partnership between government (through both grants and procurement power), universities, and the private sector (historically, including regulated monopolies like Bell Labs). Other countries including China have copied this model somewhat successfully, and our own government taking a monkey wrench to our own system that has worked so well seems like a really stupid idea. First we need to stop the damage and then let’s hope it can be repaired.
Jeff Masters has a nice summary of the science on the global devastation of even a limited regional nuclear war. He starts with the accounts popularized by Carl Sagan and others in the 1980s, which really did move the needle on global public and political consciousness on the issue. There was also a 2008 paper about the global consequences of a relatively small India-Pakistan exchange. Since then the science has been updated several times, including using the latest climate models. The results are always bad, with even the limited regional war disrupting global agriculture for up to a decade and killing 2 billion people. It would just be cold, in the summer, where food is normally grown, for ten years. Human beings would starve on an unimaginable scale. By contrast, a huge volcanic eruption like the one in Indonesia in 1815 could cause a similar effect, but it would last only a few years. (Nonetheless, we should have a plan for that one, no? Something that happens every few hundred years is common and you have to have a plan for it!) This should probably be the #1 political issue no matter what else is going on. Where are the courageous leaders today?
I will refrain from commenting on fast-moving current events in the India-Pakistan conflict. But here is a bit more on the water situation bubbling (sorry) under the surface (sorry again).
From an opinion piece by Brahma Chellany (“Professor Emeritus of Strategic Studies at the New Delhi-based Center for Policy Research and Fellow at the Robert Bosch Academy in Berlin, is the author of nine books, including Water: Asia’s New Battleground (Georgetown University Press, 2011), for which he won the 2012 Asia Society Bernard Schwartz Book Award.”)
“But this time, Modi has offered a calibrated and impactful response, pausing the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), the world’s most-generous water-sharing pact, which grants downstream Pakistan access to over 80% of the Indus Basin waters. Brokered in 1960 by the World Bank, the IWT has long been hailed as a model of cross-border cooperation – one that China has not emulated. (Though its 1951 annexation of the water-rich Tibetan Plateau gave it control over the headwaters of Asia’s major rivers, China has refused to enter into a water-sharing treaty with any of its 18 downstream neighbors.)” …
Last year, when India formally sought to update the IWT – to account for unanticipated factors like climate change, groundwater depletion, and population growth – Pakistan refused to negotiate. [Note this is clearly an opinion and not an objective discussion, I am sharing as an example of how someone sympathizing with the Indian side might view the issue.]
Now a discussion of some science from indianexpress.com (which I have no past experience or inside information about, but it passes my surface credibility instincts):
Kulkarni said studies carried out by him and his colleagues have shown that the glaciers feeding the Ravi, Sutlej and Beas rivers, located at a lower altitude, are retreating at a faster rate in comparison to the glaciers in Pakistan, located at high altitudes in the Karakoram range. As a result, the amount of glacial meltwater is projected to be much higher than the previous decades till the middle of the century, which would be followed by a significant reduction in water availability, he said.
“The glaciers located on the eastern side are located at a relatively lower altitude, and they are losing mass at a higher rate, thus retreating faster. As you go higher, in the Karakoram mountain ranges, glaciers are not losing mass, they are relatively stable. In the scientific community, it is called the Karakoram anomaly,” said Kulkarni, a scientist at the Divecha Centre for Climate Change, Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru…
Under the IWT, signed in September 1960, all waters of the Indus basin’s eastern rivers — Satluj, Beas and Ravi — are available to India for unrestricted use. Pakistan has rights over the western rivers — Indus, Jhelum and Chenab — and being upstream of its neighbour, it can only use waters of these rivers for non-consumptive use, such as to produce hydropower, navigation, flood protection and control, and fishing.
So the glaciers in the headwaters controlled by India have more flow currently because the glaciers there are melting faster, but there is less water stored there than in the headwaters controlled by Pakistan, and that would mean less flow in the future. Somewhat counter-intuitive. It also never occurred to me that China’s occupation of Tibet could be at least partly about controlling Himalayan headwaters. It’s hard to believe any of these countries and their politicians are making policy decisions based on long-term scientific forecasting and thinking. But maybe they are actually more rational and scientifically oriented than at least our current cohort of irrational and scientifically illiterate U.S. politicians.
from the somewhat fun, scientifically illiterate movie 2012, in which the Himalayas are flooded by more water than exists on Earth
