This image is why announcing a climate crisis is a bullshit response

1. No we don’t deserve this.
   We need to rapidly reverse the Capitalocene.
   Let’s talk about the political means to do this.
   Who is talking shite, and who is acting responsibly to mitigate it for the whole people and not just a few rich polluters with expensive escape plans.
   Right now the existential crisis begs the existential question.
   Revolution or Extinction!
   https://situationsvacant.blog/2019/06/16/is-greta-thunberg-a-sock-puppet-for-green-capitalism/

   • I like this idea that of embracing our fate. We are all well aware of the facts about climate change. I go to professionals like brain surgeons for important advice like I’d go to climate scientists for important advice. I wouldn’t go to some one like Shaun Plunket for science advice. Trying to model complex ecosystems with simple common sense as people who listen to Pluncket do terrifies me.

     We shouldn’t accept our fate as set in stone. We should embrace our destiny. I mean I don’t think it’s nessecay to go full vegan to save the planet. Perhaps a diet that consists of 2/3 less meat and 2/3 more desserts is not such a bad trade off in my mind.

     Y’know if the ocean currents shut down we simply won’t be able to support a population of 8 billion or what ever it is. We will simply be forced to adopt the practices of climate survival and I will be expert way before in one else here. Good luck guys.

     • Sam is there a half way and if there seems to be one what is it.

       Animal produce are easily placed outside of our diet. What is the problem in doing that. The main ones being supply of good whole foods plant based and locally grown.

       That is what our major economics needs to be shaped around.

       Food banks, cooperatives, family shelters and state not corporate controlled.

       The NACT whingers live in a miserable world and subtract from our society. Consumerism mindset.

       They need to be put into harness and pull plows for community driven food supply program.

       Money will not get us out of this mess. Money has got us into this quagmire.

       Some basic economic shift and community accountability for its population can’t be avoided anyway so the present market means nothing as it is toxic.

     • Was it you and I discussing this on one of the Fortress Aotearoa blogs? Anyway. Yeah food. “Mess with 1st battalions food and they will give you a hiding” isn’t just a saying, it’s simple a simple commen sense analogy that describes a complex process with in kiwi society and democracy. And how that if the trade routes are backed up for what ever reason then the response is for NZDF to reestablish commerce. That has always been the role of NZDF right from the start when the Crowns forces confiscated Waikato agricultural land that kick started New Zealand’s international trade routes and betting on future prices. Y’know so we just need a new machine that makes the machines that produces the stuff we need for modern life to exist.

       So, right now the Zero Carbon act 2019 sets a target of a net zero carbon economy, So an economy with a frozen emissions target that doesn’t rise, but carbon emissions don’t have to necessarily fall either, and is offset with carbon credits. So currently many of New Zealand’s advanced propulsion research or energy and energy storage research are all in this research phase until there’s a need for it or renewed interest. All of which means that we are a long way from any renewed project that underwrites the sovereignty, security and prosperity in a modern way being a functional alternative kiwi style.

       Due to the lack of infrastructure the start up costs for renewable energy is very high. Figures for capital expenditure and operating costs are all speculative and no one really knows what a zero carbon economy really looks like, and I would argue that NZDF simply can not function around this type of contingency planning, and no one really knows the associated costs of implementing the zero carbon act into practice. Hence the race for DARPA’s prototype fusion reactor or Australia’s lithium ion battery technology may be over before NZDF gets started on complying with the zero carbon act.

       Perhaps the biggest threat to NZDF is its dependence on diesel fuel. In an institution where standards are everything and safety is high, the philosophy is rather conservative. It’s unlikely that defence personal will take risks and experiment with renewable energy. Hence the progress of these technologies is bound to be slow. During research phases, it’s easy to predict the benefits, but it’s often in testing that the real issues and hurdles become apparent.

       While in my opinion we (and by we I mean NZDF) should be in charge of New Zealand’s advanced fuel research, energy research and high speed technology research & development (marked top secret) sectors. The fact remains that NZDF is built up around diesel fuel, and it would be a dramatic shift and a very costly shift for NZDF to move to comply with the Zero Carbon Act on any sort of short timescale towards renewables.

       So bio-diesel and ethanol made out of forestry waste is something I believe has a lot of potential when paired with trading carbon credits. It’s also less reliant on international markets and more reliant on domestic production and safer. Y’know so a lot of rural towns up and down the mutu and landscape are right now watching their small rural towns give way to property speculators who can out bid local farmers and convert farm land into forests for carbon trading. It’s New Zealand’s boom industry and potential dotcom bubble. And one of the benefits from converting forestry wast into fuels for NZDF (mean while the rest of the economy does its market forces thing) is you need a pretty large workforce and tourism is a byproduct of the forestry sector which could boost rural economic growth. And converting biofuels is pretty academic process and a lot cheaper than rewiring NZs energy grid for renewables, IMO.

       Solar and wind turbines could be ideal for the environment but NZDF lives in a world that demands diesel fuel. At least for the moment the needs of NZDF can not be meet by renewables, just yet. There’s nothing to say that renewables couldn’t get to the stage of underwriting New Zealand’s sovereignty, security and prosperity. But in the meantime Y’know some one is just going to have to take a deep, deep look into bio-diesels and jet fuel made out of forestry waste.

       • Diesel is a short term gap filler even in a biodiesel form. It is a part of our

         All of the global efforts to harvest energy using wind and solar have not reduced fossil fuel consumption one iota.

         It takes fossil fuel to build solar harvesting technology and turbines plus the infrastructure to distribute and maintain / replace the plant all of which has a limited life on this planet with shrinking resources. A wasteful exercise which leaves a legacy of more pollution as it has to date.

         Using animal power to aid preparing soil for crops on the other hand is viable and restorative if we relearn the skills and techniques of a few generation past. Stationary traditional windmills built from mainly plant based material have shown to be efficient and frugal with resources.
         Both of these low tech solution are used daily around the globe but ignored by Western capitalism and the greed for more.

         Plant based food can be grown locally as it is in many emerging attempts to build locally manageable community efforts already in NZ.

         The survival approach to living is not one that will be launched on a national scale.

         NZDF will have little involvement at development level.

         Fuel for tractors will be more of a concern than fuel for tanks or troop carriers.
         Wood driven steam engines may serve us well in a medium term.

         There are small enterprises building steam engines and simple low cost boilers designed to burn wood

         Our food supply is just too energy intensive at present and that energy comes from fossil fuels and mainly oil.

         Processing milk for export, using fossil is plain nuts. Such market driven nonsense has no validity in economic or environmental terms.

         Most people just can’t join the dots.

         We need to change direction and use less energy. Using harvested energy is BAU and can only aggravate the dilemma.

         I don’t expect understanding of that situation to be common except among multi disciplinary science folk who have explored the data for years.

         The assumptions made by most are based on limited grasp of the interdependent nature of our Non Renewable Natural Resources, potential food resources and fertile soil, pattern of human population growth to date, extent and slowing of industrialisation, accumulated pollution all leading to a sharp decline before long.
         No magic bullets.

         Meanwhile small communities can cobble together local food supply and shelter which may not rely on “modern” material.

         Many stop gap measured will be tried no doubt and much energy and resources wasted.

       • I am sorry. I don’t want to do an essay with lovely well placed links. I have given my thoughts on this and that subject to do with waking up from the climate crises many times.

         I just want to say that it is my position that we must do the opposite and go full factory farming as opposed to going full green foods, that’s the stuff we should have been doing 50 years ago. Instead I think we should be brining as much of the food production back into the cities as possible so to leave the landscape to recover on its own. I also believe that the urban sprawl must stop and city boundaries contained as they are now and cities build up if they want to increase immigration and decenity.

         New Zealand is lucky in that the warm air from the pacific hits kiwi mountain ranges and the Southern Ocean to produce lots of rain. We have the largest high altitude non-predatory rain forests in the world. That means every time a non-native species is introduced parts of New Zealand’s natural flora and fauna disappear. So all the introduced species just has to be cleared out. Y’know? destroyed. Those cattle numbers, they have to by over a halve. And with that decrease in cattle numbers. And we kill all those introduced species and take those resources and put it into more chicken and pork production because they use less oil and water and grow a shit ton of vehicle hydroponic horticulture and reduce our carbon footprint. When will lose New Zealand’s rainforests to economic diseases we simply will not be able to sustain a population of 4 million people any other way.

         • Locally based permaculture in smaller lots with diverse crop rotation and community planning.

           Factory farming and mono cropping just amount to more waste and soil destruction.

       • Okay then. It depends what you’re trying to grow be it bulbs, tubes or leafy greens and vine ripened or whether you’re using hydroponics, aquaponics or a green house. Designing systems can be quite fun. Guess I’m a real geek like that.

         There’s about 1-2 million kiwis living in rural settings and about 2-3 million living in cities. Do you honestly think rural New Zealand could cope with a doubling of the population in the next 20 years or how ever manyyears? No they can’t! It can’t. What then should we do with the climate refugees and how do you intend to control birth rates.

         So among the confusing permaculture enthusiasts, emerge some interesting problems. From what I can tell most people would struggle to cook more than 3 recipes and the rest would just die through not being smart enough to grow there own food and feed themselves.

         A few underlying problems should now start to emerge. Overpopulation is a serious issue and will lead to serious consequences for all of us. In the 80’s Chinese Communist leaders tried to engineer the problem away in a very Thano’s (Avengers Villian) kind of way by implementing the one child policy. This controversial social engineering was designed to ease China’s resource problems. The fears of lack of energy, poverty and fears over famine drove their politicians to desperate policy. Sure trying to squeeze 4 million kiwis into a system designed for 2 million is pretty cruel like Thano’s snapping his fingers but desperate policy happens like this when demand outstrips supply.

         We’ve already been living with desperate policy. With the gradual drift of migrants to Auckland which has created some pretty crazy property prices. The average house price now is $1 million’z. That’s about 20 times the average salary of a normal worker. The doubling of New Zealand’s population since the 80’s has also caused deforestation due to the need for more farming to sustain this new growth in population. Then there’s the Havlock Water fiasco where people died from drinking contaminated tap water – https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11955292

         Thankfully these problems of exceeding the carrying capacity of land is contained to certain parts of New Zealand. So permaculture in a rural type commune will only solve certain issues and exacerbate others. With the appearance of whole families and high income individuals rural land will only increase in price as Auckland property prices ease. A quick reevaluation in property prices will have to occur as well as reevaluating income taxes. Auckland Landlords would have to scramble to find new tenants and cover overheads as populations migrate, and high value areas like Parnel will repopulate quicker while towns and cities that suffer mass migration might just die out.

         Realestate prices is really the last of the problems because all sorts of essential services will have to be restaffed because everything from police to trash removal will be completely understaffed. The government would quickly have to reorganise to fill in gaps and reorganise each departments priorities and resource needs. There will be massive amounts of people power shortages and less essential services will have to be neglected. For instance DOC may have to abandon many of there programmes for pests and parks. Or the government may conclude that it is a better use of resources to have DOC and NZDF absorbed into the police in order to keep stability in all of the confusion that would follow from revolutionary change.

         Another consequence of reorganising society and cutting it straight up the middle is the NZX stock market crashes from a halving of the national income as high payed workers give up future high tech industries for a shovel and a donkey. Almost every listed company will have to drive down valuations and many businesses will have to close because of lack of leadership and people power. Then the police will have to insure that all essential services and sectors are kept running and producing. Then there’s the more complicated process of working out who has the right skills and how to pair them with jobs and resources, Y’know and maybe we can put all those lawyers to work on something useful.

         This would be a greater problem for the Census Bureau to figure out who went where and why. This would be a difficult task for locals to team up with bureaucrats and figure out what’s going on and sweep empty houses and pick up vulnerable pets that are left alone. Basically reorganising the economy with out thought to what people want and do will be complete chaos for decades and a lot of essential services that we are use to will be out of order and the energy sector will shudder from lack of staff, and food grossers go out of business through lack of delivery drivers, and airlines cancel flights through lack of pilots. But slowly things would stabilise and kiwis would prosper as New Zealand has many times before through out history. In the wars of the 1800’s the Māori population was crushed from hundreds of thousands to only 50,000. All though a great amount of art and culture was lost during this time and it took 200 years for Māori to regain its population, life expectancy and quality of life during that time actually did increase.

         It’s highly likely that every one would have to go back to school and relearn and retool from high paying jobs to poor farmer. After all, this will be the worlds first post capitalism policy. While kiwis will have to sacrifice their wealth and income so they can feel good about the landscape, only to find that Auckland landlords have repopulated there old mansions in Parnel with foreigners and there bank accounts completely empty. It will be very strange because once again New Zealand will not be able retrain and retool kiwis for the jobs of the future as we once failed to do during the Rogernomics neoliberal period. So over a relatively short term New Zealand would not be able to cope with mass migration under a permaculture policy. It will cause panic, unrest and most likely a lot of death. Hundreds of thousands to millions will be wondering around. The homeless will be taking over shelters and draining food banks.

         It will take a humongous effort from the government to turn city slickers in rural folk while integrating immigrants in with everyone else. Massive resources and supplies will have to be fund to feed all those people on a much, much wider scale. The riches and space that everyone has become accustomed to will once again be redistributed. Everything will stabilise and get back to normal after some strange times but I think permaculture is still a possibility.

         But as you can see these are just a few of the plumbing stocks and issues that go on in the background which is a problem when you’ve got 4 million people being moved around by political decisions, and going to sleep high income earners and then waking up poor dirt farmers and will put a huge amount of unnecessary stress on society.

   • capitalocene? or the plasticene?

2. What is the point of school kids ‘striking’ for action on climate change, when their middle class parents continue clinging to their wasteful, polluting lifestyles, driving SUVs and so everywhere, still buying heaps of one way plastic packaging and doing stuff all to really stop the waste and pollution?

   We live in the age of tokenism, where ridding retailers and customers of cheap see through plastic bags is celebrated as an achievement, but most plastic is still accepted in the form of endless packaging, of stuff that is used all the time and then thrown away, some into pretentious, insincere ‘recycling’ schemes, that are mere down-cycling, shifting the end pollution only into the future.

   People are not honestly facing up to the climate crisis that is looming, they carry on as usual, talking about one thing, doing the opposite. Hypocrisy galore, BS galore, that is what most of modern day humanity is about.

   People are not forced to drive cars, not forced to buy and use plastic, they simply accept it, and do nothing much against it, many seem quite ok with the waste and pollution.

   • Kids that really care should pressure their parents first of all, tell them they want a bicycle, not a ride in a car, they want solar panels on the roofs, they want an energy neutral home, and so forth, and choose to buy organic food and products.

     Only if they do that can they be taken seriously, not by simply ‘striking’ and demanding others to do stuff. The government only does what the majority support, or at least condone or put up with, blaming the government is bypassing the useless parent generation that does not front up. Blaming business is only partially constructive, as business sees opportunity, some products can be chosen, so why blame those for not changing, when you can make change yourself and tell others, join in?

     That is the constructive way forward, if anybody would care, and then change will come. Striking is only productive to a very limited degree, only raising some awareness, but doing so also turns many others off.

     So do young people and those older ones who care (a minority) actually really care? Then take action and do not wait for others, they will not act, unless they see others lead by example.

     • Many kids are doing just that now.

       Turn off all advertising and redeploy staff on community local food supply.

       The more kids that strike the more BAU will be challenged.

       • Sadly mist kids do not realise how much they waste and pollute themselves, with their modern day consumerist urban lifestyles.

         Few have any real understanding of how food is produced and how the stuff they buy at the supermarket is made, packaged and transported, mostly using fossil fuel for energy and resource for making stuff.

         And this alienation is part of the problem.

         Would they care also about how their computers and gadgets are made, using labour and materials that are hardly employed under decent terms and mined in safe and environmentally sound ways?

         • The dependence they have been taught by their parents generation is hardly their doing but revolting against the the problem seems to be something the do understand.

           Does there parents generation or do the just blame the messenger.

     • @Marc your argument is just an attempt to diminish the credibility of the kids and it’s wrong.

       Here’s the simplest way to explain how large scale change works: People force governments to regulate business.

       The kids should NOT be wasting time on getting their parents to do anything, they need to put every ounce of their energy into forcing governments all around the world to do their job properly.

       After that happens people won’t need any encouragement to make changes in their lives – in fact they’ll feel really inspired to make a difference

       As soon

       • So where is the people’s force then???

         • I humbly suggest that the peoples “force” evolves from their understanding and collective agreement.

           Blogs may assist as a source of shared thinking and learning.

           Leaders need to emerge.
           Mike Joy is a source of learning.

           • Most humans are driven by the force that wants survival, and by greed, that is my observation.

             Only a minority truly cares and is prepared to think logically, objectively and carefully, before making wise decisions.

             That is a huge problem we have, and it led to human civilisations collapsing before, or being destroyed before.

             • Human want as a driver has little place as a survival priority yet is quoted as immutable. Its like saying we all are helpless and cannot change which is untrue. Many have made significant change but the bulk seem to refuse to adapt. There is your problem.

               • That was hard to read

3. So the Censor is at it again, blocking most my comments, those that make much sense even, appalling TDB.

   • Sorry, should have gone below Mike Treen’s post.

4. Two Options

   This graph leaves two general options, or should I say, calculated hopes.

   1. Move to less vulnerable zones and try to live of the land.

   2. Try to grab the wheel by the spokes by bringing a radical platform for climate resilience to parliament.

   System Change. Now.

   ….A disturbing thought….

   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKigK4MwTZA

5. Wind/storms, temperature and tides must also play a big part in oceanic flow though these are probably impossible to monitor fully let alone predict into the future. An article in RT yesterday described yet another government declaring a climate emergency (Trudeau declares emergency one day and opens up a massive oil pipeline the next). It’s good to see vocal support for change, and governments can’t phase out fossil fuels overnight, but Trudeau’s particular declarations just exposes the climate farce (I still think we should be focussing on pollution in the first instance before worrying about if and how the weather is changing. We can open a window in a hundred years if the temperature in summer has increased by one degree but we can’t drink water laced with heavy metals nor live in a nuclear wasteland). Chris Hedges in essay (Truthdig) writes about the continuing threat to indigenous and settler Canadians from this tar sands oil pipeline.

Comments are closed.