Comments on: What has posterity done for us? http://www.carboncommentary.com/2009/03/02/406 A critical appraisal of issues in the move to a low-carbon economy Mon, 06 Feb 2012 06:02:34 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Jose http://www.carboncommentary.com/2009/03/02/406/comment-page-1#comment-1639 Jose Sat, 14 Mar 2009 11:32:22 +0000 http://www.carboncommentary.com/?p=406#comment-1639 It's worth noting that we overcame all these factors in taking action on Ozone Layer depletion. Not a disimilar threat in my view but one which we were able to act on. Your points are well taken but I seem them as a multiplier effect on the root source of the inertia, not the source of inertia itself. It’s worth noting that we overcame all these factors in taking action on Ozone Layer depletion. Not a disimilar threat in my view but one which we were able to act on.

Your points are well taken but I seem them as a multiplier effect on the root source of the inertia, not the source of inertia itself.

]]> By: purposeful http://www.carboncommentary.com/2009/03/02/406/comment-page-1#comment-1585 purposeful Wed, 04 Mar 2009 19:50:31 +0000 http://www.carboncommentary.com/?p=406#comment-1585 <strong>What has posterity done for us?...</strong> Bookmarked your post over at Blog Bookmarker.com!... What has posterity done for us?…

Bookmarked your post over at Blog Bookmarker.com!…

]]> By: Ian Falconer http://www.carboncommentary.com/2009/03/02/406/comment-page-1#comment-1573 Ian Falconer Tue, 03 Mar 2009 12:30:51 +0000 http://www.carboncommentary.com/?p=406#comment-1573 There are three factors influencing inaction that you are not discussing explicitly (though they are implicit in some of your arguments). They are fear of change, perception of time and anthropomorphising natural systems. A bit abstract I know, but worth a mention. To me there is no surprise that disruptive technologies are difficult to implement. Change involves risk and risk brings fear, irrespective of economic barriers to entry or institutional encouragement. We are still small furry animals in so many fundamental ways. Secondly, man's perception of what sustainability actually means is skewed to the human life span, not geological or evolutionary timescales. A species that is conscious of evolution surely has a responsibility to at least attempt to think on that timescale. Doing so grounds us in the reality of our existence and all the possible threats to it. Lastly, the earth doesn't care whether we live or die, only humans care whether humans live or die. We may well imprint values on natural systems, whether aesthetic or economic, but those systems do not reciprocate. Every species is a different solution to the same problem. Every species has been undergoing co-evolution for the same length of time (4bn years or so). While we don't fully understand what that means to our lives and long-term prospects, to form opinions without that realisation suggests the same sort of egoistic disconnect as the European religious establishment were guilty of when they denounced the work of early astronomers. There are three factors influencing inaction that you are not discussing explicitly (though they are implicit in some of your arguments). They are fear of change, perception of time and anthropomorphising natural systems. A bit abstract I know, but worth a mention.

To me there is no surprise that disruptive technologies are difficult to implement. Change involves risk and risk brings fear, irrespective of economic barriers to entry or institutional encouragement. We are still small furry animals in so many fundamental ways.

Secondly, man’s perception of what sustainability actually means is skewed to the human life span, not geological or evolutionary timescales. A species that is conscious of evolution surely has a responsibility to at least attempt to think on that timescale. Doing so grounds us in the reality of our existence and all the possible threats to it.

Lastly, the earth doesn’t care whether we live or die, only humans care whether humans live or die. We may well imprint values on natural systems, whether aesthetic or economic, but those systems do not reciprocate. Every species is a different solution to the same problem. Every species has been undergoing co-evolution for the same length of time (4bn years or so). While we don’t fully understand what that means to our lives and long-term prospects, to form opinions without that realisation suggests the same sort of egoistic disconnect as the European religious establishment were guilty of when they denounced the work of early astronomers.

]]>