There are NO JOBS on a dead planet.
My and Your CO2 catastrophe (concerning CO2, we must speak of a catastrophe / see below) began 25 years ago, when the tundra in Russia began to defrost (an unquenchable fire / solution: see below), and gigantic amounts of methane gas ( methane gas is, beside CO2, a gas that raises the temperature on earth) was released into the atmosphere. This worried me a lot and some initiatives were taken (inter alia the creation of a webside), but the general public wasn't ready. Tens of years of action were lost. In 1989, Time Magazine nominated The earth as 'Planet of the Year: the endangered Earth'. Other magazines made similar warnings, but generally speaking those who are opposed (the people of the money (as well companies as workers representatives) and the people who put their own little world above everything, even above the rescue of the world of humans) succeeded to have the CO2 catastrophe not to be placed on the agenda. 25 years later the majority of people is still not ready, but we are running totally out of time.
Footnote: when we deal with the CO2 catastrophe, we only speak of CO2 in order to complicate things no more: in fact there are other important gases that are responsible for the global warming (more specificaly methane: the gas that is produced by the melting of the Russian tundra in gigantic amounts).
Perhaps You have noticed, depending on Your local climate, that Your climate has become different than Your local climate of the last hundred years: very hot summers, a lot of less freezing days (in my local climate, Flanders, we were used to winters of -20 ° C, now since some years we have winters without freesing themperatures at all, spring has started 1 month earlier, summer lasts one month more, newspapers say: 'the mildest winter ever', 'the hottest summer ever, .. ..Insects, worms and birds, belonging to warmer regions or even to tropical regions inhabit since many years already our Western Europian regions.
A catastrophe : This actual climate can be nice for gardeners who can try out subtropical plants in a previously temperate climate, but there is something else going on that must worry us all: the temperature can't continue to rise infinitaly. At 60 ° C, we are all cooked and humanity stops to exists; before that, large areas of land will become uninabitable because too hot to live in, resulting in enormous tension between people.
So, the CO2 problem has become a CO2 catastrophe, because nothing less than the survival of humanity has become at stake.
The utmost Urgency : Moreover, the situation becomes very urgent: the oceans who have absorbed the last years an enormous amount of CO2 surplus, have become saturated and can't take up vast amounts of CO2 anymore: so, the temperature rise will accelerate considerably in the years to come (my assessment for my region, Flanders: + 20 ° C in januari (winter) 2030).
The reason why there is little or no action from Your government: the reason is You: almost all actions have an effect on Your and their finances (see below) and people are blinded by money and averse to action when their money is concerned. Furthermore, most people are egocentric, which blinds them in their thinking about matters other than their job, family, friends and some limited other interests. Our political system is populated by people whose world is only the world of money and who are under great pressure caused by organizations who want still more and more and more. This behavior leads to the extinction of humanity and isn't any more possible. On the contrary, we all shall have to take back. Our estimate is a take back of 30% shall be necessary for everyone. Please be patient when Your government takes some CO2 steps.
The goal to be reached is very simple: a CO2 equilibrium . Only a CO2 equilibrium (= CO2 production by humans + CO2 production by nature (volcanous + forest fires) must equal the CO2 intake by plants) can stop this catastrophical outcome. Consequently, there is no time to waste and strong action is very urgent. Every citizen mustn't wait for his government (altough the most alarming situation is known to them, very little action has been taken) and can start to undertake the necessary actions (please look at the chapter 'What can You do Yourself'): this will give some more time to the goverments to become aware of the disaster.
Everyone can easely folow the state of the CO2 catastrophe: as long as the temperature continues to rise, there is no global CO2 equilibrrium and the CO2 catastrophe continues to be a threath to us all.
Absolute prior yfor the CO2 catastrophe: We even dare to say that all other issues (social achievements, turnover, permanence of employment, ...) are irrelevant to and by far secondary to the absolute necessity to solve the CO2 catastrophe. If you're thinking that the CO2 catastrophe can be solved without any effort of Yourself, makes a huge mistake. It is normal to human behavior that You try to make some excuse about, however look at Your children or at Yourself if You are under 60, when You decide on Your attitude to the CO2 catastrophe (we think (and many do so) that the CO2 equilibrium has to be reached in 30 Year (starting from 2018) if we all want to survive; we also believe that postponement or delays can't be corrected anymore. This means a global decrease of 3% a year:
So we think that the CO2 catastrophe justifies a temporary state of emergency and a cabinet similar to a war cabinetshall have to be installed in each country untill the country has reached his assigned CO2 budget.
A global human CO2 budget shall have to be installed: the CO2 production by men (= the global human CO2 budget) + CO2 production by nature (vulcanoes + forest fires + the emissions of methane by the tundra) must be equal to the CO2 uptake by plants (mainly trees, because the oceans have become saturated) .This global human CO2 budget shall have to be allocated country-by-country . Within a country, a CO2 budget per head and per company shall have to be introduced.
A fair distribution key of the global human CO2 budget country-by-country should be the population of a country (situation 2010, because at this time, the absolute necessity of the CO2 stabilization should have been clear to all responsibles). It is of the utmost importance that later population growth (by birth or by immigration) isn't taken into account for the distribution of the global CO2 budget, because a stop on population growth is an absolute necessity and the most important tool for the achievement of a CO2 equilibrium. The only way to achieve a responsible behavior of a country, is to make a country pay for it's lack of responsibility: this means that a country that doesn't follow the population growth restrictions, shall have a lower CO2 budget per capita (see below ).
Futhermore a CO2 budget per capita and per company shall have to be distributed within a country.
These measures implicate some consequences : - The more rainforest is destroyed, the less global CO2 budget can be divided amongst the nations and can be divided amongst industry and people; - The higher the population growth of a country since 2010, the less CO2 budget shall be available for industry and people of that country; - Volcano eruptions, large forest fires and the emissions of methane by the tundra shall have to be compensated by a reduction of the human CO2 emission: Mother Nature can't take any more automaticaly take care of it;
We believe that the only workable method for the solution of the CO2 catastrophe and for the distribution of the global CO2 budget and of the distribution of the country's CO2 budget is this (bottom up method): starting from the corona lock down and the CO2 production at that time of a country, the leftover (if the country's pro capita part has not been fully taken up) of the country's CO2 bugets can be allocated to the industry and the inhabitants (The corona pandemie has learned us one thing: measures deemed impossible (the working at home of residential employees, the restricted use of cars, the cancellation of all flights,….) can be instored without the collapse of countries). This method has the advantage that CO2 levels are under control without the endless waiting for the success of dark and unsolvable numerous negotiations. All other methods (eg the reduction of the CO2 emissions without taking a start from the corona lock down , the top down method )have failed totally (let's be honest, globally zero has been achieved today) and shall never work, because using the top down method, everybody stays in his comfortable position of no-agreement and quick decisions and quick actions can't be respected.
The CO2 catastrophe and nature conservation
Most people think that solving the CO2 catastrophe has something to do with nature conservation and not with themselves. Nothing is less true: nature (life on eath) has restored itself already 5 times after the 5 mass extinctions. So we should not do it for nature. Humanity however wan't recover after an extinction. On the contrary: we think that 30% of the government budgets should go to the CO2 transitition (the CO2 survival switch) in order to get a CO2 balance and supplementary creation of government budgets is totally out of the question, because this means a supplemetary creation of CO2. So choices shall have to be made in the actual government budgets: eg 95% of the government budgets for nature conservation (except the budgets for hardwood planting) shall have to be transferred to the CO2 transition. The CO2 balance is far more important than eg the maintaining of the diversity in nature. Achieving the CO2 equilibrium is in the upmost direct interest of self and human beings en has (directly) NOTHING TO DO WITH nature conservationas an end in itself (indirectly some measures necessary for the CO2 equilibrium (eg the preservation of tropical rainforests) coincide with nature conservation, but is never an end in itself.
What can we expect from people and from our goverments on the CO2 catastrophe?
It is in peoples nature to bend the world to their will (mostly in the dark) and to defend or even increase ones status, power and money. This happens mostly by compromises, through with give and take on both sides and achieve part some of te wishes. We have seen this during the Corona crisis: again and again politicians try to find a compromise with scietific necessities, because they want to be reelected, because the interest groups make them do so or because the system considers it in its and in the countries interest . Finding compromises is the essence of the job of a politician, more specifically between a problem and finances (individual and / or public). This is a very slow and ineffective process.The pressure for the financial aspect comes from the interest groups (both from business as from workers).there will be a CO2 balance or there will be nothing any more for anybody . Political compromises shall of course have to be used in the allocation of the global CO2 budget among countries and in the allocation of the national CO2 budget among business and people, if the bottom up method is used.
Furthermore, governments are used to and find it in the countries interest to deceive other countries using false figures and using false securities: on the contrary, concerning the CO2 catastrophe, it is no more in the coutries interest to cheat and misinform, because the result of such an attitude (the disappearence of humanity) also effects one's own country in its existence and in its basic interests. That's why countries must accept mutual inspections on CO2 output. These inspections must The result of these controls must be made public, thus alowing the world's population to know exactly what they are dealing with. The corona epidemic has shown that in case of global threats, the world is standing nowhere and we are running out of time (we think we've another 30 years). Of course,
Concluding: only an emergency government of national Union, including all parties, declaring special powers, can solve the CO2 catastrophe in a country and organize THE CO2 SURVIVAL SWIITCH .On a global scale, the 3 superpowers must make a deal that binds the world. Al conflicts must be put on hold until we reach teh CO2 balance.
CO2 and economics :
Broadly it can be stated that a large part of the consumption (including a lot off unnecessary and avoidable transport, eg vegetables and fruit produced by tropical countries for the Western European markets) and some parts of the production (including the many transports) are linked to CO2 emission.
Consumption: certain consumption patterns are responsible for huge amounts of CO2 emissions and should be forbidden (see also: 'What will definetely have to happen?): - plane journeys: the AEROSPACE INDUSTRIE is A SUICIDAL INDUSTRIE.
- heating with fossil fuel (gas and coal) or with wood (wood is at present the only source of temporary storage of CO2: this storage should be preserved a maximum period and the captured CO2 should return in the athmosphere (by natural decay) as late as possible: burning would mean a very quick return of the captured CO2 in atmosphere; - cooking with gas or on wood; - non-seasenal food: food imported from remote (more than 100 miles) locations by planes or by other means of transport hould be forbidden or at least ton which a high dissuading rate of taxation should be applied; - holiday get offs other than by train (CO2 neutral) or other than by electric car; - all transport based on fossil fuels (petrol, diesel or gas) or based on a tracking system (such as trams); - sea going ship transport based on nuclear energy (?); - water to drink: only tap water (the transport need for bottled water is too high; - all transport based on fossil fuels (petrol, diesel or gas) or based on a tracking system (such as trams); - sea going ship transport based on nuclear energy (?); - water to drink: only tap water (the transport need for bottled water is too high; - all transport based on fossil fuels (petrol, diesel or gas) or based on a tracking system (such as trams); - sea going ship transport based on nuclear energy (?); - water to drink: only tap water (the transport need for bottled water is too high;
The reduction of transport of food, water and of other consumer goods is the easy way out for the reduction of CO2 consumption by the consuming people and should be a constant point of attention and a priority ;
The transport of food, water and other consumption goods by means of CO2 producing methods, must be passed on to consumers by taxation, shouldn't provide for indexing the cost of living (indexing the cost of living is in terms of CO2 pointless);
Production: - The production of electricity based on fossil fuels should be prohibited; - Each country should make an inventory of the CO2 production methods and make a choice between in order to stay within the CO2 budget;
- Transport: transport by rail using electricity as a power source should be chosen (CO2 neutral); transport by road should use an electrical tracking system (suche as used by tram);
- All transport should be inventorized and minimized if not possible by electric power source (eg wine: transport of only the liquid, bottles to be filled and cleaned locally;
All transport other than by electrical power source of goods should be significantly taxeted; those transport taxes should stay out of compensation methods (eg indexation), oherwise they are CO2 pointless;
Industry :
- Make the office work of the clerks obligatory at home;
- Unless a wide range of sources of CO2 (see below 'Absolute necessities): and of methane (see : 'the isolation of the tundra') can be neutralised, the CO2 budget of a country shall make it necessary that some CO2 / methane producing activities can no more take place : it is in the interest of these activities to develop production methods who create less or no CO2 / methane or are able to neutralise the CO2 / methane output. It is also in the interest of those industries that the government creates budgetary CO2 space ( only electric tranportation, no more flying, ... ( see further : 'What can your government do ?').
Other issues :
1) Discipline : a society that shall have to realise the 'CO2 survival transition' shall have to introduce discipline in the acting of her politicians and of her habitants and can't tolerate laxity, because of the utmost urgency of the catastrophe . A strong discipline shall have to be created in order to realise the sometimes very unpleasant measures.
2) High quality education : the enormous CO2 challenges necessitate a high educational level of the population , because of the great need of engineers, technicians and organisation specialists.
3) Economy in thinking and acting
4) Economy in the use of the surface : solving the CO2 catastrophe (the co2 equilibrium) makes it necessary that there is a storage maximization of CO2 in hard wood (oak, beech, cedrus, or tropical hardwood) and other trees with a very long shelf life, in order to keep the CO2 as long as possible out off the atmosphere . Everybody shall have to take action in order to achieve this goal : building shall have to be this way : a minimum occupation of the land. 95 % of the open space (the open space other than used for agriculture) shall have to be used for hardwood planting; parking spaces obligatory in the building. In the other use of land (roads, factories,...) : the utmost care for the most economical use of the land.
Some observations :
I think gardeners and farmers are in an excellent position to follow the evolution of local climate : in my area ( Flanders, the northern part of Belgium), climate evolved in 5 years time from climate zone 7b (-15 °C in winter) to climate zone 8b ( 2 or 3 short periods of - 5 °C, and that's it). We can now grow nerium oleander (-5 °C), cordilyne australis (- 5 °C) , olea europaea without damage ( 0 °C) and magnolia campbellii permanently outside, wich was totally unthinkable 5 years ago. In the past , eastern cold from the Moscow area gave us the coldest temperatures in winter ( I used to follow Moscow temperatures in order to foresee freesing temperatures), but that's over now. We have only a few cold spells coming from the north pole (2 or 3 times - 3°C / -5 °C for a short time.
I am sowing now Jacaranda mimosifolia, because I exspect in 5 years time a minimum temperature in winter of 5 ° C.
Some CO2 thinking:
(1) The collection of coarse household waste : what is the best CO2 practice ? 1 truck collecting the coarse household waste house by house by house OR 1000 cars bringing the coarse household waste to the recycling center ?
We have extensive experience and can be proud of 10 000+ completed projects.
We value each client and always respond to feedback throughout our cooperation.