James Lovelock on "The Revenge of Gaia"

Tonight I heard James Lovelock speak at Kepler's Books. The notes are, as always, my own take on his remarks, and not an official transcript.

Lovelock never thought that CFCs were a big thing, and is in favor of nuclear energy; so why write this book, which is pretty alarmist? During a visit to the Hadley Center, Lovelock heard lots of people talking separately about specific problems; put them together, and you have a very disturbing pattern. "Global heating is not just another scare."

Yet there's still little realization that as the century progresses, the world will continue to warm, rendering much of the tropics uninhabitable-- "a hot and barren desert unable to support today's burgeoning humanity." Anthropic heating will likely be as serious as the last major global warming, 14,000 years ago-- though it'll happen over the course of decades rather than centuries, and on a densely populated planet, and is likely to trigger mass migrations (on the order of hundreds of millions of people).

According to the Gaia Theory, the Earth seeks to generate conditions supporting life (without life on Earth, the planet would be a lot more like Venus or Mars, with no bodies of water and lots of CO2).

The Earth has the ability to self-correct to keep the core regions-- the 70% between 45 degrees north and south-- temperate. This dynamic view suggests that the coming hot phase (when CO2 hits 440 ppm-- we're at 380 right now) will come on quickly, is bad but not intolerable (it's the earth's equivalent of a fever), and will peak at about +8C. When this happens, water-born life (particularly algae) shifts far north around the poles; forests retreat; some land masses will flood; and most of the world's land mass in currently temperate regions becomes desert. Island nations like England and Japan will become more attractive for massive influxes of immigrants.

What to do:

• We need a new science that incorporates biology and geology.
• Give up environmentalism: it's urban-based superstition about nature that focuses on personal and human risks rather than the bigger dangers, It's "an understandable but unthinking response to rapid change." Biofuels are downright dangerous; wind power is too low-intensity for use in places like Europe and the North American coasts. (Further, the consumption of fossil fuels is pumping out both carbon that's warming the earth, and aerosols that are helping to keep the earth a little cooler. If there were a big disaster or economic downturn, we'd lose this rather suddenly.)
• Look seriously at geoengineering-- i.e., proposals to put a shade up at a Lagrange point, or seeding the air with sulfate aerosol-- to buy us some time. "What we need is a well-planned, sustainable retreat that embraces nuclear energy," and looks forward to the day when other alternatives mature.

"Our contract with the earth does not speak of human rights, only human obligations."

Technorati Tags: climate, environment, gaia, James Lovelock, Kepler's Books

Comments

[James Aach]

Another longtime environmentalist who is calling for a second look at nuclear power is the Bay Area's own Stewart Brand. He has also endorsed my effort to provide an entertaining lay person's guide to the good and bad of nuclear (there's plenty of both.) It's disguised as a thriller novel. See http://RadDecision.blogspot.com

[Rondo]

This absolute belief in the inevitable warming of the planet is something that has to be re-examined by all thoughtful people with scientific instincts. It is too easily accepted without examining the very basic foundations of the argument. This is the monkey brain that leaps to conclusions and jumps to mass action. The tropics are far from uninhabitable. It is not likely they will become so unless a massive natural disaster occurs, beyond conventional thinking. Think outside the lines, don't be a clone.

[Joe Skeaping]

As a layman (piano tuner by trade)my take on global warming is this:

James Lovelock is right about rejecting athropocentric environmentalism, (surely current windfarms, solar arrays, tidal barrages and biofuels &c. will soon be seen as the stone age of green technology).

He is also right about nuclear energy, as a bridge to future, perhaps nano, technologies later this century.

The concept of Gaia is brilliant. This is no freaky new-age icon but a sophisticated and mature, wholly scientific metaphor, powerful enough to overturn the mechanistic scientific/technological culture currently threatening the entire future of Humanity.

Joe Skeaping