“Most of the people who are going to die in the greatest cataclysm in the history of man have already been born.”
—Paul Ehrlich in 1969 [1]
Part 8 ended in 1979 with The Sinking Ark and the notion that using apocalyptic forecasts to scare people is nothing new.
1980
Environmental pessimist Paul Ehrlich bet environmental optimist Julian Simon that basic metals would face severe shortages and, therefore, higher prices within ten years. The optimist won.
Neo-Malthusian environmentalists and catastrophists do not understand abundance to this day. Capitalism makes things cheaper. In 1980, the average US worker needed to work 1.3 minutes for a banana. In 2020, less than 50 seconds of work was required. The work in 1980 vs 2020 for 1kg of coffee was 84 and 9 minutes, i.e., a fall of almost 90%. This means, of course, the average wage goes much further, i.e., people got richer. Is uranium on your shopping list? In 1980, the average worker needed to work almost ten hours for a pound. In 2021, it was closer to 1.5 hours. One kilogram of salmon went from 2.5 hours to 22 minutes of work.
On a related note: In 2021, in capitalist Switzerland, the average worker needed to work around 15 minutes to buy the most expensive Big Mac on the planet, priced at USD7.0 with his or her after-tax income. In semi-socialist France and Greece, it was closer to 28 minutes for the burger priced at USD 5.1 and 48 minutes in Greece for the Big Mac at USD 4.1.
Germany started the Energiewende, a transition from non-sustainable to sustainable energy sources, resulting in 45% higher electricity prices than the European average by 2019. In Germany, a kWh costs $0.52, compared to $0.21 in neighbouring France:
The funny thing about the German Energiewende is that by 2018, France had 5.0 tons of CO2 emissions per capita per year, while Germany had 9.1 t/year. (By comparison, Qatar had 38.2 t/y, Canada and the US 16.1 each, Japan 9.4, China 8.0, Denmark 5.8, UK 5.6, Switzerland 4.8, and Uganda had 0.1 t/y.[2]
“The transition to renewable was doomed because modern industrial people, no matter how romantic they are, do not want to return to pre-modern life.”
—Michael Shellenberger (b. 1971), American journalist and author [3]
If the Energiewende were a serious affair, it would include nuclear energy, like in France, where CO2 emissions are almost half as high as in Germany. In 2019, the Wall Street Journal had an editorial titled “World’s Dumbest Energy Policy - After giving up nuclear power, Germany now wants to abandon coal.”
1981
The election of Ronald Reagan brought a backlash against the environmental movement to power.[4] Before Reagan’s election, there was a short moment whereby US politicians, including Republicans, were worried about climate change and wanted to position the US as a global leader in fixing it. Reagan had Jimmy Carter’s solar panels removed from the roof of The White House by 1986.
“He doesn't make snap decisions but he doesn't overthink either.”
—Nancy Reagan
1982
The United Nations (UN) held the Second Earth Summit in Nairobi, Kenya, but it failed because the Reagan administration was not interested. Earth Summits are meetings of world leaders organized by the United Nations to identify ways to achieve sustainable development. The first UN conference was in Stockholm in 1972, which gave birth to the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP).
Ice cores from the Greenland ice sheet showed dramatic temperature oscillations in a single century from the past, an extremely short period for climate change. Scientists also called 1981 the warmest year on record.[5]
A group of scholars met in Stockholm, intending to reform the study of economics. The new ecological economists saw the economy as embedded in and supported by natural systems; nature was not simply a factor in, but the foundation of, economic activity. By integrating models from ecology and economics, ecological economists sought to provide scientific arguments for preserving the natural world. Ecological economists distinguished themselves from neo-Malthusian catastrophists by switching the emphasis from resources to systems.[6]
1983
The 1983 report "Changing Climate" was produced by the National Academy of Sciences in the United States. It addressed the emerging concerns about climate change and its potential impacts. The report was an early, influential document that brought attention to the issue of climate change and laid the groundwork for future scientific and policy discussions on the topic. It highlighted the need for ongoing research and proactive measures to address the emerging challenges posed by a changing climate. Reagan's response to the report was characterized by a lack of proactive measures to address climate change. The administration's policies were more aligned with economic and energy production priorities, and there was minimal emphasis on the precautionary actions recommended by the report.
1984
Charles A.S. Hall (b. 1944), the American systems ecologist and biophysical economist, appeared on the cover of Science for his work on applying EROI (energy return on investment) to fuels. EROI is an output/input ratio, i.e., the ratio of usable energy delivered from a particular energy resource to the amount used to obtain that energy resource.
Empires can fall from falling EROI. In the Bronze Age, for example, as mentioned in Part 1 of this series on climatism, global cooling resulted in the calories from agriculture (the EROI numerator) falling with no fall in input energy (the denominator).
“The theoretical system by which environmentalists would seize our societies does not allow them to escape this conclusion: in its principle or its applications, individual freedom must be abolished.”
—Drieu Godefridi (b. 1972), Belgian essayist and author[7]
Critics of renewable energy sources argue that they have low EROIs compared to conventional fossil energy when all the energy that goes into the EROI’s denominator is accounted for. (When environmentalists strong-sell renewables, they suppress the denominator of the EROI. Another trick activists use is omitting government subsidies in the cost/benefit analysis.) The government-enforced green movement, therefore, results in higher costs and less efficiency, i.e., the government self-mutilates its economy by misallocating capital. The loss of business and individual freedom is a side effect of the enforcement. As nearly always, the law of unintended consequences applies.
Nuclear fusion would solve many problems as it is clean, and the EROI could be huge, i.e., a killer app, or a paradigm shift in a real Thomas Kuhn sense. We are not quite there yet, though. You surely have heard the 80-year-old joke that harnessing nuclear fusion economically is just 20 years out. When nuclear fusion becomes closer to being harnessable economically, you can bet that environmental groups will oppose it. (It’s the “T” in Paul Ehrlich’s I=PAT equation.)
1985
The Villach Conference in Austria declared consensus among experts that some global warming seems inevitable and called on governments to consider international agreements to restrict emissions.[8]
Antarctic ice cores showed that CO2 and temperature went up and down together through past ice ages, pointing to powerful feedbacks.[9]
“We may be the only source of high intelligence in the cosmos, but our act of avoiding nuclear power generation is one of auto-genocide. Nothing more clearly demonstrates the limits of our intelligence.”
—James Lovelock[10]
David Rothbard (1964-2018), the American activist, no relation to Murry Rothbard, the libertarian theorist, and Craig Rucker (b. 1961) founded the Washington-DC-based Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) to pursue a free-market approach to environmental issues. CFACT describes their mission as “relentlessly infusing the environmental debate with a balanced perspective on environmental stewardship.” CFACT is known for its climate change scepticism, often challenging the mainstream scientific consensus on human-induced climate change. CFACT promotes the idea that environmental regulations should not impede economic growth and that technological innovation and market-driven approaches are the best ways to address environmental challenges. The organization frequently critiques policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, emphasizing the economic costs and uncertainties associated with such measures. While the exact breakdown of their funding sources and amounts is not publicly detailed, it is known that some of their support comes from entities that are sceptical of regulatory approaches to environmental issues. This has led to scrutiny and criticism from various environmental groups and watchdog organizations.
1986
The Chernobyl disaster crippled the plan to solve climate problems via nuclear power. The range of casualty estimates is rather wide, ranging from 45 (The United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) as of 2008, to hundreds of thousands of deaths. More recently, the United Nations estimated about 4,000 total deaths from radiation among emergency workers and nearby residents. This is the figure that Oliver Stone uses in Nuclear Now, a 2022 documentary. Organizations like Greenpeace propose figures in the tens or even hundreds of thousands, though these estimates are debated.
The Chernobyl disaster was a major event that significantly impacted the environmental movement and public perception of nuclear energy. It contributed greatly to a shift towards alternative, renewable energy sources. In the wake of Chernobyl, many countries re-evaluated their nuclear energy policies. Some, like Germany and Italy, decided to phase out nuclear power, while others implemented more rigorous safety standards and regulatory oversight. While nuclear energy remains one of the cleanest forms of energy in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, the stigma associated with nuclear accidents has been a significant barrier to its broader acceptance and expansion. This has had a lasting impact on energy policy and the development of energy infrastructure around the world.
1987
The World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) published Our Common Future, to be known as the Brundtland Report, named after Gro Harlem Brundtland (b. 1939), the Norwegian politician and three-term PM of Norway. The Brundtland Report stated that critical global environmental problems were primarily the result of the enormous poverty of the South and the non-sustainable patterns of consumption and production in the North. It called for a strategy that united development and the environment – described by the now-common term sustainable development.
By the late 2010s, the word “sustainable” became quite popular: [14]
The Montreal Protocol of the Vienna Convention imposed international restrictions on the emission of ozone-destroying gases. According to some accounts, the ozone hole in Antarctica is now slowly recovering. The Montreal Protocol has been ratified by 196 nations and the EU, making it the first universally ratified treaty in United Nations history. The success is attributed to its effective burden-sharing and solution proposals, which helped mitigate regional conflicts of interest compared to the shortcomings of the global regulatory approach of the Kyoto Protocol.
“Kyoto was an anti-growth, anti-capitalist, anti-American project which no American leader alert to his country’s national interests could have supported.”
—Margaret Thatcher in 2002 [20]
A core cut from central Antarctica showed that in the previous 400,000 years, CO2 had dropped to 180 parts per million (ppm) during the most extreme glacial periods and climbed as high as 280 ppm in warmer times, but it had never been higher. In the outside air, CO2 was measured at 350ppm, unprecedented for nearly half a million years.[11]
James Hansen (b. 1941), the American Atmospheric physicist dubbed the father of climate change awareness, then at NASA, told the United States Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources that NASA was 99% confident that the warming was caused by the accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and not a random fluctuation.
“In climate research and modelling, we should recognise that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.”
—IPCC, Working Group I: The Scientific Basis, 14.2.2.2, 2001.
1988
The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), responsible for coordinating responses to environmental issues within the United Nations system, established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which provides policymakers with regular scientific assessments of the current state of knowledge about climate change. Other terms for “IPCC” include Intense Panic Creation Council, Iceberg Prognostication & Climate Circus, Intergalactic Predictions and Climate Clowns, Impressive Powerpoint Crafters Consortium, Invisible Polarbear Counting Committee, Incessant Precipitation Complaints Club, and Irreversible Planetary Catastrophe Committee.
The IPCC was set up as a report-producing mechanism which involved three separate international working groups: The first dealt with the science behind predictions of global warming, the second concerned the potential impacts of the warming on society, and the third examined the various possibilities for a political and social response. The main reason for the existence of the first two working groups is to lend gravitas and respectability to the political deliberations of the third.[12]
IPCC critics argue that the IPCC was founded to prove that climate change was man-made, a foregone conclusion. They wonder whether billions of dollars of funding could be spent more intelligently on finding solutions to the problem rather than scaring British and Tinseltown royals and anti-semitic life-long teenagers from Sweden who refuse an education.
“You're in no position to lecture the public about anything. You know nothing about the real world. Most of you spent less time in school than Greta Thunberg.”
—Ricky Gervais (b. 1961), English comedian [19]
“When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn’t become a king. The palace becomes a circus.”
—Turkish proverb
Excursion: hypocrisy
“Hypocrisy is a fashionable vice, and all fashionable vices pass for virtue.”
—Molière (1622-73), French playwright and writer [15]
Hypocrisy, in a nutshell, is deceitful, two-faced, insincere, duplicitous, phoney, dishonest, disingenuous, false-hearted, pretence-laden, backstabbing, treacherous, untrustworthy, disloyal, pretentious, holier-than-thou, and fraudulent.
Hypocrisy, the act of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not truly hold or possess, stands as one of the most egregious character flaws. It strikes at the heart of trust and authenticity, undermining the foundation of genuine human relationships and societal cohesion. The duplicity inherent in hypocrisy damages personal integrity and erodes the moral fabric of communities.
“Whenever I meet prostitutes, they never speak of sex. They inquire about the soul, and about God. I also meet many ascetics and monks, and whenever we are alone they ask about nothing but sex.”
—Bhagwan Rajneesh (1931-90), Indian philosopher and spiritual teacher [16]
Hypocrisy is betrayal. At its core, hypocrisy is a profound betrayal of self and others. It involves deliberately concealing true intentions and actions to gain social acceptance, power, or admiration. This deceit creates a facade of righteousness, behind which lies a starkly contrasting reality. Such behaviour is not just a minor moral lapse; it is a significant breach of ethical conduct that can have far-reaching consequences. That said, the deceit is also a propaganda technique.
“The road to power is paved with hypocrisy. And casualties.”
—Francis Underwood, House of Cards
Hypocrisy makes cooperation impossible. One of the most damaging aspects of hypocrisy is its ability to destroy trust, a vital component of any relationship, whether personal, professional, or societal. When someone is exposed as a hypocrite, it becomes impossible to take their words or actions at face value. The revelation that a person's outward demeanour is a mask for their true, often selfish motives leads to a breakdown in communication and collaboration.
"You have heard then, comrades, that we pigs now sleep in the beds of the farmhouse? And why not? You did not suppose, surely, that there was ever a ruling against beds?…comrades, with all the brainwork we have to do nowadays. You would not rob us of our repose, would you, comrades?”
—Squealer, a pig, in George Orwell's Animal Farm [17]
Hypocrisy breeds cynicism. When people witness hypocritical behaviour, especially in those they look up to, they become sceptical not just of the individual but of the values and principles they represent. This scepticism can lead to a broader distrust in institutions and societal norms, fostering an environment where genuine virtue is overshadowed by suspicion and doubt. The result is a community where authentic expressions of integrity and morality are questioned and undervalued.
“Our sole object in taking these things is to preserve our health. Milk and apples (this has been proved by Science, comrades) contain substances absolutely necessary to the well-being of a pig. We pigs are brainworkers. The whole management and organisation of this farm depend on us. Day and night we are watching over your welfare. It is for your sake that we drink that milk and eat those apples.”
—Squealer, a pig, in George Orwell's Animal Farm [17]
Hypocrisy is corrosive to the hypocrite. Living a double life requires constant vigilance and effort to maintain the deception. This inner conflict can lead to significant psychological stress, as the individual must continually reconcile their public persona with their private actions. The dissonance between who they are and who they pretend to be can lead to guilt, shame, and self-loathing. Over time, this internal turmoil can erode the individual's sense of self-worth and well-being.
“The true hypocrite is the one who ceases to perceive his deception, the one who lies with sincerity.”
—André Gide (1869-1951), French author [18]
Hypocrisy is a red flag for the risk manager. Hypocrisy is often a precursor to greater moral and ethical lapses. Once a person becomes comfortable presenting a false front, they may find engaging in other forms of deceit and unethical behaviour easier. The initial act of hypocrisy can set off a chain reaction, leading to increasingly severe violations of trust and integrity. This slippery slope can ultimately result in actions that cause significant harm to others and the hypocrite's moral compass.
"Will the last eco hypocrite to leave COP26 please turn off the lights?"
—Page 1 headline, Daily Star, 10 November 2021
1988 cont.
John Zerzan (b. 1943), the American anarchist and author, published Elements of Refusal, a collection of essays. It's a foundational work in anarcho-primitivist thought, critiquing civilization and its core aspects. Zerzan argued that seemingly positive aspects of civilization, like art, language, timekeeping, and technology, actually contribute to domestication and alienation. The title "Elements of Refusal" reflects Zerzan's emphasis on rejecting the structures and assumptions of civilization. The book also critiques traditional leftist movements like communism and socialism, arguing they haven't challenged the basic framework of industrial society. Zerzan doesn't advocate for a simple return to a romanticized past. Instead, he argues for recovering the rebellious spirit and freedom he believes existed in pre-civilized societies.
The Toronto Conference on the Changing Atmosphere called for strict, specific limits on greenhouse gas emissions. The UN recommended that the world “reduce CO2 emissions by approximately 20% by 2005 as an initial global goal.” UK Prime Minister Thatcher, who brought back the UK from the so-called second world to the first in the 1980s, was the first major leader to call for action. She promoted low-CO2 nuclear energy mainly for energy security reasons, thus trying to reduce Middle East energy dependence. However, she used global warming as a further argument to go nuclear when the global warming rhetoric became more popular.
“The problem of global climate change is one that affects us all and action will only be effective if it is taken at the international level. It is no good squabbling over who is responsible or who should pay.”
—Margaret Thatcher in 1989 [13]
Her main motivation for energy security is still valid today, as much of fossil energy comes from politically unstable parts of the world. Energy independence and access to water might become a risk concern in the near or distant future. Water from the Himalayas, for example, is a point of contention for drinking, irrigation and hydropower. Furthermore, the three nuclear powers there don’t like each other very much.
To be continued…
[1] Paul Ehrlich, “Eco-Catastrophe!”, Ramparts, Special Earth Day issue, 12 August 1970. Originally published in the September 1969 issue of Ramparts magazine.
[2] Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research (EDGAR).
[3] Michael Shellenberger, Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All (New York: Harper, 2020), chap. 9, Kindle.
[4] The Discovery of Global Warming, history.aip.org (February 2021).
[5] Ian Sample, ”The father of climate change,” The Guardian, 30 June 2005.
[6] Mark Sagoff, The Rise and Fall of Ecological Economics, 19 June 2015.
[7] Drieu Godefridi, The Green Reich (Texquis, 2019), 54.
[8] The Discovery of Global Warming, history.aip.org (February 2021).
[9] Ibid.
[10] James Lovelock, Novacene – The Coming Age of Hyperintelligence (London: Allen Lane, 2019), 49.
[11] Ian Sample, ”The father of climate change,” The Guardian, 30 June 2005.
[12] Garth W. Paltridge, The Climate Caper: Facts and Fallacies of Global Warming (Lanham: Taylor Trade Publishing, 2009), 75.
[13] Speech to United Nations General Assembly (Global Environment), 8 November 1989.
[14] Hat tip to Ulrich N. for pointing this out to me.
[15] Molière, Tartuffe, 1664. Original: “L'hypocrisie est un vice à la mode et tous les vices à la mode passent pour vertus.”
[16] Osho, Sex Matters: From Sex to Superconsciousness (New York: Osho International Foundation, 2002). First published by Bhagwan Rajneesh, later Osho, as “Sambhoga se samādhī kī ora” in 1969.
[17] George Orwell, Animal Farm, 1945.
[18] André Gide, The Counterfeiters (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1927).
[19] Ricky Gervais, Golden Globe monologue, 5 January 2020.
[20] Margaret Thatcher, Statecraft—Strategies for a changing world (New York: Harper Collins, 2002).