Carbon Tunnel Vision

We don’t have a ‘Carbon’ problem. We have a storage problem.

Too much carbon is in our atmosphere in the form of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide. Too little carbon is in the soil. This fuels the hidden killer: water cycling.

No soil carbon > no capacity to store water > no ability to grow plants > no photosynthesis > no storage of carbon.

This is better viewed as a cycle, not a linear progression.

A cycle, like the wheel going round on a bicycle, is moving and so can be stopped.

Here’s the stick in the spokes:

Well managed livestock and cropping practices can build soil that holds carbon, therefore water, therefore more plants. What do plants do? Suck CO2 up and store it in the soil! Louder for the ones at the back!

Decarbonise the atmosphere.

REcarbonise the soil and therefore our economies.

Precision Fermentation: Precisely Idiotic

Using precision fermentation to make food is being suggested as an answer to the issues of feeding our growing population and solving the climate crisis simultaneously.

For argument’s sake, let’s park all nutritional concerns and assume that the stuff is nutritionally complete.

This technology, like almost all human-invented technology, is scalable. Theoretically, scalable to the point of ensuring food security globally as claimed. More concrete + more steel + more plastic = more factories = more ‘food’.

The second claim of this theory, it’s potential to solve the climate crisis, is another story. The assumption is that this technology would fully replace all livestock farming, thereby completely negating the emissions and use of land, subsequently solving our crisis.

This, in practice, would not be the case. These are the main reasons why:

• Livestock emissions are widely miscalculated and overstated in the commonly cited literature; skewing and invalidating all further calculations.

• Life-cycle analysis of the potential emissions of precision fermentation has not been included, or in fact even calculated . Without these estimates, we cannot and should not compare it to any other model of food production.

• The theory incorrectly assumes all livestock are damaging all the land they ‘use’.

• The theory incorrectly assumes that the removal of said livestock would restore the land.

Precision fermentation is yet another product of narrow, linear thinking. It is another shiny showcase of humans thinking that technological advancement is how we progress. No ultra-processed food product will ever be an ‘answer’.

We Can’t Hack our Climate, Bill

Solar Geoengineering: Spraying particles into the atmosphere to block the sun, thereby reducing global warming. One of the latest innovations backed by wealthy do-gooders like Bill Gates

Gates is the founder of arguably the most successful tech company ever. Why are we surprised that he, and others like him, want to use new technology to fix our complex problem of climate change. New technology is precisely what he does, and what ‘made’ him. It is also the source of his huge wealth. Very rich, technology-minded, old people will not want to work together over the coming decades to grind out a method of policy upheaval and societal shift to slowly treat the root cause of climate change.

1) they haven’t got decades to spare at their age and patience. 2) The mindset that made them rich is precisely a mindset we have to drop in order to progress. 3) Their identity is too challenged by entertaining the idea that the ‘answer’ may not involve more technology and more linear thinking.

Pumping calcium carbonate, sulphur dioxide or sea water into the atmosphere might work. But it is an expensive, resource hungry, band-aid fix to a huge, complex problem.

Mass diversity loss, desertification, mega fires = climate change.