For those of you who don’t know, Lester Brown is one of the leading voices on global climate change in the US. He has a background in agriculture and a long history of advocacy and activism, and he now heads the Earth Policy Institute in Washington, D.C. This talk was part of a tour promoting his newest book, Plan B 4.0: Mobilizing to Save Civilization. It is available online as a .pdf, or get it from your local bookstore.

Mr. Brown began the talk by suggesting that the upcoming climate change conference ought to be called the Copenhagen Conference on Food Security. We know that many (most?) early civilizations deteriorated and disappeared due to the failure of their food supplies. The Sumerians, the Maya, … Likewise, we have been unable to reverse the trends that have led to the global food crisis. Historically, the demand for food increased for one reason only: population growth. But today, in addition to tremendous population growth, people are eating higher and higher up the food chain, eating animals that require far more grain to produce than if we were simply eating the grain ourselves. Today, approximately 3 million people are trying to move up the food chain. In addition to these two factors, the huge demand for grain for fuel (ethanol/biodiesel) has added a third pressure to our global supply of food, to the point where world food prices have been growing out of control, and it has taken the meltdown of our economies to bring grain prices, not back to normal, but at least down to manageable levels.

A second issue is water. We drink, on average, 4 liters of water per day. Our food, on the other hand, requires 2,000 liters of water per day. Per day! Underground water levels are falling around the world, but notably in the world’s top three grain producers (China, India, USA) — which house half the world’s population. 15% of India’s population is fed by grain that is produced through the overpumping of aquifers, that is to say, unsustainably. In Saudi Arabia, which has long produced it’s own wheat irrigated from a non-replenishing aquifer, the government has just announced that they will be cutting the grain harvest by 1/8th each year, until in 2016 they will be importing all of their food. In countries with water shortages, as urban populations grow water is diverted to cities, and grain is imported to make up for falling harvests. The global grain market is, in essence, a global water market.

Now, climate scientists suggest that we will see a 6 foot rise in sea level by the end of this century (and a much, much greater rise over time, if most of our icesheets and glaciers melt). Even with a 3′ rise in sea level, half of Bangladesh’s ricelands, half of Vietnam’s ricelands, and huge swaths of other low-lying food production areas would be under water. At the same time, China and India’s great rivers rely heavily on glaciers’ meltwater to irrigate their crops. This is the 18th consecutive year of glaciers shrinking all over the world. If they disappear, two of the world’s largest food producers will have to downsize enormously. And where will they come for food? To the US. We’re facing the prospect of competing with 1.3 billion Chinese people with rapidly rising incomes for our grain harvests. And while traditionally, we could just close our borders and ban exports, in this case China is our banker. Whether we like it or not, we’re all in this together.

But imagine this: As the number of hungry people grows, so does political instability. Political instability, in great enough quantities, creates failing states — states that fail to provide security for their people (like Pakistan), states that fail to provide food for their people (like Haiti), states where there is no government at all (like Somalia), just a violent free-for-all, a true ‘free-market’ economy. How many failed states does it take before civilization itself begins to crumble? Recently, a mainstream magazine printed an ad which said ‘Business as usual is beginning to read like the end of the world.’ But what do we do to fix it?

This is where Plan B comes in. Lester Brown and the Earth Policy institute believe that we need to do four things: stabilize the climate, stabilize population, eradicate poverty, and restore the ecological processes that sustain us. Sustainability, he says, is such an uninspiring word. Instead, this is a movement to save civilization. And it does seem to be possible.

I’m not going to get too far into the many example he used, but just to state a few: A recent study of Texas energy showed that between existing wind farms and planned developments, there will soon be 53,000Megawatts of wind energy generated in TX – equivalent to 53 coal-fired power plants. In China, this will be the 5th consecutive year that wind-energy production doubles. In fact, China has enough wind to generate seven times its current total energy consumption, if only they build the windfarms to harvest it. Similarly, Algeria, where a new venture will soon begin piping solar energy to Europe, has enough sunlight in its desert to power the entire world. In the US, proposals are underway to link our three national grids, in order to easily distribute wind and solar energy from the West and South to places that need it. We consume more gasoline than the next 20 countries combined! But plug-in hybrids, with ratings of 220mpg and more, are already in fleets around the country, and several manufacturers will be bringing them to the main-stream market next year.

But how fast do we have to make these changes? If the question is how fast do we have to cut emissions to have a chance at saving the greenland icesheet and some mountain glaciers, the answer is that we must make an 80% cut in global emissions by 2020! That will keep us just under the threshold of 400 parts per million of carbon in the atmosphere, from where we can start backing down to the 350ppm recommended by leading scientists. It is possible, if you look at the almost instantaneous transition we made in World War II, to suddenly turn our economy and production system around. But it takes pressure and conviction — a strong grassroots movement and a government receptive to hearing it. Perhaps, just perhaps, that is what we have now.

And finally, in response to one of the questions, a few words on what happens if Copenhagen doesn’t result in a global climate treaty. International climate treaties may very well be obsolete. They are minimalist and uninventive by their very nature, and they draw diplomats, not scientists and not entrepreneurs or creative thinkers. By the time a treaty is written, and taken around to various countries to be ratified, and finally put into effect, it may be too late. Copenhagen is not the issue. What we need is a grassroots, and to a certain extent economically-driven, approach to change. For example, in recent years the Sierra Club and Earth Justice, as well as a grassroots movement, have been so effective in combatting coal-fired power plants, that there is a virtual ban on building any more coal plants in the US. This has not been legislated, but the potential for a public outcry is so great that companies just don’t dare go that route anymore. We need a similar approach to clean energy, population growth, poverty, LED lighting, agricultural reform… Pick an issue you’re passionate about, and get involved. As far as legislation goes, cap-and-trade won’t do the trick. It hasn’t worked in Europe and it won’t work here. Tax restructuring, where we gradually reduce income tax over the next few years while raising the carbon tax, will provide strong incentives to reduce emissions, while helping out the economy.

This week marks the beginning of the swine flue vaccine availability for the general public in our neck of the woods. Maybe you’re planning on rolling up your sleeve and getting in line for the jab in the hopes of protecting yourself and loved ones from illness. Or maybe you’ll be sitting this one out because either you’re concerned about taking part in the largest experimental inoculation campaign in recorded history, or perhaps you’re somewhat cynical about the extent to which this campaign is lining the deep pockets of the pharmaceutical industry.
…
What we really need is a vaccine to protect us from the media tendency to sensationalize and exacerbate public panic by playing on deeply held personal fears. Fortunately, we have such a thing. It’s called common sense, and we all ought to take a healthy dose.

A Vaccine for Pandemic Panic | November 17, 2009

And while you’re contemplating that, perhaps you can ponder why it is that we can so easily get swine flu vaccines out to everyone and their neighbor, no matter what the cost or effectiveness, but we can’t seem to get proven, life-saving HIV meds to the people who need them.

I’ve posted them here (they’re the last three posts), so they don’t go to waste. Let me know what you think.