Resource Renewal: The Solution to Our Environmental Problems
‘Decarbonization’ is a correlative effort, at best. The real solution involves the creation, regeneration and protection of natural resources.
As advisors and investors in social and ecological impact projects/ventures, we see operating context as critically important to smart, measured and highly strategic development. Unfortunately, climate change narratives, and the science driving them, can be woefully misguided.
Our position on environmental reform focuses on resource renewal.
Essentially, we see natural resource development, regeneration and protection across supply chains and independent producers as the boon in the reformation equation. Stemming from that, pollutants can be eradicated, and sound economic models can emerge through supply chain transformation, which in turn, bring a wider array of investors and participants to the table.
‘Decarbonization’ is about an elusive of a proposition as trying to control global temperatures — it’s the logic of hysteria. It’s binary. It’s not pragmatic. It’s not very inclusive. And it’s not working.
It also promotes the idea that big government and its constituent bureaucracies can somehow solve our environmental issues through patchwork policies and subsidies which are relatively sparse. They can’t. If history has shown us anything, big business runs big government through powerful lobbying, in combination with unwieldy tax, monetary and credit schemes. So, more focused, more decentralized efforts in the private sector are the way forward.
We suggest a (re)focus on real cause, not correlation.
The cause of our environmental crisis is resource extraction. The solution is resource renewal (via resource regeneration). Plain and simple.
Sure, there is a ton of complexity around the details behind this, but it is not an unforeseeable, impossible set of efforts, nor, in this context or any other, are we working against a timeline of 12 years (or less) before there is ‘planetary collapse’.
With that said, it is simply NOT true that climate change science has reached ‘widely held’ scientific consensus. It’s geopolitically driven, understatedly so, and mostly filling the coffers of those profiting from climate change narratives.
Truth is, there are warming trends and cooling trends associated with climate change. Yes, the climate changes. Biodiversity is hugely affected. Biospheric management is understudied and not interdisciplinary. We seem to be in an interglacial (some assert a post-glacial epoch) Holocene period headed towards another ice age. The modeling around this is still nascent, for obvious reasons, and so all we can really do is focus our attention on being the best stewards of the planet and its precious resources that we can possibly be… Right now.
What we’re commonly overlooking are the very serious issues involving clean water systems, sustained renewable infrastructure, waste management, topsoil regeneration, hydrocarbon uses (like plastics), raw material production, organic food systems, and myriad other challenges connected to production and consumption.
We also have to think about transition planning — we can’t just displace millions of jobs tied to fossil fuel production without a viable net that provides new skills development and education on regenerative methods for new resource creation. Alongside of that, we have to think about leadership, and the ways we can reindoctrinate people into healthy relationships with their physical environments. We also have to think about polycultural factors, and implement programs, for example, in which indigenous principles are honored and integrated.
In solving for these — and undoubtedly the efforts are well underway — carbon emissions will be taken care of by default. Horse before cart, as they say.
I could rattle off all the things that are being developed per what’s mentioned above, but I won’t. This piece is about context, and establishing a different kind of baseline. So, if you’re interested in challenging your own belief systems around what is thought of as ‘climate change’, here’s a short list of reputable scientists who have brought forth enriched, evidence-based perspectives on the climate, as well as studies on various changes to the environment, along with the implications concerning resource renewal:
- David Bellamy
- Lennart Bengtsson
- Piers Corbyn
- Susan Crockford
- Judith Curry
- Ivar Giaver
- Richard Lindzen
- Craig Loehle
- Ross McKitrick
- Garth Paltridge
- Roger Pielke
- Hendrik Tennekes
- Anastasios Tsonis
- Fritz Vahrenholt
- Timothy Ball
- Don Easterbrook
- Jennifer Marohasy
- Tad Murty
- Claude Allegre
- John Christy
It is the responsibility of each of us to evolve our thinking, so that our actions matter. As such, we should expand our research capacities and come to an ever-expanding set of inferences. The scientific method is no exception, nor are the insights we draw from it. And do know that many solutions are in tow.
Breaking Free of the Mental Model that Stifles Real Progress
The Hegelian Dialectic has impregnated our change initiatives around the world with delusions of ‘great, sweeping…
The Truth about the Economy, and the Real Opportunity for Blockchain Entrepreneurs
Getting down to brass tacks as we head into 2019.
The Real Power of a Crypto: Non-Flationary Value
Moving past stablecoin theories into the real, applied territory of resource economics.