The threat of extreme disasters to nuclear plants seems to have escaped the media. What else are the sleeper stories out there in the coming decade?
Of course they are missing the story of the century (see Silence of the Lambs: Media herd’s coverage of climate change “fell off the map” in 2010). But I mean more specific stories that could be told in more compelling terms.
For instance, China seems to be building nuclear power plants at a fast rate. Are they cutting corners?
Edited by Joe Romm, we cover climate science, solutions and politics. Columnist Tom Friedman calls us "the indispensable blog" and Time magazine named us one of the 25 "Best Blogs of 2010." Newcomers, start here.
Language Intelligence: Lessons on persuasion from Jesus, Shakespeare, Lincoln, and Lady Gaga.
Joe Romm has pulled together the secrets of the greatest communicators in history to show how you can apply these tools to your writing, speaking, blogging — even your Tweeting.
Powered by NewsWhip
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
About ThinkProgress | Contact Us | Donate
Previous in TP Climate Progress
The power of utilities to kill/water down/manipulate renewable energy initiatives at the state & local level – especially those, like subsidies for distributed solar, that are backed by other powerful business groups (Walmart wouldn’t mind…) but that threaten their monopolies.
Great question.
There may not be just one story, but rather we seem to have lost an attitude of self reflection. Like no other time, human problems now endanger our civilization – and very few in the media think that is even possible.
The big story they miss is that we have failed to handle technology, failed to bring technology into culture – and the media, wielding so much of that technology, fails to embrace philosophy. It is as if our species is corrupt and weak. By failing to spot danger, we prove ourselves blind and unworthy.
Now there is the real possibility that our entire species may be extinct within 3 generations, no one is talking about it – except to loudly deny it is even possible. Pity. Even if we cannot prevent it, it is important to talk about.
What media? The mainstream US media?
In Germany, thousands of people demonstrated against nuclear energy. This is how you make the news: take action, now!
The German government is discussing the future of nuclear energy. This is how you make the news:
http://www.tagesschau.de/inland/atomdebatte110.html
We have to stop complaining about the media, we must take action, everybody, NOW!
Seismic resilience, and the risk to schools and children in quake-prone locales like the Pacific Northwest.
As Andy Revkin at DotEarth has repeatedly pointed out (http://nyti.ms/dVUiEc), more than 1,000 public school buildings in Oregon were identified as collapse-prone in 2007. Nearly every one of those schools remains at risk today. Oregon began a small experiment with school retrofits in 2009 and has managed so far to fund seismic repairs at about a dozen schools — but the program requires borrowed funds, and the state has essentially frozen borrowing for the next two years.
There is a link to climate. A promising effort to perform energy audits at 500 Oregon schools is gearing up (funded with stimulus dollars), with the eventual efficiency upgrades to be financed by energy savings. A very smart and imaginative idea, but one whose payback could well be cut short if schools are destroyed by a Cascadia earthquake.
The last great Cascadia earthquake and tsunami struck 311 years ago. But about 40 great quakes (Magnitude 8 and larger) have been documented on part or all of the fault in the last 10,000 years, and of the intervals between them, eight out of ten are shorter than 300 years. This is no longer a remote risk, it is an imminent risk, and Japan tragically teaches the consequences.
In Oregon, we need “safe, green schools.” We need to view investments in seismic resilience as a way to protect our investments in sustainability. We need a way to “monetize” prevented injuries and deaths so that we can understand that state investments in safer schools are not a luxury. Today, over 300,000 Oregon children are at risk in their classrooms.
The sustainability movement can no longer consider that risk acceptable, and the media can do so much more to report it.
Well, we have seen an extreme disaster to the nuclear plants, but they have yet in turn to produce an extreme disaster. It still appears that the radioactive leaks from the plants are minimal and that the loss of life associated with the plants themselves will be a few orders of magnitude smaller than the loss of life associated with the tsunami.
Best to wait a couple of days to confirm this, but until then (and putting to one side Joe’s existing reservations about nuclear that are well-documented on this blog) I don’t think we should knock nuclear out of the equation just yet purely from the images coming from Japan.
Risk in general is not well covered by MSM. People are notoriously bad at assessing risk. The most common example (which has been covered) is fear of flying. People jump into their cars without a second thought, but are white knuckle passengers in planes.
We are facing countless risks this century. The information that needs to be covered would fill a 24/7 broadcast.
The future is about the survival of the human race. So we must ask, what has to be done to sustain civilization.
Look at Haiti today, look at japan, look at queensland, look at christchurch – who is next? Who is prepared?
The media is missing every story that threatens the power of the plutocracy that is in power.
The concept of an open and free press is gone in the United States. Until someone or a group of real courage steps up and begins to tell the truth.
Although it has been covered to some extent there needs to be much more widespread coverage on the dangers of fracking. Readers of this blog will know at least some of the issues involved but the people I talk to, in general, have very little knowledge of what is involved in the fracking process and the possible dangers.
Molds and fungus – you can’t keep drenching the earth over and over in same places and not expect a large increase in these two and all the problems that will go with them. From root rot of the trees to rotting of your toes.
Pneumonia – can’t keep breathing humid air without a large increase in this health problem.
Major media is missing the huge role of the states in promoting renewable energy markets. Nearly 30 states have a Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard, and the SREC market (Solar Renewable Energy Credit) is driving new installations. There are grant programs, tax exemptions, rebates, and so on — all neatly indexed at http://www.dsireusa.org. Cities are also taking a leading role — for example — our nation’s Capitol is now considering the Distributed Generation Act of 2011 that would require DC to get at least 2.5% of its energy from solar photovoltaics and solar thermal energy installations by 2020. This policy alone will bring 1500 new green jobs and about $2 billion in investment in DC over the next decade. Too often, the good news is overshadowed by the negative– the inroads that solar and other forms of renewable energy are making into energy markets is under-reported, under-appreciated, and under-supported by federal policymakers who threaten to cut the federal loan guarantee program and continue to carry on fossil foolish policies and subsidies.
Endocrine Disruptors -
The very ability of the main stream media to address issues that demand actions contrary to the “status quo” solutions.
James Hansen’s research into the ‘Venus Syndrome’. The fact that he believes if we do not effectively combat climate change, runaway global warming will in a few hundred years kill every single living organism (including bacteria)on this planet and the earth will become a permanently ‘dead’ world.
I would think this should be of maximum concern to humanity, and that great efforts should be made to find-out if this is indeed a realistic certainty for our course on B.A.U. So presenting info on this, debating & then deciding strategies to combat it, you would think is the most important story in the history of humankind.
But in the media it’s not even an issue, and the general public (liberals & conservatives)will continue to hawk ‘green’ solutions which in no way shape or form address this horrible possibility.
I challenge anyone on this thread to find a more compelling issue being ignored by the media. As far as I know, the possible or probable eventual extinction of all life on earth tops the list.
For all those millions of Japanese for whom the electrical infrastructure was wiped out it will be back to the Stone Age for a long time to come. It will take more than 10 years replace those destroyed reactors.
Apart from the Japanese tragedy, by far the biggest sleeper story for decades to come is of course peak oil, as illustrated by the following chart:
http://climateprogress.org/2010/05/15/peak-oil/
The most advanced battery technology has less than 1% of the energy density of gasoline/diesel. The idea that there will be a seamless transition to renewables violates every known law of physics.
Take a look at the following video of a gigantic highway project planned by the Ontario/Canada Governments to give you an idea how ignorant and unprepared governments are for what lies ahead:
http://www.weparkway.ca/infocentre.html
Hi Joe,
The media is missing the “clathrate gun hypothesis”. So are you.
All the signs are that we are feathering the trigger of the clathrate gun, and in danger of setting something off along the East Siberian shelf.
An atmospheric test of this idea would seem to me to be contra-indicated.
People should know ahead about any sudden weather changes that can possibly happen in their surroundings because the prevention can save many people´s lives. If we fully understand the action and its consequences we may know how to react on them better. We should appeal more to persuade government and private institutions to put more investments into new technologies that can predict weather changes with higher accuracy.
The biggest story that the media don’t cover is the fact that in the face of AGW, Peak Oil, the horrific trade imbalance, and the volatility of MidEast politics, our lawmakers neglect/ignore the development of domestic and renewable energy sources in favor of kowtowing to the Oil Patch.
A bill wsa introduced into the Texas legislature by Warren Chisum of Pampa, TX HB3037 which evicerates the contexted case process at the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) when challenges are made to the construction of cement plants or coal fired electrical generating plants. The burden of proof would be placed on the effected person to show why the permit to build should not be issued. There have been such bills before and they have failed but this time is particularly tough because Rep. Chisum is a powerful state congressman.
I don’t think corporate news media is covering the Michigan story adequately, if at all. Here are the 2 links:
http://whtc.com/news/articles/2011/mar/12/governor-bypasses-voters-adding-tax-code-bill/
http://www.boingboing.net/2011/03/11/michigan-republicans.html
This is so disturbing that my friend calls this fascism and dictatorship.
I have to agree with @3 LucAstro. We must mobilize! I’m sick of those useless internet petitions. People in Wisconsin and Germany have it right – mass mobilization for large scale protests and activism. If Pres. Obama refuses to lead, I guess we’ll have to do it ourselves!
Ocean warming. Out of sight, out of mind – up to 90% of the extra heat we create with greenhouse gases goes into the oceans.
That will change the climate for all species for hundreds of years, at the very least, while driving some species into extinction.
Hardly anyone knows this story, the determinant of the age.
Alex Smith
Radio Ecoshock
Lots of good ones above, including Venus, clathrates, and Richard’s comment about human awareness, but no, Bob Lang, Japan will not replace those reactors. They will wise up and install renewable energy or gas. Problem is, Japan has weak wind except offshore (where it’s more expensive) and marginal solar resources. The US is in ideal circumstances for both, but vicious hillbillies from oil companies are bullying our government.
The story of ongoing North American deforestation has disappeared. We have about 5% of our native forests left here in the US, and restoring them could return major carbon sinks. Standing in the way are timber companies, including the Kochs’ Georgia Pacific, media companies’ reliance on newsprint, and our sick habit of building houses out of two by fours. Public opinion has been neutralized by greenwashing, including portraying chainsaw swinging loggers as brave macho men. The trees don’t fight back, though.
Something that worries me is the compartmentalisation evident in the media. Climate coverage may be slightly better than it was, though I’m not so sure, but concerns about sustainability are not getting in to over areas, economic reporting in particular. There still seems to be an unquestioning assumption that continued growth is a GOOD THING and the possibility that we might need to look for alternative models is never addressed.
I want to second the nominations above for:
1) Hansen’s “clathrate gun” paleoclimate findings
2) Hansen’s “Venus syndrome” paleoclimate findings on both planets
I would add:
3) Paleoclimate is stronger than modelling.
Addresses meme that models can’t be relied on so we don’t know the future.
4) Ecosystems don’t just move poleward with warming.
They fractionate into bits some of which move at all different rates and others don’t move at all. Addresses the meme that everything will just shift but be basically fine.
5) Jet travel’s hidden GHG crisis.
IPCC shows jet travel GHG = 2.7 x CO2 which bring it to close to 9% of global GHG and rising like a…well…jet. A single vacation flight to far flung parts of the world can dump 10 to 20 tGHG per passenger. Average EU personal transport (non aviation) is just 1.1 tGHG per person per year. One flight can be almost a decade of personal transport GHG at today’s level for EU person. EU GHG per capita needs to fall 80% in coming decades. Prop planes as GHG efficient per passenger km as modern jet fleet…we have increased speed but not climate pollution efficiency over 50 years. We won’t get a solution to this in time if we don’t hold the industry feet to the actual truth.
6) Low-carbon prosperity metrics.
There isn’t any coverage of the essential economic metrics of prosperity in the coming low-carbon reality. My experience is that $GDP/tGHG is instantly “aha” for most people. When people see that China is $450/tGHG while India is $700 it becomes clear just how dirty China’s economy is and how much room for GHG progress there is there. Also when a nation like Canada sees they were tied with USA in 1990 but have fallen $250/tGHG behind USA since then…they can see they are leaving $5,000 per person per year behind as a result. People can easily grok that they want to have Norway’s $9,000/tGHG not Australia’s $2,000/tGHG when the low-carbon future shows up.
One good point:
7) the media are figuring out the “wet” side of climate change finally. Kudos to Joe for helping this happen.
The movie Collapse (2009) did a pretty good job hitting all these points. Viewers should be prepared to have the hope-y wind knocked out of their sails. Particularly poignant is the interviewee’s assessment of the current President at around time stamp 1:11;00…
Gives new meaning to “must see” tv (netflix; amazon; itunes)
One more nomination:
“All climate forcing CO2 was put there by burning fossil fuels. Terrestrial ecosystems are still big net CO2 sinks”
I run into the false meme all the time that it is more important to focus on land use carbon than fossil fuel burning. Wrong.
Hansen makes it very clear that science shows the source of extra CO2 in the air and oceans comes from fossil fuels burning: “The fact that Earth’s land masses continue to produce a net sink of carbon dioxide provides a glimmer of hope for the task of stabilizing climate. This carbon sink occurs despite large scale deforestation in many parts of the world, as well as agricultural practices that tend to release soil carbon to the atmosphere.”
In fact, terrestrial ecosystems net absorb CO2 at nearly the same rate per hectare as oceans do.
Yes we need to improve forest and agricultural practices to hopefully draw even more fossil fuel CO2 out of the air and increase the net sink of CO2 into the biosphere on land masses. It just isn’t going to help if we take our eyes off the source of the problem — fossil fuel burning.
How do you feed eight billion people in a water-scarce world?
In an exclusive extract from his new book, World on the Edge, Lester Brown outlines fresh ways of thinking about water and land use in order to sustain the world’s growing population http://www.theecologist.org/how_to_make_a_difference/food_and_gardening/772835/how_do_you_feed_eight_billion_people_in_a_waterscarce_world.html
Oh Pulease. The media – and even most so-called activists – are missing the overwhelming and irreversible essence of the Trifucta -
1. peak oil and resources
2. terminal economic collapse
3. imminent total (in other words, it is already well underway) ecosystems collapse – trees from ozone, coral reefs from acidification – and all the species that rely upon them for shelter and food…including us.
http://witsendnj.blogspot.com/2011/03/how-science-became-obsoleteand.html
“The big story they miss is that we have failed to handle technology, failed to bring technology into culture – and the media, wielding so much of that technology, fails to embrace philosophy. It is as if our species is corrupt and weak. By failing to spot danger, we prove ourselves blind and unworthy.”
This is a precisely apt metastatement. I strongly encourage everyone to watch Adam Curtis’ Pandora’s Box that has this as its core thesis; it is the best piece I’ve seen that is intrinsically pro-science while remaining skeptical of the cultural components in how it is used. This section about nuclear power is devastatingly relevant for what we are seeing in Japan.
The dirty history of corporate spying
Hiring private detectives to conduct surveillance and infiltration operations against environmental groups is, sadly, nothing new
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/feb/15/activism-protest
Media is reflecting our current attitudes. Where is their talk of the GOM disaster, the earthquake in Haiti (until we have just been reminded) or the 30,000 Europeans that lost their lives during a summer heat wave only a few years back? How soon we all want to forget and move on with our mundane, but seemingly secure lives.
Human history has shown only rare cases where facing imminent danger has produced long term rational action to prevent it. Humans seem to be more comfortable with letting ourselves be hit with what-ever disaster and attempting to adapt thereafter. Which is why I hold out little hope for any of the converging problems we now face to be addressed.
As #8 Peter says – it is the job of media to maneuver attention toward certain issues – and certainly away from other news. Most media promotes commerce of media owners.
Ferociously interesting times now.
Untapped crop data from Africa predicts corn peril if temperatures rise http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-03-untapped-crop-africa-corn-peril.html
Why are people assuming that Industrial Civilization as it exists now will continue indefinitely.
As early as 4 years from now there will be a more than 10% shortfall between the supply and demand of liquid fuels. The oil price spike to $148/barrel in 2008 was caused by a 2% shortfall, which led to the most severe economic decline since the Great Depression.
Raw materials extraction and transportation, such as coal, iron ore, copper, etc. require huge amounts of oil. How are you going to repair and maintain the highway system without abundant affordable oil. And what about all those asphalt shingles on suburban roofs which start to leak after about 20 years, just to mention a few weak links among many.
Everything that was caused by cheap oil will go away with cheap oil, including much of the GHG emissions.
Bob Lang @33 – “Everything that was caused by cheap oil will go away with cheap oil, including much of the GHG emissions.”
—————————-
Not necessarily so, since there will still be a world with half of its oil supply left and then we will end up burning every bit of dirty cheap fuel we can put our collective hands on, from coal to shale oil, to the forests around us. Since we still haven’t felt the full effects of the last 30 years of CO2 emissions, expect plenty left to expel at even greater rates into the next century which will last for a millennia.
Easter Island still has a story to be told.
Chemical pollution.
The testing for biological effects of the myriads of chemicals produced in the world is horrible.
Especially of concern are chemicals which mimic hormones in animals and plants, where even minute amounts can have biological effects.
Definitely the Hansen/Venus stuff, I’ll vote for that. And the associated threat from the methane hydrates dissociating.
But also, maybe the possibility that shifting large amounts of mass around by melting icecaps and raising sea levels could set off earthquakes, increase volcanic activity, and possibly cause a geomagnetic reversal.
The stresses it takes to cause an 8.9 earthquake have to build up over hundreds of years. But, we could perhaps triggers stresses already built up.
As sea levels rise and icecaps melt, this will certainly, by conservation of angular momentum, slow the rotation of the earth. The core, though, will continue to rotate at its usual speed. This could cause a geomagnetic reversal by disrupting the dynamo action that supposedly generates our magnetic field.
As the ocean basins increase in mass and start to decelerate due to conservation of angular momentum, will large stresses be placed on subduction zones at the western boundaries of those ocean basins? Is this already happening with Japan?
45 to 50 % of anthro GHGs from agriculture and food production –U.N. Special Rapporteur on the right to food said last week
“If we don’t radically transform the direction of the global food system we will never feed the billion who are hungry,” De Shutter warns. “Nor will we be able to feed ourselves in the future.”
http://stephenleahy.net/2011/03/13/cut-climate-damaging-emissions-in-half-and-double-food-production-with-eco-farming/
Barry, I don’t know anyone who believes that it’s more important to restore terrestrial sinks than to stop burning fossil fuels. The problem is that deforestation and ecosystem restoration are rarely addressed anymore even by Green groups, who print out FSC certifications as if they were stamps.
It’s also not true that all terrestrial ecosystems are sinks. British Columbia has been a major source lately, and Indonesia was a huge source during their peat fires- something that was exacerbated by deforestation.
Not often I quibble with your posts, though- your contributions here have been excellent.
Four Things (in no particular order)
1. The mainstream media — and most other people — have “no clue”, it seems, about the sorts and degrees of changes that will be necessary and beneficial to make in order to “evolve” (as quickly as we can) to more sustainable ways of life as widely as possible. Many people seem to think that it will take a “tweak” here and there, or perhaps a “big change” in one or two particular areas, but do not realize that the changes necessary will need to involve how we think about “prices” and “profit”, what aims we choose, some rather foundational things about corporations and corporate governance, and so forth, as well as changes in some fairly deeply-held attitudes. This is not to say that life will be “worse” because of such changes: Indeed, if we do things wisely, life should be much better and more meaningful: that’s a big part of the point, of course. But most people don’t seem to have a clue about it.
2. The media don’t cover deep systemic hypocrisies and deeply inconsistent arguments well, if at all. Yes yes, they cover the matter when a politician talks about family values and then has an affair. But do they cover the deep hypocrisies and fundamentally inconsistent arguments that many ideologues give in support of some narrow ideologies? No, usually not; and never well or persistently.
3. The media don’t really cover why modern society “knows” so much, scientifically and technologically speaking, and yet cannot muster the honesty, wisdom, and will to face up to its problems and address them. In other words, to put it one way, the media don’t seriously cover the reasons why our society and democracy and culture are so darn dysfunctional. Of course, the media are a big part of this problem, so that explains (in part anyhow) why the media don’t cover the problem, and when they do cover it, they usually miss the mark. This probably won’t change, unfortunately, until most of the media are financed very differently, somehow, i.e., not mostly through advertising.
4. One of the biggest stories will involve the progression and indeed positive shift in our understanding and paradigms of morality (or ethics, if you like), from a secular standpoint anyhow, involving breakthroughs in the understanding of the interrelationships and “common ground” between the science of the matter and the secular reasoning (or “philosophy”) of the matter, with “the matter” being that of human morality in the normative sense as well as from the descriptive and explanatory standpoints. Much of my own work in recent years has focused on this, including (I believe) some important breakthroughs. For a glimpse of one person’s recent work on the subject, see the first two-thirds of Sam Harris’s recent book, ‘The Moral Landscape’. The subject is vastly important, for reasons I won’t go into here, but a big one is that it relates to how we understand ourselves in our relationships to each other, to future generations, and to the entire biosphere, from the moral/ethical standpoint. It also relates, in turn, to the other three topics mentioned above. It relates also to the relationship between morality and sustainability, and to the moral case for sustainability. It also relates to a phrase I often use in my own work on the subject, which is “conscious, informed, and responsible human sociality”.
Finally, I’m hoping to see a subject covered here on CP — a proposed guest post that I’ve submitted — which relates to at least two of the topics above. I called it (as a proposed title) ‘Free Markets, Externalities, and A Question of Integrity’. In these busy times, I haven’t heard back yet. If Joe thinks the topic fits, I’m hoping that he’ll run it. Joe, any chance to look at it yet?
In any case, the media are dropping a big ball on all the topics mentioned above.
Cheers and Be Well,
Jeff
How about something on the good news side for a change?
Energy Secretary Chu recently announced the development of bacteria that can convert celulose waste materials into isobutanol as a gasoline replacement!
BESC scores a first with isobutanol directly from cellulose
Compounded factors and compelling risks.
A forefront example of compounded factors is (tsunami) X (40 year old boiling water reactor with a lot of byproduct heat) X (cooling water diesel pumps not rated for an 8.9 quake).
Though I grumped at the Sandia study for underestimating variation in hydrologic ratios, the study’s phrase “compelling risk” is still a gem.
Unless we get a grip on how to triage emergent compelling risks, we will be reacting whack-a-mole to anything that comes to the top of the news.
Not easy topics for journalism, though disaster movies play with the theme.
If the original question is asking about the greatest crisis facing mankind I would say there is absolutely no doubt about this. It is human consciousness. Surely all the other crises have originated from this? From the greed, the fear, the self-centred action, the desperate search for psychological security. This is our real problem, and until there is a transformation in human consciousness, our problems must only multiply, intensify.
No matter how we act, unless there is understanding of our selves,of the human mind, all action will bring more chaos.
And yes, this problem is certainly, overwhelmingly, unreported, unrecognised. We always think the problem is “out there”. We focus on the myriad manifestations of this basic issue, not the fundamental cause.
Clive
Going back to the original post relating to nuclear risk, I think it important to keep an eye on how much risk these Japanese nuclear accidents pose. The mass media analysis of the risk posed by these accidents has been dire. A great treatment of the risks is here:
http://morgsatlarge.wordpress.com/2011/03/13/why-i-am-not-worried-about-japans-nuclear-reactors/
I believe that climate change poses a massive threat to mankind, but I also think we should seek truth from facts. It is a provocative thing to say, but if only a few people die connected with the Japanese nuclear industry in the face of a tsunami of such magnitude at a time when 10,000 plus have probably died as they went about their business in other occupations, then actually it would be a vindication of the Japanese nuclear industry.
The media are miss the story about the clueless media.
The production of GM seeds that contain a kill gene that does not allow a seed from a field of say GM soybeans to be viable, able to be pollinated for another season of soybeans, you must buy new seed every year. That was the real reason they were developed. The statement of producers of these seeds said it was being used to keep GM crops from cross breeding with non-GM crops. Instead nature finding a way again, the kill gene has managed to cross into non-GM crops and into none crop variety’s of wild grasses. Not a story the likes of Monsanto and their ilk are likley to let get big news coverage when millions of dollars a year are at stake.
yes, paulm, and the media miss the story quite deliberately, because the media are owned by the same individuals who own the same corporations that are enriching themselves while despoiling the resources most people rely upon for survival.
Let’s NAME them!
Everyone has hit on a lot of really good missed stories from near term certainties (peak oil, accelerating environmental degradation due to ozone and other pollutants) to the more long term uncertainties (runaway greenhouse effect or Venus syndrome). I guess I’ll just include them all and say that the media is definitely missing the accelerating disintigration of our current global civilization which is happening right before our eyes but which most people can’t see because they’re the “trees in the forest” and have no clue that our whole idea of what civilization means is totally at odds with how the world really works. I don’t think anyone can give an exact sequence or paint an exact scenario of how the current disintigration will play out the same way that no general can know beforehand how a battle that he initiates will turn out. But we can know for certain that everything that’s considered “normal” in our presence civilization is unsustainable and probably has been for the last 200 years. But I don’t see any major media outlet even musing about such a story, never mind cover it. They’ll probably just jump from one disaster to another and never make any real connections to the ridiculous fundamental beliefs in what civilization is supposed to be that seems to running rampant throughout the world. That cluelessness itself is definitely a story that I’m sure they’ll continue to miss as some have already pointed out. Some have said that we need a turn from technology to philosophy, but that’ll never happen as long our current basic beliefs about a technological civilization remain the “coin of the realm”. That’s a story they’ll never get either.
I don’t think the emotional impact of the “peak-eveything” crises we are facing is being acknowledged or talked about in the media.
When you really understand the nature of the massive threats to our lives and wellbeing that loom around the corner (or are already happening for some) it can lead to quite an emotional rollercoaster. I’ve been on one myself lately.
I don’t think most people can cope with those feelings, so they shut the news out or deny it’s happening – it’s just too intense and terrifying. And there’s a terrible sense of guilt that we, humanity, have done this to ourselves.
The media could help the majority to move out of the “deer in the headlights” phase of emotion, and move into the “let’s do something about it now!” phase.
#42 Clive, there already is a solution to the fear, greed, self centred behaviours etc. These behaviours are determined by the dominant organizational structure we see all around us, our workplaces, community organizations and governments. When you have structures where the people above have the right and responsibility to tell the people below what to do and how to do it, you have built a structure which produces competition and inequality. When you have competition and inequality, you automatically get insecurity and self interest.
It is perfectly possible to build structures which produce cooperation and equality and in these organiations, people agree shared goals at the highest common denominator and work together to reach them. These organizations produce more idealism, creativity, innovation and productivity. All this has been empirically demonstrated for over 60 years. You can find more about this on http://www.thelightonthehill.com. ME
I think the Main Stream Media has woefully under-reported the trials of Charlie Sheen. Obviously the man is struggling and yet this story only got about a week of coverage before it was displaced by the earthquake-tsunami-nuclear disaster in Japan. I know things are bad over there, but 2 1/2 Men was canceled! Hopefully we’ll be hearing much more about Charlie soon.
And what about Lindsay Lohan, by the way? Is she still alive, after all this time?
Oh, and for those of you who are more into “Hollywood material” (no need to be ashamed, we all need to relax from time to time;), there is also this nice little one:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1313858/Solar-flare-paralyse-Earth-2013.html?ito=feeds-newsxml#ixzz10C2O1OU7
This article argues that it is the money, not messaging, that stopped Climate Change legislation: http://www.grist.org/article/2011-03-12-why-doesnt-congress-give-a-damn-about-climate-hint-not-messaging
[JR: Hard to separate the two.]
The media only reports on things that happen, so if there is a study done with far-future modeling, the media largely ignores it unless there is a current event anchoring it to the public mind. They are only just now catching on to the “wet” climate because it was predicted in climate models and now we see torrential rains all the time – a new norm. Droughts, massive snows – everything – no matter how small that can be predicted in the short term should be exploited, by locale, and discussions about further forecasts can have a greater meaning for people and their local economies.
Since climate effects nearly every aspect of our economy, I’d like media to share more of how climate-friendly policies/lifestyles could lead to a more stable economic environment, or what businesses could thrive within new norms. Urban vs. suburban lifestyle economic benefits – the article below points out there’s well over $1 Trillion representing what is spent on personal transit by suburban dwellers that could be used elsewhere.
http://seattletransitblog.com/2011/02/24/demand-for-housing-near-transit/
How long will people justify their over-priced, car-dependent mortgages, and what will banks do when people just walk away? I’d love to hear more about where Detroit’s venture into urban farming leads them in 10 years.
This “wet” new world has to be affecting some of the home insurance companies – you would think they might become an ally at some point in trying to make sure a hurricane or Nashville’s hurricane doesn’t wipe them out too. Or will they be the next target of dropping coverage in a pinch?
I think arguments or articles about long term only affects are lost on the average citizen. People are so focused on their current situation, many don’t have time to think about those kinds of things unless they are forced to or have a personal connection or stake in what’s being discussed.
Merrelyn, (#49) it is certainly true that society, its structures and organisations, are built on greed, competition, and all the manifestations of the self. So where have these structures come from? Surely they have been created by people, by the human mind. And whatever the mind creates MUST be a reflection of itself, surely? We can easily see this in the results of various social revolutions that have been attempted. For example, communism propagated the ideals of equality and caring, but the revolution was doomed to failure since it was normal human beings (ie self-centred) who had the responsibility to put the new structures in place.
Through the use of certain techniques It may be possible to increase creativity innovation and productivity. But such things will not solve mankind’s basic problems, as they cannot touch the core, the heart of the issue, the human psyche. Without seeing the total picture, such things are used in the service of war and environmental destruction
I am not being totally pessimistic, I am not saying there is no solution to greed, fear, violence, and all the manifestations of the self, but unless we see where the real root of all problems lie (in ourselves) we will ever dissipate our energy in seeking partial solutions. And partial solutions only create more problems – again this is easily observed.
Clive
#56 Clive, Humans are capable of both cooperation and competition. The problem today is not our psyches but in our choice of design principle that underlies these organizational structures. There are only 2 basic design principles, DP1 and DP2. The authoritarian top down structures (DP1) we mainly have today have only become dominant in the Western Industrialized world in the last 250 years.
If by communism you mean the USSR, it was based on DP1. Same in China.
I know it can be difficult to believe that the ways we organize ourselves can affect our behaviour so directly. And once the design principle of an organizatiion is changed- same org, same people- the changes in behaviour take place very quickly. A lot of people can’t believe it until they see it, ME
What is the posibility of collapsing ice sheets causing tsunami across the southern continents?
Not so far fetched with West Antarctica, where if the ice sheets are breaking up at some time in the future a large chunk could slide into the southern ocean creating a large wave. How big would such a chunk have to be? Is there someone out there who could do the figures?
Corruption, lobbying, promises of donations/jobs in the future. This is the single biggest issue because it is what stops us from deploying a scientifically valid societal response to any of the above issues. The love of money is the root of all evil.
The threat of extreme disasters to nuclear plants is the one issue CNN has NOT missed!
Another hockey stick graph has been discovered [in the comments of].:
http://climateprogress.org/2011/03/12/weekend-open-thread-17
It is an earthquake hockey stick. Global Warming is melting the ice on Greenland. The ocean is a fraction of an inch deeper, but that is billions of tons of water, enough to trigger earthquakes. See:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20327273.800-climate-change-may-trigger-earthquakes-and-volcanoes.html
“Climate change may trigger earthquakes and volcanoes”
“the Hansen/Venus stuff”…does not find much support among other serious climate scientists. A couple of the contributors to RealClimate have argued against its likelihood. The risks of man-made climate change are quite bad enough without it.
Edward,
while the first four points of my post at 114 that you refer to remain valid, the fifth, concerning a ‘hockey stick’ rise in the frequency of earthquakes over magnitude 6.0, does not.
As I wrote when a discrepancy was spotted by Mike F:
Mike F -
You are quite correct. I’m afraid I’ve been misled by the USGS provision of data on historical earthquakes on this page:
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/world/historical.php
Plainly it does not tally with the data they provide on the centennial pdf,
and I must apologise to all for failing to scrutinise the two sets.
Evidently the data shown on the ‘historical’ page has been subjected to some filter, but without either warning or explaining to the reader what has been done.
I shall try to be more cautious in future !
Regards,
Lewis
Here’s a story that is covered by the media, but with exactly the wrong conclusion: Economic Growth
Capitalism requires never-ending nonstop economic growth, which is impossible. I’m a staunch believer in democracy, but capitalism? It’s sexy in the short run and totally unsustainable in the long-term, because it requires never-ending nonstop economic growth.
If 100 bucks buys 100 loaves of bread today, due to inflation it will buy only 99 loaves tomorrow. Just to tread water, corporations in a capitalist economy are forced to cut costs and increase market-share. There’s only so much cost cutting that can happen. Therefore, there must be at least SOME economic growth for them to tread water.
The only problem is that we have no examples of anything on earth that grows nonstop forever. SO far, when we have been about to hit the wall we’ve come up with good ideas to spur sudden growth. For example free trade acts. In my opinion, we’re in a ferrari on the autobahn with a blindfolded driver. Each time we solve our immediate problem by spurring a new round of growth we’re just pressing a bit harder on the accelerator.
The deadly obesity epidemic that has ravaged our country has been completely downplayed and all but ignored by most media. Now overtaking smoking as the number one cause of preventable death, it is also likely to bankrupt our already overburdened and failing healthcare system in the years to come. Most Americans now live sedentary lifestyles, get little to no exercise, eat toxic “food products” from a toxic and corrupt food system (an inefficient food system that greatly contributes to climate change and the destruction of ecosystems), and are generally weaker (both mentally and physically) and more susceptible to illness because of these facts. Unfortunately, this trend is still going in the wrong direction, as every year the number of overweight and unhealthy Americans continues to climb.
As a society of people, we have been physically and mentally weakened by our “modern lifestyle” and therefore less prepared to face the mounting problems we now face. We need to become healthier and stronger if we want to be prepared for the changes to civilization that lie ahead. None of this is discussed in mainstream media (it’s hardly even discussed on this site) and this needs to change.
Overpopulation has to come into the sunlight one day or another, methinks…
“The deadly obesity epidemic that has ravaged our country”
I find the link to virus origin interesting.
Ricki (Australia), “What is the posibility of collapsing ice sheets causing tsunami across the southern continents?”
I think more of worry are underwater landslides from unstable clathrate deposits. Collapsing ice sheets might trigger other more subtile dominos. Such as ocean currents, wave formation and influence weather patterns.
Two more undertold stories are crumbling infrastructure in the U.S. (mentioned wrt Oregon schools by Ted Wolf #4 and alluded to by Bob Lang in #34) and the coming era of food & water insecurity (mentioned by Stephen Leahy in #38).
The ASCE keeps track of infrastructure deficits through its Infrastructure Report Card: http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/ The linked videos run 6-7 minutes each.
And of course Joe has posted numerous times on food & water insecurity.
But the mainstream media never cover these topics systematically — only reporting crises like a bridge collapse in Minneapolis or a famine in Ethopia. They have to do better.
And, as Richard Pauli notes (#2), contemporary culture is marked by a profound lack of the inclination to reflect. The major media, in pursuit of profit, have largely adapted to this; they feature the novel, the dramatic, the sudden calamity facing one person, one family, one region. They ignore the factors that led up to that crisis, and the further troubles that might flow from it.
It may not be extreme to judge this as the übercrisis of our time, presaging a new Dark Age — as Maggie Jackson does in her book Distracted: http://www.chris-winter.com/Erudition/Reviews/M_Jackson/Distracted.html
Chris, (re: 69)
It’s easy to blame the media. I put half the blame on the audience, which is unable to think critically independent of the “liberal” or “conservative” blogger of their choice. (uh, no offense Joe…)
The other half of the blame I save for the electorate, because the voters are allowing schools to let students advance without critical thinking skills, and those students then become the media’s audience.
No, its not “the media’s” fault. Its ours, and ((yawn)) school board politics and teacher salaries is the key.
Hi all,
@AdamR (62) – Hi Adam, I was so pleased to find out that the “Venus/Hansen stuff” is disputed by other serious climate scientists. In fact, I rushed over to check out Real Climate, to find out what they said. (I’m really not looking forward to choking to death, as you can imagine.)
So far though, I am having a few problems finding “a couple” of contributors at Real Climate who dispute the prediction. Though there do seem to be no shortage of scientists over there queuing up to make up the 98 to balance your “couple”. But where are the couple? Please could you be more specific?
In fact, I seem to have developed the stupid misconception that Gavin Schmidt, who runs Real Climate, and really is just some dumb rocket scientist working for NASA, (so not really a “serious climate scientist”) had something or other to do with coming up with this “Venus/Hansen” stuff in the first place.
Hi Joe, I retract my earlier comment that you have had nothing to say about the clathrate gun hypothesis, but its now some time since 4 March 2010, and an update might be in order. The situation is far more precarious this year.
The MSM ‘misses’, ‘downplays’ or simply denies every problem-that is what their owners expect, and the drones deliver. Our civilization is too complex and too destructive to persist, so the only question is whether we will successfully replace it with one that is sustainable in the long run and which provides individuals with the opportunities to grow intellectually and spiritually or whether we will remain trapped in the dead-end existence of wage slavery and pointless consumption, for a few more decades, at most. That transformation requires, to begin with, the end of capitalism because it is inherently anti-life, because it opposes complexity and instead reduces the universe to a one-dimiensional competition to accumulate possessions. It’s the old ‘To have or to be’ question. Capitalism ‘haves’ and can never have enough-the new world, if it is ever born, must be a realm of ‘being’.
Too bad the military itself (and its resource requirements) will never be examined objectively by our media. Beyond the stupidity of a cycle of fighting resource wars in order to secure resources to fight resource wars, our media –never– reports the simple OPPORTUNITY COST of (our) war-related activities over peace-time activities.
Ask “why is climate change dropping off the mindmap of the American people” – look no farther than the quickening militarization and creeping fascism of our American society, beginning in earnest the very day Gore signed Kyoto – that’s the big picture, folks, that we must keep constantly in mind.
So yes, it is a crisis of spirit and of education. We have taught the militarists how to prosper (by scaring us with fantasy enemies), we have allowed them to prosper (by an unaccountable Pentagon), and we will all perish for it (see wars, above). There is no doubt in my mind that the denialists are ONE AND THE SAME as those well-preserved by our feckless (and increasingly pointless) political system.
Get rid of the lobbyists and institute public financing, and maybe just maybe we can change what looks all the world to me to be a predictable script for the disasters to come. An ETHICALLY RESPONSIBLE media would be broadcasting this message night and day. But they will NOT because the media is coopted and as corrupted as the rest of the “system” we have presently in America, so we! are the only agents of change left.
Rise up peacefully and say corporations are no longer free to lie. Get rid of the truly twisted idea that corporations have personal rights to participate in our elections or our self-governance. Only THEN we will see change – otherwise we’re just paralyzed by the same old powerful pyramids of our status quo.