There are some flashpoints in the world that could involve major powers. Numerous resource-rich islands in the Western Pacific, for instance, have recently fueled tensions between China and its neighbors.
But large nations have diplomatic sophistication, and numerous reasons not to allow their conflicts to escalate to the point of violence. Not so on a smaller scale. Where people live near the edge of starvation anyway, the use of violence to gain access to resources is often the only option.
Today, clashes in rural Kenya have killed at least 38 people . Over 50 more were killed last month. Some goat-herds needed grazing land and water that farmers want for their crops. That's all. 88 deaths as a result.
The connection between resource scarcity and war has the potential to grow beyond impoverished zones of developing nations. As this century progresses, will larger nations find the need to feed their people and power their countries so compelling that they will resort to war? Solving resource challenges solves a bigger problem as well: it reduces the threat of military conflict. And in a world with weapons of mass destruction, that is vitally important.
Tuesday, September 11, 2012
Monday, September 3, 2012
Carbon, renewables and resource scarcity
European governments took the lead, several years ago, in establishing penalties for releasing carbon dioxide into the air, and creating a scheme for "carbon trading." It was a way of tackling a perceived environmental threat that attempted to take into account the complexity of the issue.
Australia has followed suit, and implemented one of the most aggressive carbon taxes, at $26 a tonne. Living here, there has been no lack of opinions and whining about the impact that the tax will have on the Australian economy. Even though the tax has been in place for only a month, there have been scams, cheats and accusations. Recently, almost $50 billion in capital projects have been cancelled by the mining industry here, and some have blamed the tax. It's a much more convenient whipping boy, clearly, than the fact that the Chinese economy has stalled.
But the larger question is: does carbon trading actually enhance sustainability? And does it improve the lot of the massively expanding human population?
Carbon trading would be unnecessary were carbon-neutral processes for energy generation economically viable. But they are not. Various nations and corporations have invested in some of these processes--solar power, wind power, fuel cells--but they have primarily been used for high-tech photo opportunities. Solar power still costs four times what carbon-based power does. Someone has to pay the difference. Small amounts of uneconomical practice can be absorbed, but not large amounts. In addition to the cost issue, there are other, unsolved technical problems, such as the variability of the "renewable" sources, which play havoc with the reliable delivery of electricity. So far, there has been zero improvement to the sustainability of world energy production.
Many developing nations want, and deserve, the higher quality of life that results from affordable energy sources, particularly for electricity and transportation. Can they be given access to this, even given the risk of increased global atmospheric temperatures? In this Century Of Scarcity, one principle must remain inviolate: no amount of carbon policing must be allowed to interfere with the production and distribution of food.
Australia has followed suit, and implemented one of the most aggressive carbon taxes, at $26 a tonne. Living here, there has been no lack of opinions and whining about the impact that the tax will have on the Australian economy. Even though the tax has been in place for only a month, there have been scams, cheats and accusations. Recently, almost $50 billion in capital projects have been cancelled by the mining industry here, and some have blamed the tax. It's a much more convenient whipping boy, clearly, than the fact that the Chinese economy has stalled.
But the larger question is: does carbon trading actually enhance sustainability? And does it improve the lot of the massively expanding human population?
Carbon trading would be unnecessary were carbon-neutral processes for energy generation economically viable. But they are not. Various nations and corporations have invested in some of these processes--solar power, wind power, fuel cells--but they have primarily been used for high-tech photo opportunities. Solar power still costs four times what carbon-based power does. Someone has to pay the difference. Small amounts of uneconomical practice can be absorbed, but not large amounts. In addition to the cost issue, there are other, unsolved technical problems, such as the variability of the "renewable" sources, which play havoc with the reliable delivery of electricity. So far, there has been zero improvement to the sustainability of world energy production.
Many developing nations want, and deserve, the higher quality of life that results from affordable energy sources, particularly for electricity and transportation. Can they be given access to this, even given the risk of increased global atmospheric temperatures? In this Century Of Scarcity, one principle must remain inviolate: no amount of carbon policing must be allowed to interfere with the production and distribution of food.
Thursday, August 23, 2012
Can technology be the savior?
Recently researchers have posted a new result that could help rice to thrive in poor soils . Yes, it would require genetic modification. So some will object to it on that basis. The moral question--can we object to a technology on the basis of our fears and prejudices, if it will prevent starvation?--raises its head again. This particular discovery may be less objectionable than some other GM approaches, because it involves taking a gene from one rice strain and putting it into another.
But the point I want to make is in the area of technology maturity. Notice that the research findings were in the journal Nature. That means that they are essentially at the level of basic science. What lies ahead for this technology is turning science into product:
Case in point: superconducting wire. It's wonderful stuff--electricity passes through it with no losses. So the use of energy becomes more efficient, with reduced damage to the environment. The materials with the best superconducting properties to date were discovered in 1986. The first application of them in a real power system happened this year.
Waiting for technology to be the savior is twice foolish--because good ideas are unpredictable, and because once they occur, they must still be matured into a useful state.
But the point I want to make is in the area of technology maturity. Notice that the research findings were in the journal Nature. That means that they are essentially at the level of basic science. What lies ahead for this technology is turning science into product:
- delivering seed by the ton instead of by the handful
- rigorous large-scale field trials
- getting the cost of the technology under control
- addressing the safety issue
- marketing, training, distribution
Case in point: superconducting wire. It's wonderful stuff--electricity passes through it with no losses. So the use of energy becomes more efficient, with reduced damage to the environment. The materials with the best superconducting properties to date were discovered in 1986. The first application of them in a real power system happened this year.
Waiting for technology to be the savior is twice foolish--because good ideas are unpredictable, and because once they occur, they must still be matured into a useful state.
Thursday, August 2, 2012
The "local ripple effect" of the US drought
Bloomberg agricultural reporter Alan Bjerga, often cited in this blog as the author of Endless Appetites, takes a trip to the US Midwest to report on the drought's consequences for agriculture-dependent communities and businesses . The same ripple effect is seen anywhere in the world: when drought hits, it isn't just the farmers who suffer. It is instructive, however, to remember that this is happening in the world's greatest food-exporting nation.
The "global ripple effect" will come later--when all those grain elevators are empty with no 2012 crops to refill them.
The "global ripple effect" will come later--when all those grain elevators are empty with no 2012 crops to refill them.
Wednesday, August 1, 2012
Power generation is not enough
In an earlier post, we presented an argument proposing that food crisis events would grow faster than the population. The keystone of that argument was that distribution infrastructure, including the energy needed for transportation, was also under pressure. Therefore even if food supplies grow with the population, the "black swan" events would become more frequent.
The same argument can be applied to water shortages, and to energy shortages. An excellent example of the latter was this week's massive blackout in India. This was not about supply, it was about grid control and connectivity--nearly invisible parts of the infrastructure, where failures have enormous ramifications.
Infrastructure investments bring no immediate reward to the policy makers who fund them. They are largely invisible to the political base. In addition, the very complexity of the infrastructure can daunt even those who are willing to fund improvements.
Instead, political will and a long-term thirst for prosperity must be the drivers of improvement. A superb example is Singapore's progress toward a robust water system, which that small country has pursued since the 1960's.
But in addition to investment, bureaucratic streamlining is often needed as well. Red tape and complexities of officialdom can block access to otherwise functional infrastructures.
Food, energy and water are not only connected to each other; they are connected to the social and economic fabric of each nation. Infrastructure failures reduce economic productivity, which then harms both government and citizen. Lower productivity means a lower tax base, restricting resources for infrastructure upgrades. And lower productivity means lower incomes, so the citizen is less able to save against times of shortage, and more vulnerable to resource variability.
UPDATE: here is additional information on the Indian blackout, which happened because food, energy and water are really one thing . Water generates electricity; electricity is used to pump water; no water, no food.
The same argument can be applied to water shortages, and to energy shortages. An excellent example of the latter was this week's massive blackout in India. This was not about supply, it was about grid control and connectivity--nearly invisible parts of the infrastructure, where failures have enormous ramifications.
Infrastructure investments bring no immediate reward to the policy makers who fund them. They are largely invisible to the political base. In addition, the very complexity of the infrastructure can daunt even those who are willing to fund improvements.
Instead, political will and a long-term thirst for prosperity must be the drivers of improvement. A superb example is Singapore's progress toward a robust water system, which that small country has pursued since the 1960's.
But in addition to investment, bureaucratic streamlining is often needed as well. Red tape and complexities of officialdom can block access to otherwise functional infrastructures.
Food, energy and water are not only connected to each other; they are connected to the social and economic fabric of each nation. Infrastructure failures reduce economic productivity, which then harms both government and citizen. Lower productivity means a lower tax base, restricting resources for infrastructure upgrades. And lower productivity means lower incomes, so the citizen is less able to save against times of shortage, and more vulnerable to resource variability.
UPDATE: here is additional information on the Indian blackout, which happened because food, energy and water are really one thing . Water generates electricity; electricity is used to pump water; no water, no food.
Thursday, July 26, 2012
Stating the obvious, on stage
Professor Stephen Emmott, director of Microsoft's lab in Cambridge, UK, believes as I do that the size of the human population is the root cause of the many looming challenges of this century. To dramatize the point, Emmott is staging a performance on the theme at a London theater.
The various reviews don't really say what Emmott does while onstage, other than that he uses crutches because he's hurt his back. But in my book, if it gets attention on this most important of all problems, he's doing something worthwhile.
The various reviews don't really say what Emmott does while onstage, other than that he uses crutches because he's hurt his back. But in my book, if it gets attention on this most important of all problems, he's doing something worthwhile.
Wednesday, July 25, 2012
Hunger and social unrest
One of the premises of this blog is that the "Century of Scarcity" will result, not just in scarcity, but in threats to international security. A study by the New England Complex Systems Institute shows that this may already be happening.
Food price spikes in 2007-8 were closely correlated with petroleum price spikes. This is detailed in Andrew Bjerga's book Endless Appetites, which I've cited in this blog. The more recent NECSI study shows how the food price spikes in 2008 and 2011 were also correlated with outbreaks of social unrest in the Middle East--i.e., the Arab Spring.
The NECSI study raises an alarm. The US drought has pushed up world food prices. So more instability may be on the way in the next several months.
A previous entry in this blog examined the statistical nature of famine events, and whether an increase in population would cause merely a proportional increase in such events, or even more because of interactive effects. The chart from the NECSI study shows that the increase in unrest events is even higher than the food price rise would suggest from mere proportionality:
(NECSI image from Wired article)
Of course, there is more going on here than just food price increases. Social "science" is tough to do scientifically because of all the variables. But what this data does suggest is a "critical system," using the term as it is used in physics: an irreversible, qualitative change in the nature of the system.
Such critical events will become more common as resources are more dear in the Century of Scarcity. As we've stated before, obvious trouble spots will be in the "land grab" locations where nations such as China have leased land to feed their own citizens. Food shortages there will certainly lead to unrest if food is shipped out while the locals go hungry.
Food price spikes in 2007-8 were closely correlated with petroleum price spikes. This is detailed in Andrew Bjerga's book Endless Appetites, which I've cited in this blog. The more recent NECSI study shows how the food price spikes in 2008 and 2011 were also correlated with outbreaks of social unrest in the Middle East--i.e., the Arab Spring.
The NECSI study raises an alarm. The US drought has pushed up world food prices. So more instability may be on the way in the next several months.
A previous entry in this blog examined the statistical nature of famine events, and whether an increase in population would cause merely a proportional increase in such events, or even more because of interactive effects. The chart from the NECSI study shows that the increase in unrest events is even higher than the food price rise would suggest from mere proportionality:
(NECSI image from Wired article)
Of course, there is more going on here than just food price increases. Social "science" is tough to do scientifically because of all the variables. But what this data does suggest is a "critical system," using the term as it is used in physics: an irreversible, qualitative change in the nature of the system.
Such critical events will become more common as resources are more dear in the Century of Scarcity. As we've stated before, obvious trouble spots will be in the "land grab" locations where nations such as China have leased land to feed their own citizens. Food shortages there will certainly lead to unrest if food is shipped out while the locals go hungry.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)