"“Overshoot,” these days, refers to a portion of geoengineering policy in which the continuing rise in emissions is not too concerning, because “We” can bring the temperature back down with purported new technologies such as carbon capture and/or solar energy management."
Can you elaborate? Perhaps I haven't been keeping up "these days", but I go to William Catton for a definition of "overshoot" — he literally wrote the book on that! It's right on the cover: "Overshoot: growth beyond an area's carrying capacity, leading to crash: die-off."
Since I use this word in my writings, I really want to understand the vernacular meaning you refer to.
"The IPCC has looked at "pathways" to keeping 1.5°C in reach. In nearly all of these, temperature rises will exceed 1.5°C, after which warming is reversed by humanity removing more carbon from the atmosphere than it emits. This temporary breach of 1.5°C for at least a few decades is referred to as 'overshoot.'"
Thank you, Jan, I will fix that since it is not really needed, and I cannot find it anywhere and neither can Google. That's a problem with taking too many days to write an article and too many PDFs open and too much going on in the intermediate days. Also, on "overshoot," you are correct on its long historic use and even a new Catton book coming out. But it is being used in some papers promoting the lead-in to geoengineering where besides the meaning of human ecological over-expansion, it can be used more narrowly when talking about just the CO2 emissions being allowed to (temporarily) rise above agreed limits, because supposedly "we" can bring it back down with (imaginary) nature-based-solutions, carbon capture and solar radiation management.
Given what happened in the US election, I no longer think that "we" have any more influence over our demise than do yeast cells in a vat of apple juice. We're going to use up our resources and die in our own excrement.
It's sad and ironic that the work of great composers and artists are from the institutions that are historically the ones responsible for so much subjugation, violence and death — the Catholic Church and various vile royal courts. Although hope grows dimmer by the day, I'm not ready to write a requiem, although I may listen to one today. This election happening over the next days (or likely ugly weeks) will determine what I write next. I am fearful of what is coming regardless of the outcome and thankful to be relatively old. I feel for what those younger face, and wish I had started my fight against the insanity you describe here much earlier. Bach's Chaconne is lovely. Thanks.
Thank you for your thoughts, Geoffrey! Unfortunately human "progress" is consistently moving away from Peace toward war, and war of all-against-all, since War remains a primary piece of the human tool kit. Of course this is not a necessary trajectory, but stepping off that treadmill requires continuous thoughtful purpose toward changing the course.
Years ago, Dennis Kucinich suggested a Department of Peace. I liked that idea. We are a nation spawned by an empire, built on genocide and slavery on the way to becoming an empire. Violence, unfortunately, is in much of our DNA.
Well, the problem lies with the MICC and profitability. You make money selling arms. How do you make money selling peace? What place does war have on this (or any) planet?
"“Overshoot,” these days, refers to a portion of geoengineering policy in which the continuing rise in emissions is not too concerning, because “We” can bring the temperature back down with purported new technologies such as carbon capture and/or solar energy management."
Can you elaborate? Perhaps I haven't been keeping up "these days", but I go to William Catton for a definition of "overshoot" — he literally wrote the book on that! It's right on the cover: "Overshoot: growth beyond an area's carrying capacity, leading to crash: die-off."
Since I use this word in my writings, I really want to understand the vernacular meaning you refer to.
Here is one link:
"The IPCC has looked at "pathways" to keeping 1.5°C in reach. In nearly all of these, temperature rises will exceed 1.5°C, after which warming is reversed by humanity removing more carbon from the atmosphere than it emits. This temporary breach of 1.5°C for at least a few decades is referred to as 'overshoot.'"
from:
https://theconversation.com/overshooting-1-5-c-is-risky-thats-why-we-need-to-hedge-our-bets-241623
"“Humanity not only lacks the brain-power to right this ship; they entirely lack the brain structure to conceive the predicament.” From this article: https://www.whp-journals.co.uk/JPS/article/view/855/522 "
I'm unable to find even "humanity not" in that paper, nor in the other Rees paper referenced.
Do you recall where that phrase came from?
Thanks!
Thank you, Jan, I will fix that since it is not really needed, and I cannot find it anywhere and neither can Google. That's a problem with taking too many days to write an article and too many PDFs open and too much going on in the intermediate days. Also, on "overshoot," you are correct on its long historic use and even a new Catton book coming out. But it is being used in some papers promoting the lead-in to geoengineering where besides the meaning of human ecological over-expansion, it can be used more narrowly when talking about just the CO2 emissions being allowed to (temporarily) rise above agreed limits, because supposedly "we" can bring it back down with (imaginary) nature-based-solutions, carbon capture and solar radiation management.
"even a new Catton book coming out"
Posthumous? He died in 2015.
Given what happened in the US election, I no longer think that "we" have any more influence over our demise than do yeast cells in a vat of apple juice. We're going to use up our resources and die in our own excrement.
It's sad and ironic that the work of great composers and artists are from the institutions that are historically the ones responsible for so much subjugation, violence and death — the Catholic Church and various vile royal courts. Although hope grows dimmer by the day, I'm not ready to write a requiem, although I may listen to one today. This election happening over the next days (or likely ugly weeks) will determine what I write next. I am fearful of what is coming regardless of the outcome and thankful to be relatively old. I feel for what those younger face, and wish I had started my fight against the insanity you describe here much earlier. Bach's Chaconne is lovely. Thanks.
Thank you for your thoughts, Geoffrey! Unfortunately human "progress" is consistently moving away from Peace toward war, and war of all-against-all, since War remains a primary piece of the human tool kit. Of course this is not a necessary trajectory, but stepping off that treadmill requires continuous thoughtful purpose toward changing the course.
Years ago, Dennis Kucinich suggested a Department of Peace. I liked that idea. We are a nation spawned by an empire, built on genocide and slavery on the way to becoming an empire. Violence, unfortunately, is in much of our DNA.
Well, the problem lies with the MICC and profitability. You make money selling arms. How do you make money selling peace? What place does war have on this (or any) planet?