The German Future Earth Summit was held in January but I just stumbled across the 160 page pdf file of it yesterday. It is written in both English and German, so it is really only 80 pages.
I am only half-finished but decided to write about it now and finish it up with a second post.
From the chapter Decadal mass balance of glaciers and ice caps from 2000 to 2012 based on interferometric sar satellite data:
“With this multitemporal dataset we accurately compute ice elevation, volume and consequently mass changes of large ice-covered surfaces and we offer a consistent report on the mass change rate occurred corresponding to the period 2000 – 2012. The technique is applied over areas situated at latitudes between 60°N and 56°S (the coverage of SRTM), thus focusing on temperate glaciers which are located close to inhabited areas. Ice sheets, ice caps close to polar regions and semipolar outlet glaciers will not be included in our investigations”
Good? Bad? I don’t have a clue. Feel free to fill me in.
From the chapter Revealing temporal and spatial human Dimensions of ecosystem Developments:
“More precisely, we are thinking of an approach similar to “Google”, which always optimizes the balanced mixture of “global” interest and the tailored needs of the user to determine best individual user profiles. Therefore, most likely known general patterns of ecosystems developments will prevail for most parts, but for the individual regional scales within different ecozones relevant new perspectives are expected. These need to be transferred to education and politics to prepare the ground for region-specific decision-making adding to the global approaches like the
“protocols” of Montreal, Rio or Kyoto.”
“We propose “inaccessibility” as a suitable tool to ensure the identification of pristine ecosystems. These will most likely be limited to extremely
remote areas, which are at the same time systems commonly perceived as particularly vulnerable, e.g. high mountains, arctic regions or tropical rain forests”
” Our research project addresses laypersons’ perception and understanding of “positive” human influence on the ecosystem. From a psychological
perspective, theoretical and empirical reason assume that moral values (e.g., nature protection) and associated general beliefs (e.g., human
influence is generally harmful to the ecosystem) have an impact on laypersons’ perception of arguments regarding “positive” human influence on the ecosystem and the integration of this information into knowledge structures. We investigate the motivational impact of these processes and how values and beliefs can account for psychological resistance against such considerations. Based on our research there will be the possibility to improve scientific knowledge within Future Earth initiatives on
(1) “pristine” ecosystems diversified for ecozones,
(2) their individual development accompanied
by human disturbances and
(3) how humans can accept this new and partly counter intuitive insight as well as how it should be taught (schools,museums) and transferred into political decision-making. The outcomes will eventually support the approach of defining planetary boundaries.”
The “how humans” left me feeling a little odd. Like we are just items to be manipulated and swayed to do demand our governments to follow the agenda. Kind of like: “Here boy, come fetch!” Maybe I am just being overly sensitive.
From the chapter Earth contraction and Global earth sustainability:
“Within the framework of continuum mechanics, the presented research introduces the effect of volcanism activities on earth size changes that can be driven mathematically and proof earth contraction. A hundred million cubic kilometers of volcano outcomes would decrease the radius of earth by less than 2 km approximately. As the volcanoes outcomes increase gradually, contraction accumulates gradually over time to be significant. That would result in very slowly but continuous changes in the position of the earth relative to the sun that has the most dominating influence on all the changes on earth. The fare end of earth contraction is returning earth radius to its original state before earth expansion. Then, as this research forecasts, end of man life occurs.”
“It also, provides an early warning system for abrupt, uncontrollable and irreversible change that would be of use to decision makers, resource managers and business. The presented theory does not violate neither physics nor thermodynamics laws as the other two theories, greenhouse and ozone hole theories, did. This theory also answers all unanswered questions the other theories fall to answer, such as if sun is shrinking due
to losing millions of tons of its mass in every second why earth is not going far from sun.”
“It is wrongly believed that social, economic and technological developments are disrupting the climate and the environment on a global scale and that Germany is both affected by and partly responsible for these problems, but these are not quite correct. No one is responsible for climate and most of environmental global changes. Earth Contraction in general is a must to keep the balance of the solar system. Therefore, man-kind must get along with some of these changes and face and solve others.”
“Today’s global emissions , which is a formidable challenge, need to be lowered from 7 Gt carbon per year to 2 Gt per year, is not required any more. Greenhouse is not the controlling factor, it might be a minor one. What the world needs now is estimating the volume of volcanoes outcomes. Of course no way to reduce it or control earth contraction, but facing this fact and predicting its consequences to be able to reduce its negative impact and get the most benefit of the positive ones on human life.”
Did you see that statement?
“Today’s global emissions , which is a formidable challenge, need to be lowered from 7 Gt carbon per year to 2 Gt per year, is not required any more. Greenhouse is not the controlling factor, it might be a minor one.”
Count me in as impressed!
From the chapter Surface ocean lower atmosphere transport processes in a dynamic planet:
“Besides increasing our knowledge and understanding in a dynamic planet, the SOAS
community can directly facilitate four types of services:
1) supporting services such as O2 production, CO2 sequestration, nutrient cycle and primary production
2) regulating services such as climate regulation, air quality and waste treatment
3) provisioning services for food, raw materials and genetic resources
4) cultural services through recreation, inspiration and cognitive development SOLAS makes a significant effort of knowledge dissemination and capacity building. This will be of particular relevance for research in FE, since a strong effort will have to be made in order to bridge the gap between natural and social sciences and learning each others languages.”
Here we go again with that CO2 sequestration. I could scream. Can we please go back to talking about the real harmful toxins coming out of those stacks and drains? The kind that can kill and cause cancer? Cause die-offs, pollute our water and land. I am so tired about hearing how bad CO2 is. It is the other stuff that comes out with it that is bad. Yet it looks as though we are going to collect it to put back into the soil, the water and drywall/wallboard. Is there still mercury coming out of coal stacks? Didn’t we freak when China did that and we had to take it out of all the new homes? Just stop with the CO2 crap. There are far more dangerous things to focus on. Look at the profiteering they made out of this nonsense!
From the chapter Space Based Solar Power – the next game-changer for global energy strategic security:
“Space based Solar Power (SBSP) Is a disruptive technology that is the paradigm of renewable energy resources, 24/7 efficient services, global
access. SBSP has a 99.3% capacity factor, reduced CO2 impact that does not consume water. With current advanced technology and cross-national financial structures space solar power becomes a truly long-term energy solution. The presentation will provide a clear understanding
of the current development status of Space Solar Power and its implementation forecast from different contexts.”
Sounds like a good idea to me! 🙂
From the chapter A four-Pronged approach to Global Development with open source hardware and software:
“The new global threats such as an increase in intensity or frequency of extreme events require technologies that cannot be monopoly of
nations or corporations because there is no room for profit or political barriers when dealing with the possibility of a disaster. Extreme events can be very destructive to both Human societies and to the environment. Warning systems can be made safer if the blueprints are a freely available so that everyone can contribute.”
“Open-Source ensures, by definition, reusability because its products can be easily maintained, repaired or upgraded. There are less chances of waste, in terms of obsolete equipment to be disposed of or wasted development time. This can be a way to slow down the exponential growth of e-waste, which is a threat to a sustainable world.”
I’m liking this. 🙂
From the chapter Towards a sustainable management of atmospheric aerosol particles to minimize risks for humans, ecosystems, and economic systems:
“It is well accepted that the atmospheric aerosol particles exhibit a toxic potential to humans. They trigger respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. The smaller the physical size of aerosol particles, the larger their toxic potential. The impact on the society is enormous, not least in economic terms. European legislation sets limits to the maximum allowed mass concentration of aerosol particles (PM10 and PM2.5) in air. There is a disadvantageous discrepancy between the legislation that focuses on the particle mass concentration (PM) and therefore on the larger particles, and the rather new findings that it is the smaller particles, nano-particles, that cause health problems but do not contribute much to the particle mass.”
“New findings show that aerosol particles are also harmful to vegetation and ecosystems. Plant species likely have adapted to natural aerosol regimes by sculpturing their leaf surfaces, either to reduce particle accumulation (‘Lotus effect’), or to capture aerosol borne nutrients, dependent on the environment. If deposited in abundance, particles reduce the resilience towards drought stress. Therefore, one of the adverse effects of climate change, the increased drought-induced mortality of trees, is even amplified by aerosol particles. This effect is very hard to observe because deposited aerosol particles tend to take up water, liquefy, and eventually remain undetected with conventional techniques.”
Loving this! I could just hug the person who wrote it. I have been saying that forever.
So, I will end this post on a positive note. When I finish reading it, I’ll be back with another.
You can read the pdf here.