Lüthi, S., Fairless, C., Fischer, E.M. et al. Rapid increase in the risk of heat-related mortality. Nat Commun 14, 4894 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-40599-x #OpenAccess #OA #Article #Research #Science #STEM #Health #Medicine #Meteorology #Climatology #Climate #Weather #ClimateChange #Academia #Academic #Academics #University @science

Assessing the U.S. Climate in July 2023

https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/news/national-climate-202307

#weather #climate #climatology

@Aut

"Most science". Do you find that #climatology is very inconvenient? Since aviation & fuel burning transport in general is a leading cause of #ClimateChange

Gizmodo: 41 Million Americans Are Simmering on Urban Heat Islands https://gizmodo.com/millions-americans-simmering-urban-heat-islands-1850683989 #cityofphoenixarizona #urbanheatisland #climateforcing #climatecentral #climatechange #coolpavement #urbanization #environment #petergirard #climatology #heatwave #grist

Less Talk, More Walk: Why #ClimateChange Demands #Activism in the Academy https://doi.org/10.1162/daed_a_01824

#climate #science #ClimateActivism #ScienceCommunication

#sustainability #ConservationBiology #ecology #food #wildlife #agroecology #climatology #RenewableEnergy #PoliticalScience #economist #degrowth #polluting #IndustrialSectors

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (2023). Climate Change 2021 – The Physical Science Basis: Working Group I Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896 #OpenAccess #OA #Science #Climatology #Climate #ClimateChange #ClimateCrisis #ClimateEmergency #Environment #Economics #Book #Books #Ebook #Ebooks #Bookstodon @science @bookstodon

Gizmodo: Underground Heat Is Sinking Our Cities, Study Says https://gizmodo.com/underground-heat-sinking-cities-1850635381 @news@lemmy.seedoubleyou.me #urbanheatisland #climateforcing #climatechange #urbanization #environment #climatology #rottaloria

New publication: "Measuring and evaluating colorimetric properties of samples from loess-paleosol sequences" #OpenAccess #Geoscience #Climatology #Geomorphology #Stratigraphy #Geography https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2023.102159

Hi! I'm a Boston based #software #engineer with a BS in #computer #engineering. I primarily work in #python but have been loving #rust / #rustlang.

As an ex-conservative christian, I've been trying to get more involved in #progressive #politics and the fight against #ChristianNationalism.

I love #science, #music (particularly #metal / #heavymetal), #rockclimbing, #skiing, #books and multitudes of other things.

My toots and boosts will probably be all over the place so follow me if you want to come along for the ride!

Other tags of interest:
#anthropology #astronomy #astrophycis #audiophiles #blackholes #ClimateChange #climatology #computerscience #cooking #cybersecurity #democracy #evolution #foss #opensource #misinformation #disinformation #nationalparks #neovim #vim #scicomm #skepticism #socialist #theatre #videogames #boardgames

Re Strong research background in earth and/or universe science? Apply before 24 July!
#Universe #Science, #Astrophysics, #Astronomy, #Cosmology, #Earth, #Geophysics, #Climatology, #Geochemistry, #Seismology, #Oceanography

🐦🔗: https://n.respublicae.eu/ERC_Research/status/1675772688084660224

Searching to follow scientists that have studied one or more of these subjects.

#agroecology
#climatology
#conservationBiology
#materials
#MarineEcology

Also, people that have developed a relatively low ecological impact lifestyle (e.g., obviously not flying on Jets or eating red meat)

Plus engineers that have experience in renewable energy #technology

Please "favorite" this toot if your Mastodon profile generally fits one or more of these descriptions or boosts for a wider reach.

ThX

Searching to follow scientists that have studied one or more of these subjects.

#Agroecology
#climatology
#ConservationBiology
#Materials
#MarineEcology

Also, people that have developed a relatively low ecological impact lifestyle (e.g., obviously not flying on Jets or eating red meat)

Plus, generally anyone that thinks about ecological sustainable development on a daily basis.

Please "favourite" this toot if your Mastodon profile generally fits one or more of these descriptions..

Casually browsing through the latest (semi-open-access) issue of the International Journal of #Climatology (I'm not a trained climatologist), it's impressive the varied forms of research that these scientific publications represent

Reading the abstract of research articles is a quick shortcut to get a general "feel" for the paper's aims, methods, and conclusions. https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/toc/10970088/2023/43/8

This paper reminded me of a heat pump (e.g., a fridge freezer) https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/joc.8053

#climate #science

Casually browsing through the latest (open access) issue of the International Journal of #Climatology (I'm not a trained climatologist), it's very impressive the varied forms of research that these scientific publications represent

Reading the abstract of research articles is a quick shortcut to get a general "feel" for the paper's aims, methods, and conclusions. https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/toc/10970088/2023/43/8

This paper reminded me of a heat pump (e.g., a fridge freezer) https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/joc.8053

#climate #science

The unsustainable lifestyles of the successfully wealthy.

Imagine if a government encouraged people to live sustainable lifestyles.

This would be in stark contrast to the current neoliberal sociopolitical and socioeconomic paradigm that has encouraged unsustainable lifestyles in the name of economic growth. Ways of living that are based on increasing the amounts of resources society consume (e.g., bigger cars, houses and not sharing products)

"Consumerism" is an umbrella term. However, the most ecologically damaging aspect of consumerism is due to a "free" (where products are not free) market economy where business activities have not been linked to sustaining the planet's life support systems.

A market trades products and services. In other words, supply and demand. Therefore, to critically evaluate a business's environmental impact, the supply and demand environmental impacts of the businesses' and end consumers' activities must be analyzed.

Let's take a worst-case example of an extremely unsustainable lifestyle.

A Fuel Company Executive (FCE) who relatively receives a high income (e.g., millionaire +). The FCE managers business activities that use various methods to extract "fossil" fuels (Coal, crude oil, gas). "Fossil" fuels are Carbon Based Fuels (CBF). These industrial activities degrade (damage & pollute) or destroy natural habitats so as to extract the CBF (or metal, etc) that are under the ground (on land or the seabed). These extraction activities also use machinery that burns CBF (combustion engines. e.g., diesel) to extract the CBF, and transport and process the CBF (e.g., crude oil refineries > fuel stations). At the end of all these power and resource-consuming activities, the final product is incinerated (to fuel machinery). That's a linear-based economy that is burning finite materials. That's an unsustainable economy.

A Fuel Company Executive (FCE) generally works in an office. These office blocks or skyscrapers also burn Carbon Based Fuels (CBF) & use electricity generated by burning CBF (e.g., for construction, maintenance, heating, air conditioning, etc). Wealthy FCE live lifestyle (including personal business activities) that burns a relatively high amount of CBF and uses a relatively high amount of resources in general (e.g., large car, regular trips on Jets, etc).

Generally, people that are living lives that are only taking (e.g., consuming materials) and polluting (e.g., burning fuels) can not be sustained (evidently).

Imagine if a government encouraged people to live sustainable lifestyles. "Government" is fundamentally management. For a government to promote ecological #sustainability it must understand the relevant subjects such as #ecology and #climatology. It must also have a long-term plan (e.g., hundreds to thousands of years). Generally, for a population of people in a democracy (e.g., in a country) to develop a sustainable culture the general population must have a form of intelligence that understands how the Planet's ecosystem functions (based on the evidence of the science of ecology). Also, the government must align with the voter's motives to live sustainable lifestyles (e.g., not greenwash the public as has been the norm with many governments. e.g., the UK's Conservative Party tend to greenwash the voters that they will mitigate the environmental problems in twenty years or so. Rather than dealing with them now by developing the appropriate fast-acting environmental policies now (they've been greenwashing the voters for decades)

Fundamentally, because a sustainable lifestyle is practically possible - https://qoto.org/@Empiricism_Reloaded/110511036586999020

- the fundamental problem that is causing ecological degradation, therefore, climate change is political. More broadly psychological (e.g., uneducation, misinformation, corruption, disinformation, greed, vanity, ideologies, delusions, etc)

The Planet's biosphere (e.g., weather or more broadly in time and space climate) is the regulator of all human lives and activities. As human activities degrade (e.g., pollute) components of the Planet's biosphere, this is causing ecological negative events (for humans) such as climate change. These events will increasingly regulate human activities.

Consider a spectrum (e.g., more or less of a variable). The variable is human activities. On one extreme of the spectrum is the Fuel Company Executive (or the millionaire or billionaire lifestyle). These are the people that are evidently living High Ecological Impact Lifestyles (HEIL). At the other end of the spectrum are people that are living Low Ecological Impact Lifestyles (LEIL). For example, those people that have incorporated sustainable living into their lifestyle (their thinking). In fact, in practice, LEIL can repair the damage that the HEIL has historically caused to natural habitats by restoring the local ecosystems (whilst also growing food & providing other goods and services to the local economy)

Further reading and guidance about Low Ecological Impact Living. https://qoto.org/@Empiricism_Reloaded/110511036586999020

#sustainable #climate #economy

Title – One Planet #Sustainability

The essay will describe how a population of people (society) can develop a society that is relatively sustainable (e.g., virtually zero Greenhouse Gas emissions). To be clear, this essay is not stating that humans will want to transition toward a sustainable society. In other words, for various personal reasons (psychology. e.g., political & economic ideologies), people may not want to live in a sustainable society. Or for various political reasons, they may not be able to. However, this essay is stating that populations of people can live sustainably (should they want to & the political context permitted them to).

Generally, for human societies to transition towards a sustainability culture (e.g., lifestyles), people, in general, will have to vastly reduce the amount of resources and power they're consuming. The Our World in data website - Per capita greenhouse gas emissions: how much does the average person emit?" provides an indication of how the amount of resources and power that people consume is not evenly distributed (generally, wealthy people consume more resources and power, for example, more consumerism - therefore cause more Greenhouse Gas Emissions) https://ourworldindata.org/greenhouse-gas-emissions

A sustainable society must fundamentally not pollute its environment at levels that are unsustainable. A sustainable society must not be dependent on finite resources. For example, “fossil” fuels (that are not technically fossils) have a limited supply. Metal has a limited supply, there is only so much metal that can be mined. There is a limited supply of "fossil" fuels that can be extracted. Extracting fossil fuels or mining for metals causes ecological degradation (& also burns fossil fuels, therefore causing greenhouse gas emissions, to extract, process, and transport the fuels and metals)

Cities have been constructed and powered using the energy derived from burning fossil fuels and mining for resources in general. A time is approaching when the amount of fossil fuels available will start to decline (e.g. when peak oil is reached) and when climate change causes many lands to be inhabitable (e.g., frequent heatwaves, droughts, forest fires, floods, sea level rise, etc). Scientists have been warning for decades that burning fossil fuels is causing the atmosphere to warm, which in turn is causing climate change.

Generally, sustainability means humans collectively must not be degrading (damaging) the ecology of their environments (or more broadly the planet's biosphere).

Unfortunately, human societies are collectively severely damaging ecology. For example, destroying or degrading natural habits due to mining for resources such as metal or crude oil. Crude oil is then separated (distilled) into materials (fractions) such as diesel, gasoline, kerosene, gases, etc. These materials are then used as fuels that when incinerated pollute the air (atmosphere, more generally)

However, humans could choose to live a relatively sustainable way of life.

To quote The One Planet Council "The One Planet Council provides a bridge between applicants and local planning authorities, with guidance and tools to support anyone making the transition to this more sustainable way of life. https://www.oneplanetcouncil.org.uk/

"More sustainable way of life" is a slightly misleading phrase because most people in developed countries presently, and temporarily, live an extremely unsustainable way of life (hence the requirement for a massive change toward sustainable development).

There are methods to live sustainably. However, these methods need to generally replace the unsustainable resources and power demands of unsustainable lifestyles (societies) if they're to be effectively sustainable. The following information explains by referencing practical, relatively easy-to-follow and do guidance, on how to grow food sustainably whilst also restoring ecology (e.g., wildlife). A practical and easily implementable, win-win solution that's based on the science of AgroEcology (not that evidence-based reasoning will prevent the unreasonable from arguing against reason). The following information also explains by referencing practical, relatively easy-to-follow and do guidance, on how to use resources and generate power relatively sustainably (not that reason will prevent the unreasonable from arguing against reason). That generally means reducing how much resources and power societies use. In other words, focusing on resource and power efficiency. The present dominant economy wastes huge amounts of resources and power-producing products that nobody actually needs (that people could live comfortably without)

Before this essay references the general solutions to sustain a form of human society (a sustainable culture), this essay will acknowledge the institutional practices that are making it appear impractical, and difficult, to mitigate climate change.

There are many well-intended people in #business & #politics that are thinking about ways to try & mitigate #ClimateChange (greenwashes aside as their dangerously useless). People's personal circumstances, e.g., managing a company, can make the challenges of mitigating their business's climate impacts overwhelming (& impractical). Cooperation is the right approach (we are all in this together) to mitigate ecological degradation. Competition is the wrong approach.

More generally, operationally, there are two approaches to mitigate climate change, the top-down approach (e.g., government or management) or the bottom-up approach (e.g., local communities). Ideally, both approaches would be symbiotically in unison (But, human psychology...so)

People are in different circumstances. However, there is an increasing number of people that, IF the policies were in place, would have a huge positive impact on mitigating ecological degradation, therefore, lessening the impacts of climate change. To quote the One Planet Development Council (OPDC) "This forward-thinking planning policy provides a genuinely affordable and sustainable way for people to live and work on their own land, bringing social, economic, and environmental benefits" (see reference section. 1.)

That OPDC statement is somewhat misinformation - land isn't affordable for many people (however, I digress & that's a political problem).

However, to reiterate and rephrase so as to be more accurate "The One Planet Council provides a bridge between applicants and local planning authorities, with guidance and tools to support anyone making the transition to a sustainable way of life. https://www.oneplanetcouncil.org.uk/

Well-intended policymakers that want to mitigate ecological degradation therefore climate change will do well to develop policies that enable people (that want to) to grow food sustainably whilst also restoring nature (win-win). Generally, One Planet Development Policies need to be vastly scaled up. As the effects of climate change become more severe, we will need more people that are living in ways that grow food locally, increase biodiversity, and generally live a low-impact lifestyle (that's in everyone's interest).

Therefore, I urge policymakers, or social influencers in general, that are not confined by the business-as-usual paradigm (paradox), to review the One Planet Development Policy (OPDP) & cooperate with one another to mitigate climate change. For example, of an urgently required revision to the OPDP - according to the medical (e.g., epidemiology) and #climatology (i.e., climate science) evidence, burning biomass (e.g., wood fuel or biofuel) is not sustainable, therefore renewable, source of energy (when scaled up). Furthermore, prolonged exposure to wood smoke inhalation (e.g., over the years) increases the probability of developing diseases (which negatively impacts health and work-related costs. i.e., more resources and power for the health system). Furthermore, wood smoke, or tobacco smoke inhalation is harmful to the fetus during pregnancy (i.e., wood smoke is pollution. See reference section. 2.) Therefore, the OPDP should be revised to consider clean air and relatively low-energy methods of heating water such as heat pumps (making use of thermal heat energy within a relatively low electrical energy system).

The OPDP should also be revised to meet the requirements of the ecological landscape of any area. For example, the types of foods (predominantly plants & fungi as ruminants such as sheep & cows emit methane) that can be grown in a region. Also, the time scales involved to improve the soil condition (fertility) will vary. Many areas of land have soils that have been severely damaged by industrial forms of farming (e.g., overgrazing, insecticide [poisons], and mechanized machinery such as tractors that decrease soil fertility. See reference section. 3.)

Business As Usual (BAU) is a climate paradox (that's why it seems difficult (BAU is fundamentally human-as-usual psychology). BAU has been full of “what about?” excuses (people) that have caused the outcome that the window of opportunity to mitigate severe climate change is closing fast. Many ecological landscapes are generally in extremely poorly managed conditions. Many people are still burning carbon-based fuels (this form of society simply can not be sustained)

In summary, One Planet Development – Just do it already! The One Planet Development approach will also buy time for relatively large businesses and society, in general, to adapt.

To reiterate, this essay has not stated that humans will want to or be able to (due to business-as-usual politics) transition toward a sustainable society. The essay has referenced the practical guidance that humans can live in a relatively sustainable society. I have made this distinction explicit because the agents that are inferring that transitioning towards a sustainable society is difficult are greenwashing (i.e., for their own personal reasons they don't want to live in a sustainable society. e.g., monetary & lifestyle agendas) #psychology

Website References that include multitudes of interdisciplinary science and or further reading.

1. One Planet Development Policy https://www.oneplanetcouncil.org.uk/

2. Doctors and Scientists against wood smoke pollution. https://www.dsawsp.org/environment/climate

3. The Soil Association. https://www.soilassociation.org/

#sustainable #culture #AgroEcology #renewableenergy #Degrowth #CircularEconomy

#unsustainable #society #economy #politics #FossilFuels #WoodFuel #BioFuel #climate #ClimateHeating #ClimateChange #ForestFires #droughts #FlashFloods #SeaLevelRise #OceanAcidification #PlasticPollution

Title – One Planet #Sustainability

The essay will describe how a population of people (society) can develop a society that is relatively sustainable (e.g., virtually zero Greenhouse Gas emissions). To be clear, this essay is not stating that humans will want to transition toward a sustainable society. In other words, for various personal reasons (psychology. e.g., political & economic ideologies), people may not want to live in a sustainable society. Or for various political reasons, they may not be able to. However, this essay is stating that populations of people can live sustainably (should they want to & the political context permitted them to).

Generally, for human societies to transition towards a sustainability culture (e.g., lifestyles), people, in general, will have to vastly reduce the amount of resources and power they're consuming. The Our World in data website - Per capita greenhouse gas emissions: how much does the average person emit?" provides an indication of how the amount of resources and power that people consume is not evenly distributed (generally, wealthy people consume more resources and power, for example, more consumerism - therefore cause more Greenhouse Gas Emissions) https://ourworldindata.org/greenhouse-gas-emissions

A sustainable society must fundamentally not pollute its environment at levels that are unsustainable. A sustainable society must not be dependent on finite resources. For example, “fossil” fuels (that are not technically fossils) have a limited supply. Metal has a limited supply, there is only so much metal that can be mined. There is a limited supply of "fossil" fuels that can be extracted. Extracting fossil fuels or mining for metals causes ecological degradation (& also burns fossil fuels, therefore cases greenhouse gas emissions, to extract, process, and transport the fuels and metals)

Cities have been constructed and powered using the energy derived from burning fossil fuels and mining for resources in general. A time is approaching when the amount of fossil fuels available will start to decline (e.g. when peak oil is reached) and when climate change causes many lands to be inhabitable (e.g., frequent heatwaves, droughts, forest fires, floods, sea level rise, etc). Scientists have been warning for decades that burning fossil fuels is causing the atmosphere to warm, which in turn is causing climate change.

Generally, sustainability means humans collectively must not be degrading (damaging) the ecology of their environments (or more broadly the planet's biosphere).

Unfortunately, human societies are severely damaging ecology. For example, destroying or degrading natural habits due to mining for resources such as metal or crude oil. The crude oil is then separated (distilled) into materials (fractions) such as diesel, gasoline, kerosene, gases, etc. These materials are then used as fuels that when incinerated pollute the air (atmosphere, more generally)

However, humans could choose to live a relatively sustainable way of life.

To quote The One Planet Council "The One Planet Council provides a bridge between applicants and local planning authorities, with guidance and tools to support anyone making the transition to this more sustainable way of life. https://www.oneplanetcouncil.org.uk/

"More sustainable" is a slightly misleading phrase because most people in developed countries live an extremely unsustainable way of life.

The following information explains by referencing practical, relatively easy-to-follow and do guidance, on how to grow food sustainably whilst also restoring ecology (e.g., wildlife). A practical and easily implementable, win-win solution (not that reason will prevent the unreasonable from arguing against reason)

The following information also explains by referencing practical, relatively easy-to-follow and do guidance, on how to use resources and generate power relatively sustainably (not that reason will prevent the unreasonable from arguing against reason)

Before this essay references the general solutions to sustain a form of human society (a sustainable culture), this essay will acknowledge the institutional practices that are making it appear impractical, and difficult, to mitigate climate change.

There are many well-intended people in #business & #politics that are thinking about ways to try & mitigate #ClimateChange (greenwashes aside as their dangerously useless). People's personal circumstances, e.g., managing a company, can make the challenges of mitigating their business's climate impacts overwhelming (& impractical). Cooperation is the right approach (we are all in this together) to mitigate ecological degradation. Competition is the wrong approach.

More generally, operationally, there are two approaches to mitigate climate change, the top-down approach (e.g., government or management) or the bottom-up approach (e.g., local communities). Ideally, both approaches would be symbiotically in unison (But, human psychology...so)

People are in different circumstances. However, there is an increasing number of people that, IF the policies were in place, would have a huge positive impact on mitigating ecological degradation, therefore, lessening the impacts of climate change. To quote the One Planet Development Council (OPDC) "This forward-thinking planning policy provides a genuinely affordable and sustainable way for people to live and work on their own land, bringing social, economic, and environmental benefits" (see reference section. 1.)

That OPDC statement is somewhat misinformation - land isn't affordable for many people (however, I digress & that's a political problem).

Well-intended policymakers that want to mitigate ecological degradation therefore climate change will do well to develop policies that enable people (that want to) to grow food sustainably whilst also restoring nature (win-win). Generally, One Planet Development Policies need to be vastly scaled up. As the effects of climate change become more severe, we will need more people that are living in ways that grow food locally, increase biodiversity, and generally live a low-impact lifestyle (that's in everyone's interest).

Therefore, I urge policymakers, or social influencers in general, that are not confined by the business-as-usual paradigm (paradox), to review the One Planet Development Policy (OPDP) & cooperate with one another to mitigate climate change. For example, of an urgently required revision to the OPDP - according to the medical (e.g., epidemiology) and #climatology (i.e., climate science) evidence, burning biomass (e.g., wood fuel or biofuel) is not sustainable, therefore renewable, source of energy (when scaled up). Furthermore, prolonged exposure to wood smoke inhalation (e.g., over the years) increases the probability of developing diseases (which negatively impacts health and work-related costs. i.e., more resources and power for the health system). Furthermore, wood smoke, or tobacco smoke inhalation is harmful to the fetus during pregnancy (i.e., wood smoke is pollution. See reference section. 2.) Therefore, the OPDP should be revised to consider clean air and relatively low-energy methods of heating water such as heat pumps (making use of thermal heat energy within a relatively low electrical energy system).

The OPDP should also be revised to meet the requirements of the ecological landscape of any area. For example, the types of foods (predominantly plants & fungi as ruminants such as sheep & cows emit methane) that can be grown in a region. Also, the time scales involved to improve the soil condition (fertility) will vary. Many areas of land have soils that have been severely damaged by industrial forms of farming (e.g., overgrazing, insecticide [poisons], and mechanized machinery such as tractors that decrease soil fertility. See reference section. 3.)

Business As Usual (BAU) is a climate paradox (that's why it seems difficult (BAU is fundamentally human-as-usual psychology). BAU has been full of “what about?” excuses (people) that have caused the outcome that the window of opportunity to mitigate severe climate change is closing fast. Many ecological landscapes are generally in extremely poorly managed conditions. Many people are still burning carbon-based fuels (this form of society simply can not be sustained)

In summary, One Planet Development – Just do it already! The One Planet Development approach will also buy time for relatively large businesses and society, in general, to adapt.

To reiterate, this essay has not stated that humans will want to or be able to (due to business-as-usual politics) transition toward a sustainable society. The essay has referenced the practical guidance that humans can live in a relatively sustainable society. I have made this distinction explicit because the agents that are inferring that transitioning towards a sustainable society is difficult are greenwashing (i.e., for their own personal reasons they don't want to live in a sustainable society. e.g., monetary & lifestyle agendas) #psychology

Website References that include multitudes of interdisciplinary science and or further reading.

1. One Planet Development Policy https://www.oneplanetcouncil.org.uk/

2. Doctors and Scientists against wood smoke pollution. https://www.dsawsp.org/environment/climate

3. The Soil Association. https://www.soilassociation.org/

#sustainable #culture #AgroEcology #renewableenergy #Degrowth #CircularEconomy

#unsustainable #society #economy #politics #FossilFuels #WoodFuel #BioFuel #climate #ClimateHeating #ClimateChange #ForestFires #droughts #FlashFloods #SeaLevelRise #OceanAcidification #PlasticPollution

Title – One Planet #Sustainability

The essay will describe how a population of people (society) can develop a society that is relatively sustainable (e.g., virtually zero Greenhouse Gas emissions). To be clear, this essay is not stating that humans will want to transition toward a sustainable society. In other words, for various personal reasons (psychology. e.g., political & economic ideologies), people may not want to live in a sustainable society. Or for various political reasons, they may not be able to. However, this essay is stating that populations of people can live sustainably (should they want to & the political context permitted them to)

First, it will be necessary to broadly define what is and what is not a sustainable society. Fundamentally, a society must not pollute its environment at levels that are unsustainable. A sustainable society must not be dependent on finite resources. For example, “fossil” fuels (that are not technically fossils) have a limited supply. Metal has a limited supply, there is only so much metal that can be mined. There is a limited supply of "fossil" fuels that can be extracted.

Cities have been constructed and powered using the energy derived from burning fossil fuels. A time is approaching when the amount of fossil fuels available will start to decline (e.g. when peak oil is reached) and when climate change causes many lands to be inhabitable (e.g., frequent heatwaves, droughts, forest fires, floods, sea level rise, etc). Scientists have been warning for decades that burning fossil fuels is causing the atmosphere to warm, which in turn is causing climate change. Generally, sustainability means humans collectively must not be degrading (damaging) the ecology of their environments (or more broadly the planet's biosphere).

Unfortunately, human societies are severely damaging ecology. For example, destroying or degrading natural habits due to mining for resources such as metal or crude oil. The crude oil is then separated (distilled) into materials (fractions) such as diesel, gasoline, kerosene, gases, etc. These materials are then used as fuels that when incinerated pollute the air (atmosphere, more generally)

However, humans could choose to live sustainably if they were prudent enough (in general).

The following information explains by referencing practical, relatively easy-to-follow and do guidance, on how to grow food sustainably whilst also restoring ecology (e.g., wildlife). A practical and easily implementable, win-win solution (not that reason will prevent the unreasonable from arguing against reason)

The following information also explains by referencing practical, relatively easy-to-follow and do guidance, on how to use resources and generate power relatively sustainably (not that reason will prevent the unreasonable from arguing against reason)

Before this essay references the general solutions to sustain a form of human society (a sustainable culture), this essay will acknowledge the institutional practices that are making it appear impractical, and difficult, to mitigate climate change.

There are many well-intended people in #business & #politics that are thinking about ways to try & mitigate #ClimateChange (greenwashes aside as their dangerously useless). People's personal circumstances, e.g., managing a company, can make the challenges of mitigating their business's climate impacts overwhelming (& impractical). Cooperation is the right approach (we are all in this together) to mitigate ecological degradation. Competition is the wrong approach.

More generally, operationally, there are two approaches to mitigate climate change, the top-down approach (e.g., government or management) or the bottom-up approach (e.g., local communities). Ideally, both approaches would be symbiotically in unison (But, human psychology...so)

People are in different circumstances. However, there is an increasing number of people that, IF the policies were in place, would have a huge positive impact on mitigating ecological degradation, therefore, lessening the impacts of climate change. To quote the One Planet Development Council (OPDC) "This forward-thinking planning policy provides a genuinely affordable and sustainable way for people to live and work on their own land, bringing social, economic, and environmental benefits" (see reference section. 1.)

That OPDC statement is somewhat misinformation - land isn't affordable for many people (however, I digress & that's a political problem).

Well-intended policymakers that want to mitigate ecological degradation therefore climate change will do well to develop policies that enable people (that want to) to grow food sustainably whilst also restoring nature (win-win). Generally, One Planet Development Policies need to be vastly scaled up. As the effects of climate change become more severe, we will need more people that are living in ways that grow food locally, increase biodiversity, and generally live a low-impact lifestyle (that's in everyone's interest).

Therefore, I urge policymakers, or social influencers in general, that are not confined by the business-as-usual paradigm (paradox), to review the One Planet Development Policy (OPDP) & cooperate with one another to mitigate climate change. For example, of an urgently required revision to the OPDP - according to the medical (e.g., epidemiology) and #climatology (i.e., climate science) evidence, burning biomass (e.g., wood fuel or biofuel) is not sustainable, therefore renewable, source of energy (when scaled up). Furthermore, prolonged exposure to wood smoke inhalation (e.g., over the years) increases the probability of developing diseases (which negatively impacts health and work-related costs. i.e., more resources and power for the health system). Furthermore, wood smoke, or tobacco smoke inhalation is harmful to the fetus during pregnancy (i.e., wood smoke is pollution. See reference section. 2.) Therefore, the OPDP should be revised to consider clean air and relatively low-energy methods of heating water such as heat pumps (making use of thermal heat energy within a relatively low electrical energy system).

The OPDP should also be revised to meet the requirements of the ecological landscape of any area. For example, the types of foods (predominantly plants & fungi as ruminants such as sheep & cows emit methane) that can be grown in a region. Also, the time scales involved to improve the soil condition (fertility) will vary. Many areas of land have soils that have been severely damaged by industrial forms of farming (e.g., overgrazing, insecticide [poisons], and mechanized machinery such as tractors that decrease soil fertility. See reference section. 3.)

Business As Usual (BAU) is a climate paradox (that's why it seems difficult (BAU is fundamentally human-as-usual psychology). BAU has been full of “what about?” excuses (people) that have caused the outcome that the window of opportunity to mitigate severe climate change is closing fast. Many ecological landscapes are generally in extremely poorly managed conditions. Many people are still burning carbon-based fuels (this form of society simply can not be sustained)

In summary, One Planet Development – Just do it already! The One Planet Development approach will also buy time for relatively large businesses and society, in general, to adapt.

To reiterate, this essay has not stated that humans will want to or be able to (due to business-as-usual politics) transition toward a sustainable society. The essay has referenced the practical guidance that humans can live in a relatively sustainable society. I have made this distinction explicit because the agents that are inferring that transitioning towards a sustainable society is difficult are greenwashing (i.e., for their own personal reasons they don't want to live in a sustainable society. e.g., monetary & lifestyle agendas) #psychology

Website References that include multitudes of interdisciplinary science and or further reading.

1. One Planet Development Policy https://www.oneplanetcouncil.org.uk/

2. Doctors and Scientists against wood smoke pollution. https://www.dsawsp.org/environment/climate

3. The Soil Association. https://www.soilassociation.org/

#sustainable #culture #AgroEcology #renewableenergy #Degrowth #CircularEconomy

#unsustainable #society #economy #politics #FossilFuels #WoodFuel #BioFuel #climate #ClimateHeating #ClimateChange #ForestFires #droughts #FlashFloods #SeaLevelRise #OceanAcidification #PlasticPollution

🔖 bookmarked

*The Climate Dashboard Dashboard*

🔗 https://jjk-code-otter.github.io/dashboard-dashboard

#ClimateCrisis #climatology

🔖 bookmarked

*The Climate Dashboard Dashboard*

🔗 https://jjk-code-otter.github.io/dashboard-dashboard

#ClimateCrisis #climatology