Global Warming: what do we do now?

"The most crucial action is to stop migration into the UK now."

You have heard the headlines about Global Warming, in the last few years they have been saying: “act now or pay later”. It may shock you but the truth is very different. You wont like what I am going to say but we are going to pay later whatever we do (See The Limits to Growth, Is climate change a threat because of overpopulation? ). What I am about to say will be regarded by many as “pessimistic” but it is no more pessimistic than saying that people get older or that it will be night soon. Describing the inevitable is not pessimism.

Many people were aware of the problem of global warming and ecosystem collapse in the 1980s and early 1990s but unfortunately the oil companies and car manufacturers formed well-financed pressure groups that prevented the message from getting through. The pressure groups and misinformation sources caused twenty years of media confusion. At the end of this twenty year hiatus India and China have become major CO2 producers and the possibility of effective global action is less than ever. Anyway, now we know that there is a problem we can fix it can't we? Well, bad news I'm afraid. No we can't fix it, at least not by controlling CO2.

It is interesting that the public are as confused now as they were in the nineteen nineties, the media told them there wasn't a problem in the nineties and now they are are telling them that the problem might be fixed but in truth the damage has already been done. So lets be clear about the future. It is already too late to stop a major disaster. Even if there were no global warming there would still be a disaster due to ecosystem collapse (see The Limits to Growth).

One of the scientists who struggled to bring Global Warming to the attention of the world in the 1980s was Professor James Lovelock. Lovelock's credentials are impeccable:

“He was one of a select group of scientists who gave an initial briefing on global warming to Margaret Thatcher's Cabinet at 10 Downing Street in April 1989.” (McCarthy 2006).

Lovelock, along with many respectable scientists is now telling us as clearly as possible that it is too late. It is amazing that when Lovelock tells the world that it is too late the journalists just scoff and accuse him of pessimism. Twenty years ago Lovelock was telling the world that it had to act now and the journalists just scoffed, accused him of pessimism and ignored his warnings, he is now saying that it is too late and the journalists again accuse him of pessimism. The journalists use of the word “pessimism” is just a refusal to confront an overwhelming reality.

It is quite clear what is going to happen. Global Warming is worse than the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007) predicted in its report “Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis.”. The IPCC predictions are bad but even a few days after the IPCC report it was clear that their predictions are far too conservative (Raupach et al 2007). Global Warming is probably three times worse than the IPCC figures (Lean 2007).  Not only is global warming worse than predicted but the  The Limits to Growth scenario is occurring.

If you live in Britain it is not all bad news. Britain is particularly well placed to cope with the coming disaster. It is surrounded by sea which keeps the temperature from wild fluctuations and it is next to a special ocean circulation called the “North Atlantic Conveyor” or, technically, the “Thermohaline Circulation”, which will shut off as the world warms up. In fact it is possible that Britain will be one of the least heated parts of the world. Despite this relative lack of warming the rise in sea level will be severe and by the end of the century most of East Anglia and probably London will be submerged. Most of the river valleys will be submerged for miles inland. The loss of arable land may be as high as 20% or more and populations will be displaced to the hills.

So what do we do? First of all we should mock the obsessive types who see the solution to everything in terms of making people live clean and orderly lives, sorting their rubbish into coloured bins and carrying designer shopping bags. This is just a distraction, the population will fall by 50% in a century or two – there is no need to worry about consuming all the world's resources, we don't have time. Secondly, don't believe that wind turbines and other eco-energy sources are a solution – they might be cheap or diversified ways of producing electricity but they won't stop the future. Lastly, don't be seduced by plans for carbon taxes etc. governments are always greedy for tax revenues and will seize on any opportunity to grab them. It is already too late so you have the choice of high taxes before disaster or low taxes before disaster – come on now, if the governments were really serious they would simply phase out fossil fuelled cars, lorries and power stations by 2020.

So what should really be done? The problem will occur on a timescale of about 1-2 centuries. The biggest problems will be a drastic increase in food prices as the rest of the world experiences failed harvests and mass migration of people from the south to the north. Given that Britain will be unable to grow sufficient food for its own population it will be unable to receive any of these refugees. There will be a period in twenty-fifty years time when Britain has some surplus resources and there will be increasing numbers of people from southern Europe and places further south who will want to migrate to Britain. This migration must be resisted because, in a further twenty to fifty years, Britain will have too little food to support its population and there will be famine and widespread deaths.

This closing of borders rankles with me because it seems uncharitable but many countries already control their populations and Britain does not allow absolutely wholesale migration even in these times of plenty. Furthermore, if you have a hundred people with just enough to eat and force them to share with another twenty then at least twenty will die before the balance is restored.

The most important action that can be taken by British governments is to encourage a reduction of population so that when famines strike in fifty to eighty years they will not cause millions of deaths. This is just good husbandry of the land and resources.

The efficiency of domestic agriculture should be a high priority and experiments should be undertaken to determine which crops will give the best yields in the new environment.

There should be a plan for the relocation of people from coastal cities around the end of the century. This plan will focus the electorate's attention on the seriousness of the problems confronting us.

The armed forces should be withdrawn from foreign conflicts because these will increase in frequency and vigour over the next century as food becomes scarce. A new emphasis on deterrence and the adoption of a low international profile is required so that Britain does not get attacked by desperate emerging nuclear powers. Our borders should be policed effectively to prevent migration. Our politicians must understand that they are dealing with the same problem as a farmer who finds that his land and all the land around is failing in productivity. This farmer would not tell everyone that he can feed their cattle nor would he break down his fences to allow his neighbour's cattle onto his land.

We, and our politicians, have a huge advantage because we can see the coming disaster. Unfortunately I will now have to use the word “pessimistic” in its true meaning. Although the coming disaster is natural and inevitable there are many different possible outcomes and I take the pessimistic view. Like people in the 1930s we will probably do all the wrong things until it is obvious that there is a disaster. Though maybe, just maybe, there will be pressure for practical action to deal with the inevitable before it occurs.

Although this article is about "global warming" the real problem is overpopulation - see Is Global Warming a threat because of overpopulation?. UK population growth is largely due to immigration and the fertility of the first generation immigrants so the most crucial action is to stop migration into the UK now.

See

The Limits to Growth

The Evidence for Global Warming. (1) the Himalayas
The Evidence for Global Warming. (2) Analysis using source data for global changes
Global warming (3) man or nature?
The strange case of the missing CO2
 Global Warming: What Will Change?
Is climate change a threat because of overpopulation?

Blue Haze, Brown Clouds and the need to stop Geoengineering before it begins.
Global warming: what do we do now?

Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. (2007) IPCC, Unep.

http://media.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/av/dn11088D1.pdf

Brahic, C. Blame for global warming placed firmly on humankind. New Scientist 5^th February 2007. http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11088

McCarthy, M. (2006). Environment in crisis: 'We are past the point of no return'. Independent Newspaper 16^th January 2006. http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/environment-in-crisis-we-are-past-the-point-of-no-return-523192.html

Lean, G. (2007) Global Warming is three times worse than predicted. Independent Newspaper 3^rd June 2007.

Raupach et al. (2007). Global and regional drivers of accelerating CO₂ emissions. PNAS June 12, 2007 vol. 104 no. 24 10288-10293 . http://www.pnas.org/content/104/24/10288

Lovelock, J. (2006). The Revenge of Gaia. Penguin Books