Forecasting the Future of Global Warming

There was a recent article in the New York Times about the record levels of carbon in the atmosphere.  This raises lots of thoughts in my mind and I wanted to get them down in writing.

Unstoppable Growth in Carbon
My first thought is this is unstoppable.  Carbon in the air will continue to increase.  The reason is not just powerful oil and coal lobbies.  It is the Rest of the World.  Even if the US gets as aggressive as progressive countries like Germany, it will not make a dent in the global carbon generation.  The US only uses 18% of global energy and the growth is coming from elsewhere.

Economy Tops Morality
The growth is bound to continue since economic growth is the key to power (pun intended) structures in the world.  Failing economies elect new leaders (or overthrow old ones).  So asking a country to cut back on cheap energy is a tough one.  And of course private industry is of course simply interested in the least expensive alternative, which is carbon fuels.

What is Moral?
Do we really have the right to insist that other countries do not have the right to grow their economies and advance?  The reason more carbon is going into the air is the world economy is growing.  More people in India, China, Brazil and other countries can afford cars, air conditioning, heat, etc.  And yes, they are not as efficient as we are.  But it took us until the 1960's and 70's with the Clean Air Acts to start to get our house in order.  The fact is these cultures will need time to get to that point, just as it took us time.

So putting more carbon in the air is raising the standard of living in the world. (You can see more on this topic in a blog I wrote a while ago about the book "Why the West Rules for Now").

The Negative Side
So there are plenty of negative things that will come from this.  In addition to Glacier National Park not having any glaciers in another 10-20 years (there were 150 there 160 years ago), there will be more natural disasters, lots of displacement of people and ways of life.  Watch some of these changes in the lakes and glaciers in these time-lapsed Landsat photos like the drying of the Aral Sea and you have to agree people's lives are going to be impacted negatively.

The Positive Side
I always look for the positive.  The most obvious is that the world is living better.

Another positive is obvious, there will be more countries like Germany who will encourage renewable energy.  This will spur innovations and new discoveries that we probably can't even imagine today.  And maybe some of these innovations will solve the problems anticipated.

The other positive is that the changes will spur new investments and advancements in the way people live.  For example, New York City will likely need investments similar to what Amsterdam and The Netherlands have been doing for hundreds of years to protect below sea level property.  These investments will mean new businesses and new opportunities.

Conclusion
There are two extreme positions on this topic of carbon in the air.  One end ignores it and says it is not real. The other end expects to return to 300 ppm.  I find both positions unrealistic.  The future belongs to those who embrace the change and figure out the new opportunities that will come from this.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ringside Winding Down

A year ago, a group of us met in a pizza parlor to discuss how we could bring the social web to every website and business. In January, we launched Ringside Networks with seed funding from Matrix Partners, one of the best VC firms in the country. By the end of March we released into open source an initial beta of our Social Application Server – a very ambitious project. We got some very positive reviews on our approach, our implementation and the need in the marketplace for every website to become social. We were ready for our Series A round of funding, and in late May we received a number of term sheet offers from the very best VC firms. As we were about to finalize our funding, one of the biggest non-evil Internet companies asked if we would have interest in being acquired instead. After a lot of thought and debate, we decided that the larger company would enable us to get our technology to market sooner and with more impact. The story sounds almost too good to be true. And it w...
Read more

Capitalism vs. the Three Legged Stool

Image
Wikipedia defines: " Capitalism  is an  economic system  in which trade, industry and the  means of production  are controlled by private owners with the goal of making  profits  in a  market economy ." This definition has always bothered me. I prefer a different model where there is equal recognition of the three primary drivers behind the success of a company: Owners Employees Customers I like to think of it as a three legged stool, where each leg is as important as the other.  One gets too large or small and the stool tips over. The free market is supposed to take care of Employees and Customers.  Employees because the Owners will create so many jobs that due to supply and demand, employees will receive competitive pay.  Customers because if the owners are not building the right thing, then they can go elsewhere. As someone who has helped to build about 10 startup companies now, I have seen the power in mak...
Read more

Galbraith Revisited

Image
To follow up on my post from a while ago, Galbraith sited 5 key reasons for the 1929 crash and following depression: 1. The bad distribution of income. 2. The bad corporate structure. 3. The bad banking structure. 4. The dubious state of the foreign balance. 5. The poor state of economic intelligence. To compare this to today: 1. Bad income distribution. 1929 - Top 5% received about 33% of all personal income. 1929 - Top 1% held 44% of all wealth. 2000 - Top 1% received about 20% of all personal income. 2004 - Top 1% held 34% of all wealth. Here is a picture of the real income gains between 1979 and 2005 by percentage. It is clear that the top income groups are gaining ground faster than lower income groups - creating an income distribution that approaches 1929. 2. Bad corporate structure. In the 1929 era there had been a large rise in a "vast structure of holding companies and investment trusts... In particular the dividends from the operating companies paid the interest on t...
Read more