Showing posts with label climate change. Show all posts

Climate hazards too much for the current governance paradigm to handle


Life on Earth is under enormous stress from a rapidly changing environment and climate. A recent study in Nature show how human societies are already impacted by a changing climate in at least 467 different ways. For example, increased water evaporation and increased air capacity to hold moisture, due to warming, have lead to extreme drought in places that are commonly dry (California, Middle East and Southwest Asia) that have lead to higher risk of heatwaves and wildfires. Warmer ocean waters enhances evaporation and wind speeds thus intensifying downpours and the strength of storms and risk of flooding from storm surges aggravated by sea-level rise. 

The cumulative changes from a disrupted climate are so massive and the speed at which they are occuring so rapid, only comparable to when a meteorite killed the dinosaurs som 65 million years ago, that many species will have a hard time adapting. Species must either tolerate the change, move, adapt, or face extinction. We know that species on land are moving polewards by 17 km per decade and marine species 72 km per decade. And just like terrestrial mountainside species are moving upslope to escape warming lowlands some fish species are driven deeper as the sea surface warms. This in turn impacts human well-being and is already forcing people to migrate.


The current socio-economic paradigm has not changed in accordance with occuring biophysical changes and will not be able to handle the mounting pressure unless it adapts or transforms into something new. A rapidly changing world cannot be navigated by concentrated, rigid, hierarchical, short-term social systems that resist change and tries to maintain status quo. We know this to be true of all living systems, including human societies. Civilisations fail to adapt to changing environmental conditions because they try to maintain high levels of sociopolitical complexity (large armies, bureaucracies, social stratification, occupational specialisations) and focus on expansion instead of dissolving into decentralized, smaller, more flexible and innovative units that are able to respond to change more effectively. That's why corporations, with global scope, are doing better than nation states. And why local communities and municipalities are responding more effectively to changes than governments. 

However, the limiting conditions, resource availability, under climate change make adaptation in place difficult since entire regions are becoming increasingly uninhabitable. Thus forcing people to migrate, just like other species do. This in turn puts extra pressure on national governments as social tensions increase over remaining resources. States that fail to provide essential services for their citizens eventually foster uprisings and risk internal conflict and collapse. We already see this occuring in the Middle East (Syria, Yemen, Iraq, Isreal/Palestine, Egypt). 

Unless governments take seriously the need for fundamental change of the sociopolitical system they will be unable to handle to shift to a post-carbon society able to cope with climate change. Trying to expand and pile on further sociopolitical complexity to the system will not work.
Climate Hazards

The Middle East on Fire

Source: FAO Aquastat, Oxford Analytica


When people from the West and its mainstream media try to analyse what's happening in the Middle East all they talk about is armed conflict and war. But never do they mention the deep fundamental drivers of energy, water scarcity and climate change

Many countries in the Middle East are extremely vulnerable and on the verge of break down because they cannot deal with mounting economic/energy and environmental costs. Only a little disturbance is needed to make these states fall apart and then all hell can break loose. It has nothing to do with what type of people they are, its simply a matter of survival that brings out the worst in people. When water resources dry up, agriculture collapse, there's no way to make and income and food becomes unaffordable people tend to riot no matter which country. Thats what happened during the French revolution, after 1 million died from famine and peasants turned on the ruling elite.

Displaying a complete lack of understanding of the situation, and utter lack of morality, the imperial powers decided to try and grab the regions oil resources by getting rid of Saddam Hussein but instead created a power vacuum that was filled by al-Qaeda extremists who rapidly transformed into the Islamic State. Then followed by a proxy war over resources and power between many different actors in the region. Never ending fighting with no real benefits for anyone involved. The US "divide and rule" strategy is an utter failure. 

Intensifying the fight against extremists doesn't deal with the fundamental drivers of why they exist in the first place. Instead its producing more extremists as the conditions that laid the groundwork for the rise of IS are worsening. The long-term ecological crisis of especially water stress is worsening in the region. Severe drought conditions intensified by water mismanagement and climate change have led to failed crops and lack of clean drinking water. Leading to increasing food import reliance and pushing people to move into the cities where there are no job opportunities, creating tensions. Then government subsidies for food and fuel get slashed as state revenues from falling oil exports decline. This at a time when oil and food prices have steadily risen and have had major spikes on the international market. That's the perfect storm

Absolutely nothing have been done to build local capacity to cope with extreme weather or manage ecosystems more sustainably. The conditions of deepening water scarcity are projected to intensify in coming years and decades. Meanwhile population keeps growing. And that's why the future in the region looks bleak. The US idea of turning Iraq into a booming oil economy is simply nonsense. Even if there is still more oil left in Iraq, compared to Syria, Yemen or Egypt, they too will face peak oil within a decade or so. Hedging your entire future on oil is utterly idiotic and as we witness very destructive.

Yemen reached a production peak in oil in 2001 and has now practically collapsed. Acute water scarcity and lack of food is reaching levels of mass famine. Nationwide fuel shortages are routine and economic activities have come to a halt. Livelihoods are destroyed, people starve and live in misery, and yet the US and UK support Saudi Arabia's bombing campaign of the country. 


The Conflict Shoreline by Eyal Weizman. Shows the aridity line, areas of about 200 millimetres of rainfall a year, considered the minimum for growing cereal crops on a large scale without irrigation, and western drone strikes in red dots


Egypt has become a net importer of oil and food and is struggling to pay its bills for a growing population. Poor water management (irrigation, pollution, dumping of waste) and growing demand has led to water scarcity in the country. Cairo residents don't have access to water for large portions of the day. The U.N. World Water Development report for 2018 warns that Egypt is currently below the U.N.’s threshold of water poverty and dramatically heading towards absolute water scarcity (500 m3 per capita).

Even if we are able to limit global warming to 2 degrees the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region will become unbearably hot and many parts unlivable in the coming future. Prolonged heat waves and dust storms will plague the already arid region. Destroying much of the region's agricultural potential. Researcher are expecting a climate exodus from the region. Of which we have seen only the beginning. 

Earth System Sensitivity

Annual global temperatures from 1850-2017. The colour scale represents the change in global temperatures covering 1.35°C. Credit: Climate Lab Book, 2018



The Earth System

Earth is a complex dynamic system. Earth system dynamics can be understood in terms of trajectories between alternate states separated by thresholds that are controlled by nonlinear processes, interactions, and feedbacks. For example, over the past 1.2 million years Earth has remained in a state of glacial and interglacial cycles. The current temperature change at 1,2°C above a preindustrial baseline has already pushed Earth out of the next glaciation cycle.

Furthermore, Earth is a water planet and incredibly inert. The time lag between cause and effect, between the heating and the final change in temperature, is large. The full warming effect of a large emission pulse may not be felt for several decades or centuries. As a result, the currently observed change in temperature represents only a part of the eventual expected increase in temperature resulting from already released greenhouse gas emissions.

Exactly where a potential planetary threshold, between a livable state and a hothouse state, might be is uncertain. Steffen et al. (2018) suggests 2°C as the critical limit, stating that passing two degrees could trigger tipping elements in the Earth System that could cascade, triggering further tipping elements, causing rapid warming beyond human control. 

Thus, actions taken over the next decade could significantly influence the trajectory of the Earth System for tens to hundreds of thousands of years and potentially lead to conditions that would be inhospitable to humans and to many other species.

Main point: Earth is tracking a hothouse pathway



Earth System Sensitivity


How the climate system will respond to increasing CO2 levels depends on time-scale and which feedbacks we consider. Taking into account fast feedbacks such as clouds, water vapour, snow cover change, and aerosols we get a climate sensitivity of about 2-4.5°C to a doubling of CO2. But this does not include slow longer-term feedbacks such as ice sheet disintegration, changes in carbon cycle (e.g. permafrost thaw), vegetation cover changes, or changes in oceans ability to store carbon. If we include all feedbacks, both fast and slow, we get a Earth System Sensitivity of 3-6°C.  

Estimated temperature changes from fast and slow feedbacks. Source: Schmidt, 2016



Studies of past climates in Earth's history show that long-term feedbacks play an important role in Earth's overall climate. For example, during the mid-Pliocene some 3-4 million years ago, when global mean temperatures were about 3-4°C warmer than preindustrial and sea levels 10-25 meter higher than today, CO2 levels peaked at 450 ppm. Our current concentration levels stand at 410 ppm CO2, but temperatures have only risen about + 1,2°C, so Earth is likely to warm up at least to similar levels eventually. And we would over millenia have sea-level rise of up to at least 10 m.

The reason why most people don't talk about ESS is due to the fact that its presumed to take centuries or millennia for these slow feedbacks to kick in. But the issue now is that the rate of change is many times faster than any natural rate in Earth's history. Only comparable with catastrophic rare events such as the meteorite strike that took out the dinosaurs some 66 million years ago. This means that longer-term “slow” feedbacks such as melting of ice sheets and changes in permafrost carbon stores are starting to occur now, much quicker than expected, and will likely impact humanity during this century.

Which means that on top of some more warming from rapid feedbacks that has yet to be realised due to thermal inertia we also face the consequences of slow feedbacks already coming into play. These biogeophysical forces are incredibly strong and could become dominant in driving the system. Thus limiting the range of potential future trajectories.


Main point: Earth's climate is more sensitive to forcings than standard scenarios of future warming assumes


Biogeophysical Feedbacks


Some of the key negative (dampening) feedbacks such as carbon uptake by land and oceans and reflectivity by ice and snow that have maintained the Earth system in favourable conditions are weakening. We are now witnessing ever more systems close to or passing a threshold, tipping point, causing abrupt change. The challenge with tipping points is that they're often easiest to identify in retrospect.


For example, Arctic sea ice crossed a tipping point in 2007 and is now in terminal decline and could be gone during the summer by 2040 or earlier. Due to the loss of reflective ice the dark oceans are now absorbing more energy, in turn accelerating regional warming, further melting ice and snow. It also influences jet stream patterns causing more extreme weather events in northern latitudes. The loss of Arctic sea ice has also flipped the Barents Sea from acting as a buffer between the warmer Atlantic and colder Arctic ocean to now being essentially an extension of the Atlantic.

A warmer Arctic also leads to thawing of permafrost in the region. Before believed to be a rather gradual process, new studies show abrupt (decades) thaw in Alaska and Siberia due to the formation of thermokarst lakes. Releasing CO2 and CH4 to the atmosphere and accelerating warming. 

The Greenland ice sheet is now melting rapidly, the ice caps melting irreversibly. Accelerated surface melt has doubled Greenland's contribution to global sea level rise to 0.74 mm per year since 1992–2011. The interior ice sheet could cross a tipping point slightly under 2C warming. Global sea level rise has accelerated to 4.8 mm/yr

The Amundsen Sea sector of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet has already crossed a tipping point and is melting irreversibly. This will likely trigger a collapse of the rest of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet on decadal time scales. Leading to at least 1 meter sea level rise this century. Partial deglaciation of the East Antarctic ice sheet is likely for the current level of atmospheric carbon dioxide, contributing to about 5 metres of sea level rise in the first 200 years.

Melting freshwater pouring into the Atlantic has slowed down the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) that transports heat from the Gulf of Mexico to Northern Europe. Slightly cooling northwest Europe and piling up heat along the southeast waters of the US. This in turn increases temperature differentials between tropical and sub-polar waters that can drive stronger storms. 


Main point: Abrupt changes are already occurring in the climate system, passing 2°C would likely prove catastrophic



Human feedbacks on the system


As I have explained above, the climate system is much more sensitive to even small perturbations than most people think. Another way of showing this fact is to look at human impacts on the climate before industrialisation. 

Since the rise of agriculture, human activities on Earth have played a role in shaping ecological and climatic conditions. There is good evidence to suggest that the rise of agriculture actually had a positive (amplifying) feedback on early climate, hindering a new ice age to occur. 

Atmospheric CO2 and CH4 increases during the last few millennia are anomalous compared to preceding interglacial periods. The same time period when agriculture spread across the continents and emitted greenhouse gases by clearing forests for crops and pastures, domesticating livestock and burning crop residues. Suggesting that emissions were large enough to warm climate and prolong the natural interglacial warmth.



Ruddiman et al. (2016) show evidence for what seems to be a trend brake in naturally falling CO2 and CH4 concentrations some 6000-5000 years ago, towards increasing concentrations most likely driven by anthropogenic forcing.


We know that agriculture spread across the world during this time period. Agrarian civilisations started to flourish along the Nile, Tigris, Euphrates, Indus and Yellow River some 7000-5000 years ago. Cultivation was dependent on flow and ebb cycles that in turn relied on seasonal rains and melting snows packs in the mountains. These formed the conditions for production of surplus food (energy) which allowed societies to expand and grow more complex.



Ruddiman and colleagues show how the development of irrigated rice paddies in Asia and widespread livestock domestication some 5000 years ago coincides with increases in methane emissions. Just like today, forests were cut down, vegetation slashed and burned to make way for agriculture all across Eurasia, Africa and the Americas. This generated CO2 emissions which in turn impacted climate. 

Archeological data records a shift from forest cover to more open vegetation in northern and central Europe that began som 6000-5000 years ago and was complete by the start of the industrial era. Similarly, early deforestation was likely caused around the Mediterranean by extensive land use by Greek and Roman civilisations. In Britain and France, forests had already been reduced to near-modern levels by 2500-2200 years ago.

East central China had widespread forest cover until 8000 years ago, followed by a persistent decrease especially after 6000 years ago. Archaeological sites, proxy for population density, in central China increased thirtyfold between 8000–7000 and 5000–4000 years ago. By 4000 years ago, coal had come into use as a fuel source in the Yellow River Valley because of lack of wood. Deforestation of southern China during the spread of rice agriculture after 5000 years ago added to the ongoing CO2 increase.

In India, sedentary farming and clearance emerged between 5000 and 3500 years ago, with especially rapid settlement expansion on the Deccan Plateau and in the Ganges plains. 

All this evidence provides support for the idea that large-scale deforestation led to a rise in CO2 during the middle and late Holocene. Many models have missed this because they assume low population numbers and small forest clearance per person and thus show low emissions. But this doesn't fit with historical evidence of larger per capita forest clearing 2500-1000 years ago than during industrial times. Probably because land use was inefficient and required large amounts of land but became more intensive over time as agricultural methods changed.



The simulation above indicates much greater deforestation during the millenia preceding the industrial era in agreement with pollen evidence. In contrast, standard reconstructions that assume small constant per capita clearance during preindustrial times show 40-80% of forest cover still persisting in Europe by the year 1800. Meaning massive deforestation must have taken place within the last 200 years to explain current low forest cover. But this doesn't fit with historical evidence of pervasive reforestation in western and central Europe since 1800, not deforestation. 

Main point: The Holocene climate was partly a consequence of human feedbacks on the climate system


Climate Change Adaptation


Changes in temperature and precipitation have always impacted people by affecting what they could and couldn't grow to harvest food (energy) for survival. 

The climate stabilised about 7,000-5,000 years ago coinciding with the flourishing of agrarian civilisations along the Nile, Tigris, Euphrates, Indus and Yellow River. Cultivation was dependent on flow and ebb cycles that in turn relied on seasonal rains and melting snows packs in the mountains. These formed the conditions for production of surplus food (energy) which allowed societies to grow more complex.

But agrarian societies have always been vulnerable to climatic changes. Sudden cooling events or extended droughts caused widespread famines and sometimes collapsed entire communities. Especially vulnerable were those who relied on single crops or undermined the ecological base for survival for example through intense deforestation. 

For example, a sudden cooling that happened around 3,700 to 3,000 years ago greatly influenced populations in Asia. The most dramatic changes were seen in high latitude and high-altitude areas in Mongolia and the Tibetan Plateau. Crops started to fail and widespread famine took hold. This forced people to migrate, shift to more cold resistant crops, or turn to pastoralism. Cooling temperatures also affected Northern China between AD 291-360, a time when the Chinese capital was relocated from Xian to what is now Nanjing, in the south. Again, people would have had to adapt by migrating, changing crops, herding cattle or trading. It was not an easy process and lots of conflicts arose.

The difference now is of course that the rate of change is much more rapid and that its becoming hotter, not colder, which humans have had less of an experience adapting to. Furthermore, there are no virgin lands left to move to when one region becomes uninhabitable, the world is full and most ecosystems severely degraded. Using migration as a tool for adaptation doesn't work that well anymore. We have also become heavily reliant on just a few crops and undermined diversity by eradicating species. This makes our current civilisation very vulnerable to a changing climate.

Main point: Humans can adapt to a changing climate but this time the rate of change is much more rapid and migration is not a good option


Abrupt thaw of permafrost lakes in the Arctic




There's an ongoing debate in the scientific community regarding the threshold value, tipping point, for frozen grounds in the Arctic, permafrost, to start thawing irreversibly. And whether released methane from the permafrost will occur gradually over time or more abruptly. There is more stored carbon in frozens soils than we currently have in the atmosphere.

There are basically two camps, some believe the permafrost to be stable with a threshold value around <3°C while others claim 1,5°C is enough to start thawing large parts of the frozen grounds and lakes in the Arctic. 

For a lay person this is quite confusing, but it simply means that there isn't enough data to know for sure and so some scientists are more or less conservative in their estimates. Then there is the question of using climate models to try and predict potential threshold values or doing actual fieldwork and extrapolating conclusions from that. To my knowledge, climate models have a pretty bad track record of capturing highly non-linear dynamics in the climate system. For example, Arctic sea ice passed a tipping point in 2007 and is now in a death spiral but models had predicted sea ice to remain until the end of this century. Pretty high margin of error if you ask me. Also, we are learning that there seems to be differences in how permafrost soils and lakes thaw. 

According to a recent field research study funded by NASA of thermokarst lakes, formed by thaw of permafrost below the soil, in Alaska and Siberia the potential for abrupt thaw (decades) is now likely and irreversible. As the Arctic warms more of these lakes are appearing and growing in size which expands the thaw below. It has been estimated that they now cover about 20% of northern permafrost regions. This could double the release from terrestrial landscapes by the 2050s. A carbon cycle feedback that is not yet included into climate models.

"Within decades you can get very deep thaw-holes, meters to tens of meters of vertical thaw"

This is bad news for climate change mitigation efforts. This feedback is significant because methane is about 30 times more potent than carbon dioxide as a heat-trapping gas. And the lakes are expected to thaw even under the lowest IPCC emissions scenario, adding further warming. Since we most likely are already committed, warming yet to come from current emissions, to 1,5-2°C this extra warming from the permafrost reinforcing feedback could take us above the 2C threshold for potentially catastrophic warming. Unless we rapidly decarbonize our economy and try to take out carbon from the atmosphere by for example large-scale reforestation efforts. Time is not on our side. We need a climate emergency plan.

Converging crises - Synchronizing failure

Climate mayhem, falling net energy and debt deflation

We are in for another global oil supply crunch from 2018 onwards that many experts say will trigger another severe economic recession if not depression. A fragile global economy, with a massive debt overhang, cannot handle too high oil prices. A large portion of most countries budgets, and individuals budgets as well, are spent on fossil fuel energy. That's why rapid price increases (over $60 per barrel) crushes demand and flips the economy over into a recession. In turn, leading to the bankruptcy of non-profitable unconventional energy ventures like tar sands and fracking. Thus further reducing supply over the long term.


Since the early 1970s global energy costs have steadily increased. Even if oil prices have oscillated with recurring spikes and drops, as the economy tries to adjust, the overall trend is a steady increase. This is due to the fact that extraction has become increasingly difficult and costly, yielding ever lower return on investment. The problem of course is that we built our economies based on cheap energy that yielded relatively high net energy to society. But that is a thing of the past and now we are struggling to afford our current lifestyles. Thats basically why we started this massive global debt bubble, pulling forward future consumption with cheap credit. But costs will eventually have to be paid.

We have now reached a point when all the energy and resources available to society are required just to maintain our existing level of complexity. A phenomenon puzzling many commentators, calling it secular stagnation. All these factors have made the global economy so fragile that even small perturbations from climate change, wars or falling credit could tip the system over into a deflationary spiral. With economic inequalities already increasing, increasing social instability, this is a recipe for disaster. 

No economy will be able to recover unless it transitions to non-fossil fuel energy sources and writes down its debts. And even then net energy will likely be much lower, meaning that society still has to lower its overall consumption of energy and resources. Implying a voluntary measure to reduce organizational complexity in society. Something few previous civilisations managed, perhaps the British did when they dismantled their empire. 

Implication for food security



Global food prices have increased steadily since 2005, about the time of global peak oil, now at 1970s highs or above. Further exacerbating the problem is booming populations, freshwater scarcity and climate change. 

Today’s population levels depend on fossil fuels and industrial agriculture. Especially vulnerable to rising food prices are people with low purchasing power and without subsistence farming to fall back on. We know that food price increases that reach 200 on the FAO index have led to riots and unrest.

Many countries in the Middle East are especially vulnerable due to convergence of several different crises. State revenue losses from falling oil exports, due to depleting resources and higher domestic consumption, with a need to cut food and fuel subsidies usually make people very upset. Especially when, as is the case in the region, people have no way of making a living coupled with overexploited water reservoirs and eroded soils. As if that wasn't enough, scorching heat and significant risk of recurrent droughts makes the entire region utterly unsustainable. Without energy they have nothing. The chances for further conflict and wars in the region are high. Massive, continuing, migration flows towards Europe is to be expected. 

The infamous ‘Doomsday Clock’ is again at two and a half minutes to midnight  -  the closest since 1953

Faster than forecast - Melting Arctic



Half a truth is often a great lie. - Benjamin Franklin

Abrupt climate change in the Arctic

Ice covers 10 percent of Earth's surface and helps moderate the planet's temperature. Glaciers, sea ice and ice sheets around the world are melting at an alarming rate. Much faster than climate models had predicted, like what Peter Wadhams, expert on ocean and ice physics, discusses in the video clip above. Climate models fail to interpret the real climate system because they ignore nonlinear dynamics, like key carbon cycle feedbacks and tipping points, crucial to the real system.

The Arctic (North of 60° N) is a key strategic region of global importance. Changes in the Arctic impact Earths energy balance, cloud formations, global wind patterns and ocean currents, release of methane, sea level rise, phytoplankton blooms and much more. As seen in the image below.

Component state variables and dynamic processes operating in the Arctic. There are strong couplings, feedbacks and nonlinear behaviors arising from their interactions, which together define the Arctic system. Source: Arctic System Synthesis, 2018


A recent study published by NASA shows how, since 1958, Arctic sea ice cover has lost about 66% of its thickness, averaged across the region at the end of summer. Old ice has shrunk more than 2 million square kilometres and today 70% of the ice cover consist of ice that forms and melts within a single year. Thinner, weaker seasonal ice is much more vulnerable to weather than thick ice and can easily be broken apart by storms. 

That's very bad news for our planet as darker ocean waters absorb more sunlight and triggers further warming. Melting sea ice has already contributed to about 25% of current warming but could add double that amount when the Arctic ocean starts becomes ice free in summer. That's a very strong reinforcing feedback process that accelerates warming which in turn accelerates further ice loss and so on. While in theory, with some sort of risky geoengineering, it would be possible to reverse this trend I really doubt we can do much to stop it. We can't even stop our greenhouse gas emissions from growing every year. No, its too late for Arctic sea ice, what we see now is a death spiral. 

Warming in the Arctic occurs much faster than at lower latitudes, a process known as Arctic Amplification. Arctic temperatures have increased at least 3 times the rate of mid-latitude temperatures relative to the late 20th century, due to multiple reinforcing feedbacks. Even if global temperature increases are contained to +2° C by 2040, Arctic monthly mean temperatures in fall will increase by +5° C. The Arctic is very likely to be sea ice free during summer before 2040, and probably much sooner than that. Not like the IPCC report says, once in every hundred years.

This will impact mid-latitude, like Europe, weather events by causing the jet stream to slow down and become more meandering which causes more persistent weather patterns as high or low pressure weather systems to get stuck in one place for an extended duration. Like what we saw this summer in Scandinavia with persistent heat wave, drought and forest fires i Sweden.

We have also detected a slowing down of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (AMOC) during the past 150 years since the little ice age, and that enhanced freshwater fluxes from the Arctic and Nordic seas weakened Labrador Sea convection and thus the AMOC. Its been suggested that the lack of a subsequent recovery may have resulted from hysteresis (i.e., instability of thermohaline circulation) or from 21st century melting of the Greenland Ice Sheet.

Another recent Nature article  improved a sea surface temperature proxy for AMOC strength. Their proxy AMOC fingerprint consists of a cooling in the subpolar gyre region due to reduced heat transport, and a warming in the Gulf Stream region due to a northward shift of the Gulf Stream, indicating that AMOC has been steadily weakening since around 1950, strengthened shortly during the 1990s and 2000s, then weakened again. In the short term this could cause a small cooling effect in western Europe while warming the ocean waters in the gulf of Mexico, southeast Americas. Not mentioned in the latest IPCC report. 

Last time Earth went through an interglacial period, and global temperatures were less than 1C warmer than today, sea level rose to +6-9 meters and extreme storms were common. Sea level rise has accelerated as ice sheet loss on Greenland and West Antarctica has accelerated. Also not accounted for in the latest IPCC report.

Huge slabs of Arctic permafrost are slumping and disintegrating, sending large amounts of carbon-rich mud and silt into streams and rivers. Permafrost decay is affecting 52,000 square miles in Canada—an expanse the size of Alabama. According to researchers with the Northwest Territories Geological Survey, the permafrost collapse is intensifying. Similar large-scale landscape changes are evident across the Arctic including in Alaska, Siberia and Scandinavia, the researchers wrote in a paper published in the journal Geology. Arctic permafrost caps vast amounts of old, geologic methane (CH4) in subsurface reservoirs. Thawing permafrost opens pathways for this CH4 to migrate to the surface. The concentration of methane in the atmosphere has risen sharply - by about 25 teragrams per year since 2006. Sub sea methane clathrates could also be seeping out. None of these feedbacks are included in IPCC climate models. 

Melting permafrost is altering the landscape in northern Canada on a grand scale. Credit: Wikimedia
In conclusion, putting too much trust in IPCCs climate models and scenarios is NOT recommended. One should not forget that the IPCC is a political institution and subject to political leaders meddling in the science. I have per email questioned the Swedish meteorological institute that use those models and scenarios as a reference for climate change in Sweden. When I questioned the use of IPCC material due to the fact that they don't include nonlinear dynamics I got a very angry response back that I was dead wrong. Really? So its just me and lots of other international climate experts that are worried that IPCC understates risks and uses incomplete information to draw ridiculous conclusions? Like the fact the we are already committed to 1,5C and most people think its impossible to stay below even 2C. Or the fact that all the low carbon scenarios are based on assumptions of carbon sucking technologies that we haven't tested yet. I'm I really the only one that worries about this? No, of course not. Just read the recent report by David Spratt "What lies beneath - The scientific understatement of climate risks" or take a look at the video clips and you will understand why people are worried.



The struggle to survive a collapsing society

Mohamed Ataya, a 31-year-old Syrian tends to his plants on the rooftop of his damaged building in the Syrian rebel-held town of Arbin, in the eastern Ghouta region on the outskirts of the capital Damascus last week. Ataya, who used to be a professional football player before the war, cultivates seeds for sale. Reddit March, 2017.

The crisis of civilisation


People seem confused, deluded by mainstream media into to wishful thinking, about the current state of affairs in the world. But there is that uneasy feeling that all the alarming reports about peak oil, climate change, desertification, species mass extinction, freshwater scarcity, dying coral reefs, melting of polar ice caps and toxification of our environment are piling up. In fact, we are currently living in a time of a collapsing civilisation, the end to wasteful resource use and reliance on fossil fuels. Everything is becoming increasingly expensive leading to falling standards of living and a majority of the world's population who can barely afford food, shelter or gas for transport anymore. When food becomes too expensive people riot and revolt against the ruling elite. Conflict arises and sometimes it breaks out into wars. Syria being the prime example. For Syrians who are still within the country's borders a total and rapid collapse has long since been underway and is continuing to this day. Look at the man watering his seeds in a city of concrete ruins. Its utterly sad and beautiful at the same time. That is reality. And we will be seeing more of it as entropy starts moving in from the periphery of the global economy towards the centre.




Since it's clear now, almost fifty years after The Limits to Growth (1972) was published, that humans will not take preemptive action to avoid a collapse of the system, the global economy will have to shrink. And the process has been underway for some time now, especially since 2008, it's just that some regions will feel it much harder and sooner than others. Nobody is safe from its crushing effects, that's why building resilience is important for every community on Earth.


People who are well aware of the seriousness of our current situation are suggesting radical ideas because they know there will be mayhem as hundreds of millions of people will be displaced due to a rapidly degrading biosphere and unstable climate.

Why not create a climate passport, actually, give it to all those people who cannot live anymore in their original homes, which gives them access to all the countries who destroyed their home, like the United States” - H.J Schellnhuber (Climate Change: A Last Call for the Planet, 2018)



Well, sure... that probably wont happen but it shows the inequality of the issue and where, to the centre of the global economy, people with the possibility to do so will be fleeing as their own areas are devastated. The world's richest 10% account for half the carbon emissions while the poorest 3.5 billion account for just a tenth. 

Now, climate is not the only issue here, it's just one of the symptoms of a full world. Syria suffered lost state revenue from declining oil exports due to a peak in production, massive population growth, reduced food and fuel subsidies, at the same time as they had the worst drought in 900 years. It's a combination of converging crises that crushes nations that lack resilience. This is only one way that collapse manifests. But it will impact every nation, either direct or indirect, and cause instability and hardship for ordinary people while a small percentage of the rich continue to overexploit remaining resources.

Complacent adults and brave children

The Roman government kept the populace happy by distributing free food and staging huge spectacles to divert attention from a empire in decline, i.e. to prevent people from revolting. And that's basically the same short-term policies current governments employ to appease the public and distract them from collapse. The public may still voice their grievances but according to history they won't revolt until the bread and circuses stops. A surprisingly effective strategy it seems, even today.

Marx once said that "religion... is the opiate of the masses", meaning that it reduced people's immediate suffering and provided them with pleasant illusions which gave them the strength to carry on. Nowadays, such plesasant illusions are not only provided by religion but also by the entertainment industry, media and medical science in form of legal narcotics.

People were more worried about peak oil and accepted the science of climate change some years ago but then denial increased and they got meme fatigue, tired of reading about it. Looking at google trends on the search word peak oil we can see how interest was high from 2004-2009 but then dropped off significantly.
In the case of climate change the interest is more stable over time but when we look at related topics like global warming we see the same tendency of meme fatigue and denial increasing over time. And similar queries with the biggest increase in search frequency, not top search words, relate directly to climate denial and ignorance on the topic. Especially coming from North Americans, which is a reflection of how indoctrinated they are.



However, while many westerners seem in denial or complacent about climate change the topic seem to be of growing interest in nations like Kenya, Bangladesh, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, India and Malaysia. Countries that are already hit hard by a changing climate, for example, 40% of Indias population suffer from acute water scarcity. 




So, my theory is that the “comfy” delusional westerners won't revolt until the bread and circuses stop. Not until costs rise even further, in form of direct taxes or indirect by inflation/deflation, and food subsidies stop coming will people rise up and demand change. Despite the gross inequality in modern societies and falling living standards people stay passive like sacrificial lambs . They are simply too comfortable in the current system. But there is yet hope. The younger generation, that have nothing to lose, may yet drive some change. Lets end with "Gretas cry for help"


Fragile systems under abrupt climate change



We know from our, humanity's, ancient history on this planet that rapid climatic changes ruin agrarian societies. Especially vulnerable are societies that mismanage their resource base and/or live on the margins, for example, in extremely arid regions that are wholly dependent on predictable precipitation patterns. But even societies that manage to survive periods of, say, extreme drought may suffer as they become increasingly fragile to any perturbations to the system.

A changing climate is not bound by any borders and often occur within whole regions or on a global scale. When highly populated areas undergo climatic fluctuations it often cause people to migrate in search of better lands. Which can collapse other, already fragile, societies as the extra pressure from the inflow of people pushes the system over the edge.

This is demonstrated in the German documentary How Climate Made History (2017), above. I highly recommend it and other videos about climate on the youtube channel Hazards and catastrophes. More informative than American or British counterparts.

What can we learn from history? 

Well, first of, Homo Sapiens hunter-gatherers, a generalist species, could adapt easier to extreme environmental conditions than neanderthals which were restricted to specific food sources, methods of hunting, or climates. This ability may have been the result of humans cooperative nature. It had nothing to do with brain size or intelligence.

Second, a relatively stable mild climate and fertile land, with ample and reliable sources of freshwater, plant and animal life, where instrumental to rise of agriculture. People settled and surpluses (food energy) from agriculture could be stored, freeing up time from simply collecting food, and giving rise to specialist occupations. It also gave rise to hierarchies, inequality, as some had more of a surplus than others. Humans also started worshipping the sun (source of energy).

Third, thriving agricultural civilisations were more vulnerable to changes in climatic conditions than nomadic peoples. When the climate changed rapidly and rainfall became unpredictable or rivers dried out people were forced to move in search of new lands to survive. Especially if they managed their lands unsustainably, degraded the land, and were more vulnerable to shocks.

Fourth, in highly populated regions such drastic changes in climatic conditions impacted civilisations both directly and indirectly. High pressure on the land from a large population made societies more susceptible to shocks. As people migrated from poorer lands into other richer areas they tended to destabilise societies that could have survived longer if not for the extra pressure. It also led to unrest and conflict over remaining resources.

Fifth, when civilisations collapsed people spread out to look for resources and knowledge was lost. What we call a dark age occurred.

Implications for modern society

Climate change is occurring rapidly and it is uncertain to what degree we will manage to adapt. We still live in agrarian type societies and are dependent on predictable rainfall, some regions more than others of course. Desertification and water scarcity is a major problem in many parts of the world already. Many societies are extremely fragile to shocks due to overexploitation and land degradation. Crop yields are falling. Seas are rising. Taking for granted that fossil fuels will save us is not a good idea for several reasons. Some societies may succeed better than others in managing their resources but will be vulnerable in other ways, e.g. to climatic changes, financial shocks, trade shocks and/or migration flows. Today there are no new/empty regions to populate once other areas fail. Resources are limited on a global scale.  Tensions over scarcity are rising. Some societies, like Syria, have already collapsed. While others, where most of the remaining resources are located, are having issues with immigration. It will be a very difficult journey for humankind. But as history shows, even if civilisations collapse, humanity survives. We are a tenacious species.

Blowing past 2°C, headed for 4-5°C?



Wishful thinking is today so prevalent that it even has infected the brain of people who are trained not to be biased, scientists. I mean sure, economists have always been blissfully ignorant and wrong in their predictions but what I’m talking about is more widespread. It's a deep denial among the people researching our most critical issues: climate change and energy limitations. 

You see it in the media when scientists discuss oxymorons like “green growth”, or proclaim that we can “decarbonize our entire economy within 20 years”, or that “agriculture will save biodiversity”, or that “lab grown meat will solve our food problems” and so on. It's nothings but grasping at straws in a world that is on fire. Such delusional statements are more about belief systems and identities reflecting values than science. It's also because climate scientists have been told by behavioural psychologists not to scare people as it may hamper action. But isn't it odd that the profession that claims to be devoted to curiosity and truth seeking wants to restrict exploration of future possibilities and censor people due to how it might come across to others?

Our climate reality is harsh. Most scientists tend to underestimate our predicament because they are too conservative, not the other way around. But now it's becoming clear, predictions made by oversimplified climate models have underestimated the changes we're already witnessing due to climate change. Earth, the biosphere, ecosystems and human systems such as the economy are dynamic complex systems and their behaviour is nonlinear. A model that does not include critical feedbacks in the system will not be able to accurately predict results in the real world. This has now become obvious as real world observations about the sad state of our climate is pouring in. Climate change is accelerating.

Sea ice in the Arctic is melting at an alarming rate and looks to be completely gone summertime some time in the coming years (2022?), accelerating global warming further. Ice and snow reflect about 80 percent of the Sun’s energy back into space while the darker ocean and land will absorb 90 percent of that heat. The albedo effect due to vanishing sea ice is already responsible for about 25 percent of global warming (Pistone et al. 2014). Greenland shed about 280 gigatons of ice per year between 2002-2016 and the island’s lower-elevation and coastal areas experienced up to 4 meters of ice mass loss (expressed in equivalent-water-height) over a 14-year period (NASA, 2018). Accelerating rates of ice loss also implies accelerated rates of sea level rise. Certain cities will have to be abandoned. In ten years prior to 2016 the Atlantic Ocean soaked up 50 percent more carbon dioxide than it did the previous decade, speeding up the acidification of the ocean (Woosley et al. 2016). And the list goes on and on with increasingly worrisome observations.

With an increase of carbon emissions of 2% in 2017 (Carbon Brief, 2017), the so called “decoupling” of economic activity from emissions is not yet making a net dent in global emissions. Even if we start reducing emissions now it's not going to be enough to prevent dangerous climate change since there is about a decade lag between emissions and resulting warming (Ricke & Caldeira, 2014). We have already (95% probability) gone past the 2°C warming point/UN target (Raftery et al. 2017), and are  likely headed towards 4-5°C (Steffen et al. 2018). That's because the Earth system is dynamic and is more likely to continue warming until it stabilises at another point, which in the Earth's past occurred at about 4-5°C warmer than pre-industrial levels. By the way, it is generally accepted that a 5 degree rise in temperature is not compatible with human civilisation as we know it. At the same time, perhaps a complete collapse of civilisation could prevent the worst climate change outcomes (Garrett, 2012). But no one is going to promote or talk about that in public. Even if diminishing returns on resources, especially oil, likely will shrink our civilisation in the near future, whether we like it or not (Turner, 2014). 

No one likes either outcomes of this predicament and that's why most experts are basically just arguing over different options of removing carbon from the atmosphere through geoengineering. Using machines to suck out carbon, however, is not feasible both in terms of cost and scale and could cause more harm than good. Current technology would have to be scaled by a factor of 2 million times within 2 years. That's just not going to happen. Biological approaches to carbon capture such as planting trees, restoring soils, holistic grazing, and growing seagrass and kelp appear far more promising. 

Anyway, the real issue for ordinary people is how to adapt to a world that is increasingly hostile while using less energy? Not wasting time listening to myths about "green tech" or believing in fantasies like "colonising Mars" or "geoengineering the entire planet"

Tipping points in social animals

A hysteresis window between an environmental condition (heat) and group behavior (degree of infighting) in social spiders as they respond to heat stress. Groups that have been in an agitated state (red) tend to remain agitated, whereas calm groups (blue) tend to remain calm over a common temperature range. Credit: Mesa Schumacher


Complex adaptive systems

We know that there are tipping points in many different complex systems. Although they may be hard to study and exactly define. For example in large systems such as the global economy or climate system. A recent study shows beautifully, in simpler ways, how social animals that lives in communities also have tipping points, before the function of the system changes fundamentally.

In this case the research focused on the communal spider which lay their eggs, spin webs and share their prey in cooperatives colonies, from Massachusetts to Argentina, in relatively cool temperatures. However, only until 31 degrees C, after which they start to attack each other. Suggesting a tipping point where some small perturbation can cause an abrupt and dramatic shift in the behavior of the system.

Reversal is difficult

As ecologists familiar with complex systems all know, once the system crosses the tipping point it will be difficult or perhaps even impossible to return to its previous state even if environmental conditions are reversed. This phenomenon, called hysteresis, implies that a system can have two very different stable states and which state the system is in depends on environmental conditions and its historical dynamics.

Its common that conservation efforts claim that returning to previous environmental conditions in a ecosystem will lead to a recover. However, this is not necessarily true if the system has already crossed a tipping point, in which case you may have to rewind the system to a much earlier set of environmental conditions to drive its recovery. As demonstrated in the studied heat-stressed spiders, turning temperatures down just below 30 degrees C did not alter the behavior of fighting. Not until temperatures dropped down to 28 C degrees did the communal spiders stop fighting again.

Swedish Election 2018

Opinion poll for August 2018. Social Democrats (S), Left party (V), Green party (MP), Moderate party (M), Liberals (L), Centre party (C), Christian party (KD), Sweden democrats (SD), Feministic party (FI), Other (Ö). Source: val.digital

The five most important issues to voters in the 2018 election are: health care (44%), education (26%), immigration (25%), law and order (24%), and environment (23%) according to a poll in the newspaper Daily News (DN, 2018).

That environment/climate change is now one of the five top issues for voters this election is due to the extreme heat, droughts and massive wildfires this summer. The extreme weather this summer hit farmers really hard and exposed the governments lack of quick and effective response to natural catastophies. The heat dome over Scandinavia from May to June this summer has strong connections to climate change and a broken, stuck jet stream.

Such extreme weather (heatwaves, droughts, floods) is now part of the new norm. Something many people thought was years away or naively believed wouldnt happen here in the far north. It has shocked both scientists and ordinary people and made it an important issue for the election.

Some of the better proposals for green investments come from the Green party and the Centre party, tax-switching from labor to polluting/consumption and investing in public transportation. However, adaptation efforts are way behind in Sweden and no party has proposed any solutions for that. Its basically up to each municipality to implement solutions and enhance preparedness. As such, some regions may be better prepared to handle extreme weather than others.

As for how the election turns out we still have to wait and se until 9th of September. An educated guess is that the Sweden democrats will climb to become the second largest party instead of the Moderate party. Similar to what has happened in the rest of Europe, the once maginal extremist nationalistic party becomes popular due to increased dissatisfaction and lack of real change. This is very unfortunate in many ways. Not only because their policies are non-scientific and mostly rubbish but it will also hinder further investments into climate change mitigation and adaptation.

Despite this summers extreme weather bringing the issue of climate change and managing our resources better to the top of the election it may turn out that not much will change or even become worse with a new government where the Sweden democrats have more power. 


Heat dome over Sweden pushing people to the limit

After a busy year I have finally found some time to write again. I also feel the need to portray the very unusually dry and hot summer that we have had here in Sweden.




I'm sure most readers have already heard about how Sweden have struggled with lots of wildfires this summer. This is due to a heat dome forming over Scandinavia because of a broken and “stuck” jet stream (as explained in the video above) leading to high pressure weather over most parts of the country for two months (May-July) straight with very little or no rainfall. Only 13 mm (0.51 in) of rain from the beginning of May to late July. And temperature soaring to >30C, which in some regions is 20C above the norm. This have also been the case where I live, in the south east, where many are suffering from the prolonged heat and drought. 

Many elderly are weakened and suffer heat strokes since buildings are not equipped with cooling air conditioning. Hospitals have had to cancel operations due to the heat and systems overheating. The death toll this summer will be above the norm.

Farmers have had a bad harvest due to lack of precipitation and don't have enough hay to feed their livestock. Many have had to slaughter their cattle. The government has promised 1.2 billion kronor (117 million euros, $137 million) in aid to help farmers hit hard by the drought. But many farmers think it's too little too late to keep them from going bankrupt and it doesn't help against the lack of rain. 

Lots of wildfires have been raging in the middle part of the country, forcing people to flee and emergency measure to be put in place. Approximately 20,000 hectares" of forests have burned up. Some counties have banned outdoor fires and put restriction on water use. The government has had to ask other EU countries for help to fight the many wildfires both from above and on the ground. Volunteers have also played a  major part in the effort to evacuate and put out fires. 

Groundwater levels in smaller lakes in the south east are below average and falling. It will take a lot of rain or snow to recover to normal levels.

Air conditioners, pools and fluid replacements are out of stock in every supermarket. Electricity use is way above normal and nuclear plants might have to be closed down due to the water that's used to cool reactors now being to warm.

Trains have malfunctioned and there has been lots of train cancellations all through the summer. 

Many animals suffer as well and people have put out water bowls in their gardens to provide relief.

The only good thing about this summer is that climate change now will be a part of the election campaigns for this fall. The question is, however, if people are willing to pay for the changes that are needed. Redesigning our infrastructure will not be cheap but its a must for the future.