Climatology Matters
Mar. 7th, 2026 09:01 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
tcpipWhilst the terrible and illegal war in the Middle East expands with increasing loss of life, it seems almost avoidant to concentrate on climatology matters as I have done for a lot of the past week. Still, one should be concerned with ongoing, creeping long-term issues as well as the literally explosive, immediate ones. Further, as the ever astute critic of political power and its abuse, Clinton Fernandes points out part of the reason that the United States is at war with Israel is to control China's access to high-sulphur Iranian oil, which accounts for over 14 per cent of its supply. National security is yet another reason why the rapid transition away from fossil fuels is so critically important for any country that desires to be truly independent, and why any country with internationally significant supplies of oil that is not part of USian imperialist control (e.g., Venezuela, Iran) are being targeted and why Canada is still on Trump's list for annexation.
Earlier this week was Adam Ford's "Future Day", a three-day online conference featuring various futurologists primarily discussing artificial intelligence and longevity. My own contribution was a presentation on "Critical Issues for the Global Climate" which I have produced a slidedeck, something approximating a transcript, and with the video available on YouTube. At over 4000 words, the presentation covers the core science of climatology (Earth's energy budget, carbon cycle, physics of GHGs), the industrial age and observed changes, environmental changes, the Anthropocene Extinction Event, and energy trajectories and future global policy directions. Concluding remarks identify climate change as a critical issue and one subject to "race conditions", and note that the policy route, whilst necessary, is currently falling short of requirements.
The other major climatology study completed this week was a 4500-word paper for my Euclid University studies in "Global Energy and Climate Policy", namely "Energy Production Under The Paris Agreement: Options for Developing Pacific Island Countries". Energy production is the major source of GHG emissions and, despite rapid changes toward renewables - especially solar and wind energy - fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and gas dominate global energy production. "L'Accord de Paris", requires all signatories (which excludes Iran, which never ratified, and the United States, which withdrew) to increasingly reduce emissions for each report of their own Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) in an effort to keep global temperature increases below 2 degrees C. For developing Pacific Island Countries, this is an issue: they are micro-contributors to GHG emissions, both absolutely and relatively, are especially sensitive to the effects of climate change, and, with underdeveloped infrastructure, are vulnerable. They require adaptation more than mitigation, and that's not required by the Paris Agreement. The conclusion I have reached is that the Paris Agreement requires an extension that includes requirements for both adaptation and mitigation.
With over 8000 words written on climatology in the past week, you would be forgiven for thinking that I've probably had enough on the subject for a while. On the contrary, my interest has actually increased. Whilst often a grim study (depression and anxiety are occupational risks among climatologists), the science provides multiple interesting avenues of investigation, the technologies provide a slim glimmer of hope, and the politics illustrate the dangers and difficulties of managing global matters within the limitations of sovereign nation-states. It is a life's work, a life's interest, and it is in the advocacy for life itself that makes this the most important scientific and moral challenge of our time.
Earlier this week was Adam Ford's "Future Day", a three-day online conference featuring various futurologists primarily discussing artificial intelligence and longevity. My own contribution was a presentation on "Critical Issues for the Global Climate" which I have produced a slidedeck, something approximating a transcript, and with the video available on YouTube. At over 4000 words, the presentation covers the core science of climatology (Earth's energy budget, carbon cycle, physics of GHGs), the industrial age and observed changes, environmental changes, the Anthropocene Extinction Event, and energy trajectories and future global policy directions. Concluding remarks identify climate change as a critical issue and one subject to "race conditions", and note that the policy route, whilst necessary, is currently falling short of requirements.
The other major climatology study completed this week was a 4500-word paper for my Euclid University studies in "Global Energy and Climate Policy", namely "Energy Production Under The Paris Agreement: Options for Developing Pacific Island Countries". Energy production is the major source of GHG emissions and, despite rapid changes toward renewables - especially solar and wind energy - fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and gas dominate global energy production. "L'Accord de Paris", requires all signatories (which excludes Iran, which never ratified, and the United States, which withdrew) to increasingly reduce emissions for each report of their own Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) in an effort to keep global temperature increases below 2 degrees C. For developing Pacific Island Countries, this is an issue: they are micro-contributors to GHG emissions, both absolutely and relatively, are especially sensitive to the effects of climate change, and, with underdeveloped infrastructure, are vulnerable. They require adaptation more than mitigation, and that's not required by the Paris Agreement. The conclusion I have reached is that the Paris Agreement requires an extension that includes requirements for both adaptation and mitigation.
With over 8000 words written on climatology in the past week, you would be forgiven for thinking that I've probably had enough on the subject for a while. On the contrary, my interest has actually increased. Whilst often a grim study (depression and anxiety are occupational risks among climatologists), the science provides multiple interesting avenues of investigation, the technologies provide a slim glimmer of hope, and the politics illustrate the dangers and difficulties of managing global matters within the limitations of sovereign nation-states. It is a life's work, a life's interest, and it is in the advocacy for life itself that makes this the most important scientific and moral challenge of our time.
