PNAS: Abrupt Impacts of Climate Change: Anticipating Surprises

Abrupt Impacts of Climate Change: Anticipating Surprises. 2013. sponsored by the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration, the National Science Foundation, and the U.S. Intelligence community.

This was the best summary of the 223 page National Academy of Sciences publication I could find.  The first report on abrupt climate change came out in 2002. It is sobering that one-fifth of all fossil fuels that have ever been burned happened since the 2002 report was released.

What surprises could climate change have in store for us?   Brad Plumer December 4, 2013  Washington Post

On Tuesday, the National Research Council published a brand new report, “Abrupt Impacts of Climate Change: Anticipating Surprises,” that lays out what scientists have learned since 2002 about the possibility of sudden climate shifts. There are still plenty of troubling uncertainties, but researchers have learned a fair bit.

The upshot? Earth is already seeing some abrupt changes, like the fast retreat of summer Arctic sea ice. There’s also a real risk that other rapid and drastic shifts could follow in the coming decades if the Earth keeps warming — including widespread plant and animal extinctions and the creation of large “dead zones” in the ocean.

On the flip side, other drastic changes “are now considered unlikely to occur this century.” That includes shifts in Atlantic ocean circulation patterns that could radically alter Europe’s climate, as hyped in the disaster flick “The Day After Tomorrow.” Also unlikely this century: Collapsing ice sheets in West Antarctica that would push sea levels up very quickly, as well as sudden methane eruptions from the Arctic that could heat the planet drastically. Those doomsday scenarios are left to future generations.

The authors do emphasize, however, that scientists still don’t fully understand all the different ways the Earth’s climate can change in short order. There are lots of unknowns here. “Some surprises in the climate system may be inevitable,” they conclude, “but with improved scientific monitoring and a better understanding of the climate system it could be possible to anticipate abrupt change before it occurs and reduce the potential consequences.”

Here’s a longer rundown of some of the abrupt changes the new National Research Council report explores, as well as how probable they are to occur this century (I’ve ordered them from most likely to least likely):

— Sharp increases in extinction rates. A recent study in Science found that the world is on track to warm much faster than it has in the past 65 million years. That could require some species to shift habitats at an unprecedented rate.

This concept is known as the “velocity of climate change,” and the map on the right shows two different estimates of how quickly species would have to shift in order to maintain the climates of their current habitats (assuming they needed to).

Some species will be able to keep up, others likely won’t: There’s only so far up a mountain that pikas can climb to stay cool, for instance. And coral reefs will have difficulty adapting if the oceans keep warming and become more acidic. Add it up, and it raises the prospect of extinctions for many species.

Likelihood this century: Moderate. When you toss in other pressures that many plant and animal species are facing — deforestation, for instance — the report concludes that a mass extinction event “could conceivably occur before the year 2100,” Coral reefs in particular get singled out here: “some models show a crash of coral reefs from climate change alone as early as 2060 under certain scenarios.”

However, the report adds that scientists still need to develop a better understanding of how many species will react to these shifting climates. “It is an open question whether the climatic tolerances of local populations can evolve fast enough to keep up with rapid climate change.”

The report also explores the possibility of an abrupt “collapse” of the Amazon rain forest due to a combination of climate change and deforestation (say, by creating a self-sustaining cycle of fires and dryness). The report concludes that some of these scenarios are “plausible,” but they’re still subject to much intense debate and are very difficult to model the likelihood.

— An abrupt decrease in ocean oxygen. Scientists expect the oxygen content of the ocean to decline as the world warms, due to various chemical and biological changes. And that raises a concern: In some parts of the ocean, it’s possible that this process could accelerate abruptly, creating large “oxygen minimum zones” that are virtually uninhabitable for fish and other organisms.

Likelihood this century: Moderate. Similar “dead zones” are already popping up in many coastal areas around the world, mainly caused by fertilizer run-off and improperly treated wastewater. When combined with other changes in the warming ocean, “the decrease in oxygen availability might become non-linear.”

— Destabilization of the West Antarctic ice sheet. The current scientific consensus is that the world will likely see between 0.4 and 1.2 meters of sea-level rise (1 to 4 feet) by century’s end, depending on how fast emissions rise. This assumes the oceans will expand as they warm and ice caps and glaciers melt at a predictable pace.

But what about surprises? The report notes that the West Antarctic Ice Sheet carries enough ice to raise sea levels by 3 to 4 meters (10 to 13 feet). Right now, that massive ice sheet looks stable. But the geological record that these sheets are capable of shifting very quickly, particularly at the boundary between sea ice and land ice.

“Locations where meltwater forms on the ice shelf surface can wedge open crevasses and cause ice-shelf disintegration—in some cases, very rapidly.”

— Carbon or methane “bombs” released from the Arctic. There’s a lot of carbon that’s locked in frozen permafrost at high latitudes. There’s also a lot of methane stored in the northern oceans, trapped in lattice-like structures known as clathrates. All told, there may be more carbon stored in permafrost and ocean hydrates than their are in known fossil-fuel reserves (Allen et al 2009, IPCC 2007)

So what if the Earth heated up enough that the permafrost melted, the oceans warmed, and these greenhouse gases suddenly got released into the atmosphere? That could, in theory, trigger an extremely large climate shift.

Likelihood this century: Low. A sudden massive release looks unlikely this century. The report concludes that as the Arctic warms, it will gradually release more carbon and methane into the atmosphere, which will “amplify” existing warming. But a very large release is unlikely to happen a short span, say, just one or two decades.

The report cautions, however, that “this conclusion is based on immature science and sparse monitoring capabilities.” Scientists still need better assessments of the long-term stability of those carbon stores. Not out of the clear yet. And the odds here also keep going up if the planet keeps warming after 2100.

— A chaotic disruption of Atlantic ocean circulation patterns. Ever wonder how Western Europe manages to stay relatively warm despite being so far north? Some scientists give partial credit to the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC), an ocean pattern that transports warm water into the North Atlantic and Nordic seas. The pattern also plays many other vital roles, like maintaining the ocean’s ability to absorb carbon from the atmosphere.

Back in the early 2000s, scientists raised the prospect of a nightmare climate scenario here. Paleoclimate evidence suggests that the AMOC has changed abruptly in the past due to an influx of cool melting freshwater.

So what if, say, Greenland’s ice sheets melted quickly enough to disrupt this circulation? Would we get a “The Day After Tomorrow” style scenario in Europe, where some coastal areas cool down very rapidly? (Some scientists have argued that a disruption in Atlantic ocean heat circulation may have led to such a cold spell roughly 12,900 years ago.)

Likelihood this century: Low. Fortunately, this doomsday scenario now seems unlikely anytime soon. Climate models broadly agree that an abrupt change to the AMOC “will not occur this century.” Greenland would have to melt at a far faster rate than even the worst-case scenarios. The report does suggest, however, that “it is important to keep a close watch on this system,” to understand both the impact of smaller changes and keep an eye on the remote possibility of big, drastic shifts.

==============================

Table S1 from the report (pp 29-32) summarizing the possibilities

Abrupt climate change Table S1 (1)Abrupt climate change Table S1 (2)Abrupt climate change Table S1 (3)Abrupt climate change Table S1 (4)

The implications for food, disease, infrastructure, national security, and much more are discussed as well.  Here are some more pieces I copied from the NAS paper before I gave up — it’s just too long to summarize.

Abrupt changes—which can occur over periods as short as decades, or even years—have been a natural part of the climate system throughout Earth’s history.  One such abrupt change was at the end of the Younger Dryas, a period of cold climatic conditions and drought in the north that occurred about 12,000 years ago. Following a millennium-long cold period, the Younger Dryas abruptly terminated in a few decades or less and is associated with the extinction of 72 percent of the large-bodied mammals in North America.

Abrupt Changes Already Underway

Some abrupt climate changes are already underway, including the rapid decline of Arctic sea ice over the past decade due to warmer polar temperatures. Impacts include disruptions in the marine food web, shifts in the habitats of some marine mammals, and erosion of lation systems of the ocean and atmosphere, changes in the extent of sea ice could cause shifts in climate and weather around the northern hemisphere. The Arctic is also a region of increasing economic importance for a diverse range of stakeholders, and reductions in Arctic sea ice will bring new legal and political challenges as navigation routes for commercial shipping open and marine access to the region increases for offshore oil and gas development, tourism, fishing and other activities.

Increases in Extinction Threat for Marine and Terrestrial Species

The rate of climate change now underway is probably as fast as any warming event in the past 65 million years, and it is projected that its pace over the next 30 to 80 years will continue to be faster and more intense. These rapidly changing conditions make survival difficult for many species. Biologically important climatic attributes—such as number of frost-free days, length and timing of growing seasons, and the frequency and intensity of extreme events (such as number of extremely hot days or severe storms)—are changing so rapidly that some species can neither move nor adapt fast enough

The distinct risks of climate change exacerbate other widely recognized and severe extinction pressures, especially habitat destruction, competition from invasive species, and unsustainable exploitation of species for economic gain, which have already elevated extinction rates to many times above background rates. If unchecked, habitat destruction, fragmentation, and over-exploitation, even without climate change, could result in a mass extinction within the next few centuries equivalent in magnitude to the one that wiped out the dinosaurs. With the ongoing pressures of climate change, comparable levels of extinction conceivably could occur before the year 2100; indeed, some models show a crash of coral reefs from climate change alone as early as 2060

Loss of a species is permanent and irreversible, and has both economic impacts and ethical implications. The economic impacts derive from loss of ecosystem services, revenue, and jobs, for example in the fishing, forestry, and ecotourism industries. Ethical implications include the permanent loss of irreplaceable species and ecosystems as the current generation’s legacy to the next generation.

Abrupt Changes of Unknown Probability

Destabilization of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet

Of greatest concern among the stocks of land ice are those glaciers whose bases are well below sea level, which includes most of West Antarctica, as well as smaller parts of East Antarctica and Greenland. These glaciers are sensitive to warming oceans, which help to thermally erode their base, as well as rising sea level, which helps to float the ice, further destabilizing them.   Locations where meltwater forms on the ice shelf surface can wedge open crevasses and cause ice-shelf disintegration—in some cases, very rapidly.

the Greenland ice sheet is not expected to destabilize rapidly within this century. However, a large part of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS), representing 3–4 m (10 to 13 feet) of potential sea-level rise, is capable of flowing rapidly into deep ocean basins. Because the full suite of physical processes occurring where ice meets ocean is not included in comprehensive ice-sheet models, it remains possible that future rates of sea-level rise from the WAIS are underestimated, perhaps substantially. Because large uncertainties remain, the Committee judges an abrupt change in the WAIS within this century to be plausible, with an unknown although probably low probability.

Abrupt Changes Unlikely to Occur This Century

More recent research findings have shown that they may be less likely to occur within this century than previously considered possible. These include disruption to the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) and potential abrupt changes of high-latitude methane sources (permafrost soil carbon and ocean methane hydrates). Although the Committee judges the likelihood of an abrupt change within this century to be low for these processes, should they occur even next century or beyond, there would likely be severe impacts.

Potential Abrupt Changes due to High-Latitude Methane

Large amounts of carbon are stored at high latitudes in potentially labile reservoirs such as permafrost soils and methane-containing ices called methane hydrate or clathrate, especially offshore in ocean marginal sediments. Owing to their sheer size, these carbon stocks have the potential to massively affect Earth’s climate should they somehow be released to the atmosphere. An abrupt release of methane is particularly worrisome because methane is many times more potent than carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas over short time scales. Furthermore, methane is oxidized to carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, representing another carbon dioxide pathway from the biosphere to the atmosphere. According to current scientific understanding, Arctic carbon stores are poised to play a significant amplifying role in the century-scale buildup of carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere, but are unlikely to do so abruptly, i.e., on a timescale of one or a few decades. Although comforting, this conclusion is based on immature science and sparse monitoring capabilities. Basic research is required to assess the long-term stability of currently frozen Arctic and sub-Arctic soil stocks, and of the possibility of increasing the release of methane gas bubbles from currently frozen marine and terrestrial sediments, as temperatures rise.

Bark Beetle Outbreaks

Bark beetles are a natural part of forested ecosystems, and infestations are a regular force of natural change. In the last two decades, though, the bark beetle infestations that have occurred across large areas of North America have been the largest and most severe in recorded history, killing millions of trees across millions of hectares of forest from Alaska to southern California.  Climate change is thought to have played a significant role in these recent outbreaks by maintaining temperatures above a threshold that would normally lead to cold-induced mortality. In general, elevated temperatures in a warmer climate, particularly when there are consecutive warm years, can speed up reproductive cycles and increase the likelihood of outbreaks.

Climate is not the only stressor on the Earth system—other factors, including resource depletion and ever-growing human consumption and population, are exerting enormous pressure on nature’s and society’s resilience to sudden changes

infrastructure is built with certain expectations of useful life expectancy, but even gradual climate changes may trigger abrupt thresholds in their utility, such as rising sea levels surpassing sea walls or thawing permafrost destabilizing pipelines, buildings, and roads.

VULNERABILITY OF U.S. COASTAL INFRASTRUCTURE TO RISING SEAS

• 39% of the population lives in coastal shoreline counties, by 2020 the percent will rise to 47%. Coastal counties contributed almost half of USA GDP in 2011 ($6.6 trillion dollars)

• 51 million: Total number of jobs in the coastal shoreline counties of the US in 2011.

• $2.8 trillion: Wages paid out to employees working at establishments in the coastal shoreline counties in 2011.

• 3: Global GDP rank (behind the United States and China) of the coastal shoreline counties, if considered an individual country.

• 446 persons/mi2: Average population density of the coastal watershed counties (excluding Alaska). Inland density averages 61 persons per square mile.

It’s likely sea level will rise at least by a meter by the end of the century.  For low lying metropolitan areas, such as Miami and San Francisco, such a rise could lead to significant flooding. These areas would be difficult to defend by dikes and dams, and such a large sea level rise would require responses ranging from potentially large and expensive engineering projects to partial or complete abandonment of now-valuable areas as critical infrastructure such as sewer systems, gas lines, and roads are disrupted, perhaps crossing tipping points for adaptation. Miami was founded little more than one century ago, and could face the possibility of sea level rise high enough to potentially threaten the city’s critical infrastructure in another century. In terms of modern expectations for the lifetime of a city’s infrastructure, this is abrupt.

If sometime in the coming centuries sea level should rise 20 to 25 m, as suggested for the Pliocene Epoch, 3 to 5 million years ago (see Figure 2.5), when CO2 is estimated to have had levels similar to today of roughly 400 parts per million, most of Delaware, the first State in the Union, would be under water without very large engineering projects (Figure B). In terms of the expected lifetime of a State, this could also qualify as abrupt.

A study of Earth’s climate history suggests the inevitability of “tipping points”— thresholds beyond which major and rapid changes occur when crossed—that lead to abrupt changes in the climate system. The history of climate on the planet—as read in archives such as tree rings, ocean sediments, and ice cores—is punctuated with large changes that occurred rapidly, over the course of decades to as little as a few years.

The current rate of carbon emissions is changing the climate system at an accelerating pace, making the chances of crossing tipping points all the more likely.

Surprises are inevitable. The question is whether surprises can be anticipated and reduced. That issue is addressed in this report.

Scientific research has already helped us reduce this uncertainty in two important cases; potential abrupt changes in ocean deep water formation and the release of carbon from frozen soils and ices in the polar regions were once of serious near-term concern are now understood to be less imminent, although still worrisome as slow changes over longer time horizons.

In contrast, the potential for abrupt changes in ecosystems, weather and climate extremes, and groundwater supplies critical for agriculture now seem more likely, severe, and imminent.

And the recognition that a gradually changing climate can push both natural systems, as well as human systems, across tipping points has grown over the past decade. This report addresses both abrupt climate changes in the physical climate system, and abrupt climate impacts that occur in human and natural systems from a steadily changing climate.

In addition to a changing climate, multiple other stressors are pushing natural and human systems toward their limits, and thus become more sensitive to small perturbations that can trigger large responses. Groundwater aquifers, for example, are being depleted in many parts of the world, including the southeast of the United States. Groundwater is critical for farmers to ride out droughts, and if that safety net reaches an abrupt end, the impact of droughts on the food supply will be even larger.

it is important to carefully catalog the assets at risk—societies cannot protect everything and will need to prioritize, and without an understanding of what could be lost, such as coastal infrastructure to rising seas, for example, intelligent decisions about what to protect first cannot be made.

Can all tipping points be foreseen? Probably not. Some will have no precursors, or may be triggered by naturally occurring variability in the climate system. Some will be difficult to detect, clearly visible only after they have been crossed and an abrupt change becomes inevitable. Imagine an early European explorer in North America, paddling a canoe on the swift river. This river happens to be named Niagara, but the paddler does not know that. As the paddler approaches the Falls, the roar of the water goes from faint to alarming, and the paddler desperately tries to make for shore. But the water is too swift, the tipping point has already been crossed, and the canoe—with the paddler—goes over the Falls.

Likelihood of Abrupt Changes in ocean oxygen levels

Changes in global ocean oxygen concentrations have the potential to be abrupt because of the threshold to anoxic conditions, under which the region becomes uninhabitable for aerobic organisms including fish and benthic organisms. Once this tipping point is reached in an area, anaerobic processes would be expected to dominate resulting in a likely increase in the production of the greenhouse gas N2O.

OMZs have also been intensified in many areas of the world’s coastal oceans by runoff of plant fertilizers from agriculture and incomplete wastewater treatment. These ‘dead zones’ have spread significantly since the middle of the last century and pose a threat to coastal marine ecosystems

Weather and Climate Extremes

Extreme weather and climate events are among the most deadly and costly natural disasters. For example, tropical cyclone Bhola in 1970 caused about 300,000-500,000 deaths in East Pakistan (Bangladesh today) and West Bengal of India.3,4 Hurricane Katrina caused more than 1,800 deaths and $96-$125 billion in damages to the Southeast U.S. in 2005. Worldwide, more than 115 million people are affected and more than 9,000 people are killed annually by floods, most of them in Asia (Figure 2.9 or see, for example, the Emergency Events Database5). Heat waves contributed to more than 70,000 deaths in Europe in 2003 (e.g., Robine et al., 2008) and more than 730 deaths and thousands of hospitalizations in Chicago in 1995 (Chicago Tribune, July 31, 1995; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1995). Heat waves are one of the largest weather-related sources of mortality in the United States annually.6 According to data collected by the National Climate Data Center, there were 134 weather or climate disaster events with losses exceeding $1 billion each in the United States between 1980 and 2011, an average of more than four per year (Table 2.1). Floods, droughts and wildfires—events that appear to be changing in frequency and severity due to climate change—make up about a third of these and slightly more than a third of the dollar damages (adjusted to 2012 dollars). Droughts are particularly costly, comprising about 12 percent of the events by number, but about double that (23.8 percent) by total cost.

Abrupt Changes at High Latitudes

Potential Climate Surprises Due to High-Latitude Methane and Carbon Cycles

Interest in high-latitude methane and carbon cycles is motivated by the existence of very large stores of carbon (C), in potentially labile reservoirs of soil organic carbon in permafrost (frozen) soils and in methane-containing ices called methane hydrate or clathrate, especially offshore in ocean marginal sediments. Owing to their sheer size, these carbon stocks have potential to massively impact the Earth’s climate, should they somehow be released to the atmosphere. An abrupt release of methane (CH4) is particularly worrisome as it is many times more potent as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide (CO2) over short time scales. Furthermore, methane is oxidized to CO2 in the atmosphere representing another CO2 pathway from the biosphere to the atmosphere in addition to direct release of CO2 from aerobic decomposition of carbon-rich soils.

Permafrost

Frozen northern soils contain enough carbon to drive a powerful carbon cycle feedback to a warming climate. These stocks across large areas of Siberia comprise mainly an ice-rich, loess-like deposit averaging ~25 m deep, peatlands, and river delta deposits. Estimates of the total soil-carbon stock in permafrost in the Arctic range from 1,700–1,850 Gt C (Gt C = gigatons of carbon).

To put the Arctic soil carbon reservoir into perspective, the carbon it contains exceeds current estimates of the total carbon content of all living vegetation on Earth (approximately 650 Gt C), the atmosphere (730 Gt C, up from ~360 Gt C during the last ice age and 560 Gt C prior to industrialization), proved reserves of recoverable conventional oil and coal (about 145 Gt C and 632 Gt C, respectively), and even approaches geological estimates of all fossil fuels contained within the Earth (~1,500 – 5,000 Gt C). It represents more than two and a half centuries of our current rate of carbon release through fossil fuel burning and the production of cement (nearly 9 Gt C per year).

it is clear that the time scale for deep permafrost thaw is measured in centuries, not years. Furthermore, unlike methane hydrates (see below), the very large stocks of permafrost soil carbon (i.e., the 1,672 Gt C ) must first undergo anaerobic microbial fermentation to produce methane, itself a gradual decomposition process. There are no currently proposed mechanisms that could liberate a climatically significant amount of methane or CO2 from frozen permafrost soils within an abrupt time scale of a few years, and it appears gradual increases in carbon release from warming soils can be at least partially offset, owing to rising vegetation net primary productivity. Over a time scale of decades, however, a possible self-sustaining decomposition of Yedoma could occur before the end of this century (Khvorostyanov et al., 2008a, 2008b, 2008c). A related idea is the possibility of rising soil temperatures triggering a “compost bomb instability” —possibly including combustion—and a prime example of a rate-dependent tipping point. Such possibilities would represent a rapid breakdown of the Arctic’s very large soil carbon stocks and warrant further research. Even absent an abrupt or catastrophic mobilization of CO2 or methane from permafrost carbon stocks, it is important to recognize that Arctic emissions of these critical greenhouse gases are projected to increase gradually for many decades to centuries, thus helping to drive the global climate system more quickly towards other abrupt thresholds examined in this report.

Methane Hydrates in the Ocean

Under conditions of high pressure, high methane concentration, and low temperature, water and methane can combine to form icy solids known as methane hydrates or clathrates in ocean sediments. The methane derives from biological or thermal degradation of organic matter originally deposited on the sea floor. Although the overall rate of methane production in ocean sediments is fairly slow, over millions of years, substantial reservoirs of methane hydrate have accumulated in the world’s ocean margins. Throughout most of the world ocean, a water depth of about 700 m is required for hydrate stability. In the Arctic, due to colder-than-average water temperatures, only about 200 m of water depth is required, which increases the vulnerability of those methane hydrates to a warming Arctic Ocean. The Arctic is also a focus of concern because of the wide expanse of continental shelf (25 percent of the world’s total), much of which is still frozen owing to its exposure to the frigid atmosphere during lowered sea levels of the last glacial maximum.

The inventory of methane in ocean margin sediments is large but not well constrained, with a generally agreed upon range of 1,000-10,000 Gt C (Archer, 2007; Boswell, 2007; Boswell et al., 2012). One inventory places the total Arctic Ocean hydrates at about 1,600 Gt C by extrapolation of an estimate from Shakhova et al. (2010a) to the entire Arctic shelf region (Isaksen et al., 2011) (see Figure 2.12). The geothermal increase in temperature with depth in the sediment column restricts methane hydrate to within a few hundred meters thickness near the upper surface of the sediments (e.g., Davie and Buffett, 2001). Beneath this stability zone, a layer rich in methane bubbles is often seen in seismic reflection data, called a “bottom simulating reflector.” The areal extent of methane-rich sediments is fairly well known from seismic observations of this feature, but uncertainty in the concentration of methane in those sediments is very large, thus resulting in the large uncertainty in the global inventory of ocean-floor methane.

Potential response to a warming climate

Climate change has the potential to impact ocean methane hydrate deposits through changes in ocean water temperature near the sea bed, or variations in pressure associated with changing sea level. Of the two, temperature changes are thought to be most important, both during the last deglaciation and also in the future. Warming bottom waters in deeper parts of the ocean, where surface sediment is much colder than freezing and the hydrate stability zone is relatively thick, would not thaw hydrates near the sediment surface, but downward heat diffusion into the sediment column would thin the stability zone from below, causing basal hydrates to decompose, releasing gaseous methane. The time scale for this mechanism of hydrate thawing is on the order of centuries to millennia, limited by the rate of anthropogenic heat diffusion into the deep ocean and sediment column. Even on the Siberian continental margin, where water temperatures are colder than the global average, and where the sediment column retains the cold imprint from its exposure to the atmosphere during the last glacial time 20,000 years ago, any methane hydrate must be buried under at least 200 m of water or sediment. Bottom waters at depths of 50 or 100 m might warm relatively quickly with a collapse in sea ice cover, but it would take centuries for that heat to diffuse through the 100- 150 m of sediment column to the hydrate stability zone. Thus the release of 50 Gt C from the Siberian continental shelf in 10 years as postulated by Whiteman et al. (2013) is unlikely.

The proportion of this gas production that will reach the atmosphere as CH4 is likely to be small. To reach the atmosphere, the CH4 would have to avoid oxidization within the sediment column (a chemical trap) and re-freezing within the stability zone shallower in the sediment column (a cold trap). However, the hydrate stability zone thickness decreases to zero near the top of its depth range in the ocean, and an increase in water column temperature there could eliminate the stability zone entirely, potentially providing an easier pathway for methane to reach the sea floor. Episodic and explosive escapes of gaseous methane from the sediment column have been documented by kilometer-scale “wipeout zones” in seismic images, and pockmarks on the sea floor, called eruption craters. However, the processes responsible for these observations are too poorly understood to predict what fraction of deeper CH4 might be released through them.

Most of the methane gas that emerges from the sea floor dissolves in the water column and oxidizes to CO2 instead of reaching the atmosphere. Bubble plumes tend to dissolve on a height scale of tens of meters, although larger plumes, consisting of larger bubbles, do rise farther. However, even in the cold Arctic Ocean, methane hydrate is only stable below about 200 m water depth, making for an inefficient pathway to the atmosphere at best.

The highest oceanic methane fluxes to the atmosphere in the Arctic are probably in the coastal zone, associated with erosion of coastal permafrost. In this region and terrestrial lakes the methane flux to the atmosphere is strongly impacted by ice formation on the water surface, providing another mechanism for climate feedback.

A more abrupt way to transfer methane hydrate from the sediment column to the atmosphere is by way of a submarine landslide. Methane hydrate floats in seawater just as water ice floats, and it also has greater potential to reach the atmosphere than methane bubbles. The largest known submarine landslide (called Storegga) occurred ~8000 years ago, as documented in sediment deposits off Norway. The volume of sliding material multiplied by a reasonable hydrate fraction in the pore space yields a possible methane source of about 1 Gt C. The climatic impact of this quantity of methane would be comparable to that of a volcanic eruption (although warming rather than cooling). As such it would have a significant climate impact, but one that is likely to be smaller than that of the anthropogenic CO2 rise.

Over time scales of centuries and millennia, the ocean hydrate pool has the potential to be a significant amplifier of the anthropogenic fossil fuel carbon release. Because the chemistry of the ocean equilibrates with that of the atmosphere (on time scales of decades to centuries), methane oxidized to CO2 in the water column will eventually increase the atmospheric CO2 burden.

As with decomposing permafrost soils, such release of carbon from the ocean hydrate pool would represent a change to the Earth’s climate system that is irreversible over centuries to millennia. Modeling the response of ocean hydrates to climate change is in its infancy. The largest uncertainty is the concentration of methane hydrate, especially in the shallow sediment column near the sediment water interface.

In summary, the ocean methane hydrate pool has strong potential to amplify the human CO2 release from fossil fuel combustion over times scales of decades to centuries. While anthropogenic warming should accelerate the thawing of offshore permafrost via warming of Arctic Ocean shelf waters, this impact should be considered additive to a broader thawing trend that has been underway for thousands of years.

Impacts of Arctic Methane on Global Climate

Although attention is often focused on methane when considering a potential Arctic carbon release, because methane is a short-lived gas in the atmosphere (CH4 oxidizes to CO2 within about a decade), ultimately a methane problem is a CO2 problem. It does matter how rapidly methane is released, and the impacts of a spike versus chronic emissions are discussed in Box 2.4. As methane emissions from permafrost degradation will also be accompanied by larger fluxes of CO2, Arctic carbon stores clearly have the potential to be a significant amplifier to the human release of carbon.

Speculations about potential methane releases in the Arctic have ranged up to about 75 Gt C from the land and 50 Gt C from the ocean. A release of 50 Gt C methane from the Arctic to the atmosphere over 100 years would increase Arctic CH4 emissions by about a factor of 25, and would make the present-day permafrost area about two times more productive of CH4 on average as comes from wetlands today. Postulating such a methane release over a more abrupt 10-year time scale, the emission rates from present-day permafrost would have to exceed that from wetlands by a seemingly implausible factor of 20, supporting a longer century timescale for this process, and making methane emission from polar regions an unlikely candidate for a tipping point in the climate system.

Nonetheless, as can be seen in Box 2.4, releasing 50 Gt C of methane over 100 years would have a significant impact on Earth’s climate. The atmospheric CH4 concentration would roughly quadruple, with a resulting total radiative forcing from CH4 of about 3 Watts/m2. The magnitude of this forcing is comparable to that from doubling the atmospheric CO2 concentration, but the impact of the methane forcing would be strongly attenuated by its short duration.   As concluded above, an increase in Arctic CH4 emissions of more than a factor of 10 is required before it would begin to have a significant impact on Earth’s climate in the short term. Such a strong acceleration of methane degassing from the Arctic would result in measurably higher concentrations of methane in the high northern latitudes.

Summary

Arctic carbon stores are poised to play a significant amplifying role in the century time scale buildup of CO2 and methane in the atmosphere, but are unlikely to do so abruptly, on a time scale of one or a few decades. This conclusion is based on immature science, however, and a truly sparse monitoring capability

 

What is known about the likelihood and timing of abrupt changes in the climate system over decadal timescales?

• large, abrupt changes in ocean circulation and regional climate;

• reduced ice in the Arctic Ocean and permafrost regions;

• large-scale clathrate release;

• changes in ice sheets;

• large, rapid global sea-level rise;

• growing frequency and length of heat waves and droughts;

• effects on biological systems of permafrost/ground thawing (carbon cycle effects);

• phase changes such as cloud formation processes; and

• changes in weather patterns, such as changes in snowpack, increased frequency and magnitude of heavy rainfall events and floods, or changes in monsoon patterns and modes of interannual or decadal variability.

Posted in CO2 and Methane | 1 Comment

Pity Brazil’s Military Police. FEB. 19, 2014. Vanessa Barbara. New York Times.

Pity Brazil’s Military Police. FEB. 19, 2014.  Vanessa Barbara. New York Times.

  • In 2012, 1,890 Brazilians were killed by the police.
  • 351 occurred in São Paulo — 20% of all homicides.
  • Organized crime retaliated by killing 11 police officers and another 100 off-duty.
  • Police officers are 3 times more likely to be murdered than the average Brazilian.
  • 70 percent of Brazilians distrust the police — they have lost their legitimacy.

In São Paulo, lower ranked military police officers earn an annual salary of $15,248, including benefits and danger pay allowances. They work in 12-hour shifts, night and day, for an average of 42 hours a week. But only in theory. Officers claim the rules are often ignored, with extended overtime, short notice of scheduling changes and irregular or no lunch breaks. Some take on additional jobs to supplement their wages, not only as private security guards (which is illegal), but also in a program called “Atividade Delegada,” through which the city hires policemen in their spare time, offering the equivalent of $64 for eight extra hours patrolling the streets.

There are two main kinds of police in Brazil. The civilian police concentrate on criminal investigations, while the military police have the duty of maintaining public order and working to prevent crimes.

The military police are not part of the armed forces, and yet they operate according to military principles of rank and discipline. They cannot strike or unionize, and are subject to a military-style penal code (meaning transgressions at work can be treated as mutiny or treason, and officers are tried in a special court). They are prohibited from “revealing facts or documents that can discredit the police or disrupt hierarchy or discipline.

They also can’t openly disapprove of the acts of civilian authorities from the executive, legislative or judicial branches of government, and are forbidden to express their personal political opinions.

“I love my job, I really do,” one member of the military police recently told me. “But our work goes unrecognized. Our errors are scrutinized. We have fractions of a second to decide between accelerating or braking, shooting or retreating; either way we are blamed. He noted that police officers were sometimes the only agents of the state stationed in poor neighborhoods dominated by organized crime. “Everything is on us.

But their main complaint is the impunity of criminals. Many believe Brazil’s judicial institutions are too lenient and inefficient. Officers are tired of arresting the same suspects over and over.

According to Adilson Paes, a retired police lieutenant colonel who conducted a study on police brutality, some officers turn vigilante as a result. This was also the conclusion of an investigation into policing in Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo conducted by Human Rights Watch: Many deaths of civilians “resisting arrest” are in fact extrajudicial killings, the report found, and “some police officers are members of ‘death squads,”’ which are “responsible for hundreds of murders each year.

This often leads to a cycle of retribution between the police and organized crime. Just a month ago, in Campinas, a city 60 miles from São Paulo, a policeman was killed in front of his wife during a robbery; within a few hours, 12 people were found executed — apparently by the police, as revenge. And sometimes corrupt police officers themselves are involved in organized crime.

Lately, more Brazilians have been taking notice, as police brutality is increasingly directed against journalists and political protesters (many from the middle class), instead of just the same old black and poor citizens who live in favelas.

Posted in Crime, Gangs, Corrupt police, Private security | Comments Off on Pity Brazil’s Military Police. FEB. 19, 2014. Vanessa Barbara. New York Times.

Gail Tverberg advice on what to do

Below are 2 columns of advice from Gail Tverberg.

Feb 17, 2014. Reaching Limits to Growth: What Should our Response Be?

Oil limits seem to be pushing us toward a permanent downturn, including a crash in credit availability, loss of jobs, and even possible government collapse. In this process, we are likely to lose access to both fossil fuels and grid electricity. Supply chains will likely need to be very short, because of the lack of credit. This will lead to a need for the use of local materials.

The time-period is not entirely clear. Some countries, such as Greece and Syria, will be seeing these effects quite soon. Other countries may not see the full effects for perhaps ten or twenty years. What should our response be?

It seems to me that there are many different answers, depending on who we are and what our goals are. The various options are not mutually exclusive.

Option 1. Make the most of the time we have available.

If there are things that are important to you, do them now. If you have been meaning to reconnect ties with family members or old friends, now is the time to do it. If there are things you would like to accomplish that require today’s transportation and services, do them now. If you want to support local charities, now would be a good time to do it.

Appreciate what you have now. We have been privileged to live in a society where transportation is readily available and where most of us can live in homes that are comfortably heated and cooled. At the same time, we can still enjoy many of the benefits of nature—clear skies and plants and animals around us. Life expectancies in the past were generally 35 years or less. Most of us have already lived longer than we could have expected to live in the past.

Develop stronger relationships with family and community.  This is likely to be a difficult transition. It is likely to be helpful to have as many allies as possible in transition. It may be helpful to move closer to other family members. Another approach is to form or join community groups, such as a church group or a group interested in common goals. The ties a person can form are likely to be helpful regardless of what path lies ahead.

Option 2. Prepare at least a little for the future

Learn to bounce back from downturns.  When I was an editor at The Oil Drum, I was editor for a letter from a man who grew up in Kenya and returned there practically every year. He told that the people in Kenya were very happy, even though they had little material goods and mortality was high.  One thing he mentioned was that if things went wrong—the death of a child for example—people were able to mourn for a day, and then move on. They also rejoiced in things we take for granted, such as being able to obtain enough food for the current day.

Do what you can to improve your health. In the United States, we have been used to a combination of practices that lead to overweight: (1) much too large food portions, (2) much processed food including much sugar and (3) lack of exercise. If we can change our eating and exercise practices, it is likely that we can improve our health. If healthcare goes downhill, fixing our personal health somewhat protects us.

Learn what you can about first aid. Injuries are likely to be more of an issue, as we work outside more.

We will need some specialists as well. As long as we eat grains, we will need dentists. As long as babies are born, we will need helpers of some type–doctors or midwives.

If circumstances permit, plant a garden and fruit or nut trees. Eventually, all food production will need to be local. Getting from our current industrialized agricultural model to a model with local food production with little (if any) fossil fuel inputs is likely to be a difficult transition. One approach is to learn what local plants, animals, and insects are edible. Another is to attempt to grow your own. Doing the latter will generally require considerable learning about what plants grow in your area, approaches to building and maintaining soil fertility, methods of preventing erosion, and a variety of related topics.

Find alternative water supplies. We currently are dependent on a water supply chain that can be broken in a variety of ways—drought, loss of electricity, storm damage, or pollution problems. If the long-term water supply seems questionable, it may be helpful to move to another location, sooner rather than later. Alternatively, we can figure out how to bridge a gap in water supplies, such as through access to a creek or lake. For the very short-term, a water barrel of stored water might be helpful.

Figure out alternative cooking arrangements. We humans are dependent on cooking for purifying water, for allowing us to eat a wider variety of food, and for allowing us to obtain greater nutrition from the food we eat, without chewing literally half of the day. We now depend primarily on electricity or natural gas for cooking. Determine what alternative cooking arrangements can be made in your area, in the event current cooking arrangements become unavailable. An example might be an outdoor fireplace with locally gathered sticks for fuel, perhaps supplemented by a solar cooker with reflective sides.

Store up a little food to bridge a temporary supply interruption. We have troubles today with wind storms and snow storms. There are any number of other types of interruptions that could happen if businesses encounter credit problems that lead to supply chain interruptions. It doesn’t hurt to be prepared.

Option 3. Figure out what options might work for a few years for taking care of yourself and your family 

We have a lot of goods made with fossil fuels that probably will work for a while, but likely won’t be available for the long term. Examples include solar PV, batteries, power saws, electric pumps, electric fences, bicycles, light bulbs, and many other devices that we take for granted today. Of course, as soon as any part breaks and can’t be replaced, we are likely to be “up a creek, without a paddle.”

I expect that quite a few of the permaculture solutions and organic gardening solutions are temporary solutions. They work for now, but whether they will work for the long term is less clear. We are not going to be able to make and transport organic sprays for fruit for very long and irrigation systems will need to be very simple to be resilient. Plastic wears out and even metal tools will be hard to replace.

Purchasing land for agriculture can perhaps be a partial solution for some individuals, with sufficient skills and tools. Ideally, a person will want to be part of a larger group of people using a larger piece of land, rather than a smaller group, using a smaller piece of land, because of the problem that occurs if one worker gets sick or injured. It may be helpful to have multiple non-contiguous pieces of land, to help even out impacts of bad weather and pests. Ideally, the land should be large enough so that part of the land can remain fallow, or be used for feeding animals, and can be rotated with crop-producing land.

Security is likely be a problem, especially if a single home is distant from other homes. Ideally, a family will be part of a larger group in order to provide security.

Other issues include inability to pay taxes and the government taking over property. Because of the many issues involved, any solution is, at best, temporary. Unfortunately, that may be the best we can do. As parts of the system fail, a local group may be able to support fewer people. Then the group will need to deal with how to handle this situation–everyone starve, or kick out a few members from the group, or attack another group, with the hope of obtaining control of their resources.

Option 4. Work on trying to solve the long-term problem.

There are many studies of how pre-industrial societies operated without fossil fuels and without electricity. For example, Jared Diamond gives his view of how some very early societies functioned in The World Until Yesterday. The Merchant of Prato by Iris Origo documents the life of one particular 14th century merchant, based on old letters and other documents.

Through studies of how past societies behaved, it might be possible for today’s people to develop a civilization that could be operated using only renewable resources of the types used in pre-industrial times, such as wood, water wheels, and sail boats. Such groups would probably not be able to use much metal or concrete because of the problem with deforestation when wood is used for energy-intensive operations. (Today’s so-called “renewables,” such as hydro-electric, wind turbines and solar PV require fossil fuels for manufacture and upkeep, so likely will not be available for very long.)  Heating of homes will need to be very limited as well, to prevent deforestation.

As a practical matter, the groups best equipped to make such a change are ones that have recently been hunter-gatherers and still have some memory of how they operated in the past. Perhaps some former hunter-gatherers could give instruction to others in sort of a reverse Peace Corps operation.

We do know some approaches that have been used in the past. Dogs have been used to help with herding animals, for hunting, and for warmth. Animals of various types have been used for transportation and for plowing. The downside is that animals require the use of a lot of land to produce the food needed for them to eat.

Traditional societies have used the giving of gifts and the requirement of reciprocal gift giving to increase the strength of relationships and as a substitute for our money-based financial system. With such an approach, a person gains status not by what he has, but by what he gives away.

Storytelling has been a way of passing on knowledge and entertainment for generations. Songs, games, and simple musical instruments are also part of many traditions. These are approaches that can be used in the future as well.

Option 5. Take steps toward getting population in line with likely long-term energy availability.

The world is now overfilled with people and with the many animals that people raise for food or as pets. Without fossil fuels and network electricity, we probably will not be able to feed more than a fraction of the current population of humans and domesticated animals.

Some steps we might take:

Keep family sizes small. Encourage one-child families. When a family pet dies, don’t replace it (or replace it with a smaller animal).

Eat much less meat. This could be started even now.

Option 6. Rearrange personal finances.

Paper investments are, in general, not going to be worth much, regardless of how we rearrange them, if resource availability drops greatly. Ultimately, paper investments allow us to buy goods available in the marketplace. But if there isn’t much to buy in the marketplace, they are likely to be much less helpful than we assume. Precious metals have the same difficulty–they can’t buy what is not available.

Purchasing land is theoretically better, but even land can be taken away from us by taxes or by appropriation. There is also a possibility that we may need to move, if conditions change, regardless of what property ownership conditions seem to be.

We need to learn to take each day as it comes. If we find that our bank accounts aren’t there, or that only a small fraction of the money can be withdrawn, or that the money is in the bank doesn’t buy much of anything, we need somehow to figure out a way around the situation. Very likely everyone else will be in the same boat. This is a major reason for working on substitute access to food and water supplies.

Option 7. Put more emphasis on relationships. 

Studies show that relationships are what bring happiness—not the accumulation of goods. Starting to work now on developing additional strong relationships would seem to be a worthwhile goal. In traditional societies, extended family relationships were very important.

Religions can teach us how we treat our neighbors and thus about relationships. A version of the Golden Rule (Do unto others as you would have then do unto you) is found in several major religions. Many readers of this blog have given up on religions as hopelessly out of date, instead choosing such “wisdom” as, “He who dies with the most toys wins.” In fact, this latter wisdom is clearly nonsense. We can expect our fossil-fuel based “toys” to lose their usefulness before our very eyes in the not too distant future. Ben Bernanke and Janet Yellen are not gods, even if we are told that they are all-powerful.

Another aspect of keeping good relationships is finding ways to mend broken relationships. One such approach is forgiveness. Another is through reconciliation procedures aimed at returning broken relationships to wholeness. Such procedures are common in small societies, according to Diamond (2012).

Option 8. Find ways to deal with the stresses of a likely downturn ahead.

As much as we would like to take one day at a time, oftentimes it is easy to worry, even though this does no good.

Even though we think we know that outcome of our current difficulties, we really do not. The universe has many physical laws. Ultimately, the source of all of these physical laws is not clear–is there a Supreme Being behind them? The story of natural selection is in many ways a miracle. The story of human existence represents more miracles—learning to control fire; learning to control our environment through agriculture; learning to modify our environment further through the use of fossil fuels. In my own personal life, I see a pattern of circumstances working together in ways I could never have expected.

We are not the first to go through hard times. Because of my background, I find myself comforted by many Biblical passages. I am sure other religions have other passages that are also helpful.

Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for though art with me. Thy rod and thy staff they comfort me. .  . Surely goodness and mercy will follow me all the days of my life. . . (Psalm 23: 4, 6)

. . . in all things God works for the good of those who love him . . . (Romans 8:28)

For me personally, more things have worked together for good than I would ever have dreamed possible. I will not rule out the possibility of this happening again in the future, regardless of what the external circumstances may look like.

Option 9. For those who are concerned about Climate Change

In my view, the changes we are encountering will bring a quick end to the use of fossil fuels. Thus, the concern that future fossil fuel use will cause rapid climate change is over-blown. If individuals would like to personally reduce their own fossil fuel use, I would suggest the following:

  • Stop eating meat now, especially that raised in our current industrial system.
  • Get rid of pets that are not providing support functions, such as hunting for food.
  • Spend less of your wages. With more of the money left in the bank or in paper investments, this money will lose value and thus will reduce spending on fossil fuel-based goods and services. (While theoretically this money could be lent out and reinvested, lack of credit availability will put an end to this practice.)
  • Use a bicycle for transport instead of a car, when possible. Or walk.
  • Purchase a more fuel efficient car, if you need to replace a current vehicle.
  • Turn down the heat in your home or apartment. Don’t use air conditioning.

I would suggest quitting your job as well, but if you quit your job, the job is likely to go to someone else, resulting in the same fossil fuel use for someone else.  Even stopping a business you own will not necessarily work, if another business will expand and take its place. If the business that ramps up is in a part of the world that uses coal as its primary fuel, stopping your local business may lead to an increase in world carbon dioxide emissions.

Gail Tverberg. 30 May 2013. Energy limits: Is there anything we can do? 

The energy limit we are running into is a cost limit. I would argue that neither the Republican or Democrat approach to solving the problem will really work.

The Republicans favor “Drill Baby Drill”. If the issue is that the price of oil extraction is too high, additional drilling doesn’t really fix the problem. At best, it gives us a little more expensive oil to add to the world’s supply. The Wall Street research firm Sanford Bernstein recently estimated that the non-Opec marginal cost of production rose to $104.50 a barrel in 2012, up more than 13 per cent from $92.30 a barrel in 2011.

US consumers still cannot afford to buy high-priced oil, even if we extract the oil ourselves. The countries that see rising oil consumption tend to be ones that can leverage its use better with cheaper fuels, particularly coal (Figure 1). See Why coal consumption keeps rising; what economists missed. The recent reduction in US oil usage is more related to young people not being able to afford to drive than it is to improved automobile efficiency. See my post, Why is gasoline mileage lower? Better gasoline mileage?

Figure 1. Oil consumption by part of the world, based on EIA data. 2012 world consumption data estimated based on world "all liquids" production amounts.

The Democrats favor subsidizing high-priced energy approaches that wouldn’t be competitive without such subsidies. Government debt is at 103% of GDP. It is hard to see that the government can afford such subsidies. Also, it is doubtful that the supposed carbon-saving benefit is really there, when all of the follow-on effects are included. Buying wind turbine parts, solar panels, and goods that use rare earth minerals (used in many high-tech goods, including electric cars and  wind turbines) helps to stimulate the Chinese economy, adding to their coal use. Furthermore, the higher taxes needed to pay for these subsidies reduces the spendable income of the common worker, pushing the country in the direction of recession.

So what do we do as an alternative, if neither the Republican or Democrat approach works? I would argue that we are dealing with a situation that is essentially unfixable. It can be expected to morph into a financial crash, for reasons I explained in How Resource Limits Lead to Financial Collapse. Thus, the issue we will need to mitigate will be debt defaults, loss of jobs, and possibly major changes to governments. If we are dealing with a financial crash, oil prices may in fact be lower, but people will still be unable to afford the oil because of other issues, such as lack of jobs or lack of access to money in their bank accounts.

Because neither political party can fix our problem, I expect that most of our responses will necessarily be individual, personal responses. These are a few ideas:

1. Get out of debt situations, if it is easy to do. 

There are a lot of people who own stocks on margin, or who own an expensive house with a big mortgage on it. Now, with prices of stocks and homes both higher, would be a good time to get out of both types of debt. Sell the stock or buy a less expensive house, without the mortgage.

Equities and home prices both seem to be inflated now, indirectly because of Quantitative Easing. Some recent analysis suggests that real (that is, inflation adjusted) interest rates are rising partly because inflation is falling.  The reason that inflation is falling is because oil prices are lower (Figure 2). Comparing the first four months of 2013 with the first four months of 2012, oil prices are about $9 per barrel lower. Oil prices are lower because of reduced demand due to economic contraction, especially in Europe.

Figure 2. Spot oil prices and actual refiners acquisition costs, based on EIA data.

In the past month, there has also been an uptick in interest rates (even apart from the declining inflation component). According to the Wall Street Journal, “Yields on the benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasury note now stand above 2.1%—still low by historic standards, but nearly half a percentage point higher than at the start of May.” Mortgage rates are also reported to be half a percentage point higher than they were six months ago.

There are a number of risks with rising real interest rates and falling inflation. One is that the higher interest rates will trigger lower stock prices and lower house prices. Another is that deflation will continue, making debt payback more difficult. If this happens, it is something that the Fed can’t handle with its monetary easing policy. Interest rates can go to zero, but not below. A third issue, especially if interest rates rise further, is the adverse impact on the US government financial situation.

2. Reduce your expectations about what investments can do for you.

Dmitry Orlov, who has had experience with the collapse of the Former Soviet Union, made the remark, “There are two kinds of investments: those that lose all their value at once, and those that lose value slowly.” Paper investments are a particular problem, because they can decline in value very quickly if conditions change. Even real estate can be a problem, though, because governments can take away what you thought you owned, or raise taxes to a level that you cannot afford. If you buy something and have to move, but cannot take the object with you, you will likely lose the value you invested. The only things that are really yours to keep (at least until your declining years) are skills that you learn.

3. Take up a hobby that will provide food for your family (planting a few fruit or nut trees, adding a garden, raising a few chickens, or learning to hunt/fish).

Taking up hobbies such as these provide several functions: They provide a diversion away from the problems of the day, and let you feel like you are doing something helpful. They may actually provide a cushioning effect, if there is a sharp downturn. Taking up such hobbies can provide a useful skill for the future. In some cases, it may make sense to purchase land for purposes such as these. If considering doing this, a person should take note of items (1) and (2) above. It takes quite a long time to get started, and you can’t take the improved land with you, if you have to leave.

4. Learn to appreciate nature, family, and simple joys that can’t easily be taken away. It is possible to be happy, regardless of circumstances. We can find many good things in every day. Obsessing over the future is not really helpful. Don’t tie your happiness to having more “stuff”; you are likely to be disappointed. Learn to sing happy songs, or how to play a musical instrument. Or memorize uplifting poetry or religious writings.

5. Build a network of friends. If things go downhill, we can’t expect to use a gun to ward off intruders, night and day. If nothing else, we will run out of ammunition. Over the long term, the approach that is likely to be successful is working together with other community members toward a common goal.

6. Learn new skills, if you are concerned about job loss. Try to think of what will be needed in a lower-energy world. People will always need dentists and midwives, regardless of how poor they are. Buggy whip manufacturers went out of business long ago. Maybe we will need them back!

7. If you want to develop larger-scale plans (such as for cities or regions), keep them cheap and easy to implement. Governments are already running short of funds to implement plans. Look for approaches that are inexpensive to put in place, such as car-sharing plans. Alternatives that worked years ago, such as boats and canals, might be considered as well.

8. Aim for a flexible approach to problems. We don’t know things will turn out. Water may be in very short supply in one part of the country. Or job opportunities may open up in a place far from home. Even more than in the past, we are likely to need to be able to change our plans on short notice.

Posted in Expert Advice | Comments Off on Gail Tverberg advice on what to do

Colombia’s Warning for Mexico

Preface. This is a pattern you see over and over again in civil wars and collapsing bits of nations no longer under government control

Abadfeb’s editorial reminds me of feudalism. Until the rise of state-level armies in the 17th century, the nobility had their own soldiers to keep the peasants in line. Now, rich landowners hire vigilantes to fight guerrillas and drug cartels, which leads to vigilantes also dealing in drugs and killing civilians, and they become indistinguishable from the guerrillas, and too strong to be defeated by state level armies.  Here’s a summary of what Abadfeb describes is happening in Columbia and Mexico, which applies to many other countries as well:

  1. The army, blessed by central authorities, looks for an ally
  2. Compared to the evil guerrilla army, the vigilante self-defense groups look great — they have popular support and the state army gives them permission to fight the guerrillas.
  3. The government ignores the fact that some of these vigilantes might be financed by a rival drug gang.
  4. When the state tries to reassert order, they can’t. The vigilantes have turned into a powerful armed power and are now indistinguishable from the guerrilla army and gangsters they’re fighting. Abadfeb says the outcome is “outlying territories turn into battlefields where life is impossible for defenseless civilians. The legitimate economy and tourism disappear, death tolls soar, and the final winner, inevitably, is not the state but some local narco-dictator with his own army of mercenaries”.
  5. “The vigilantes might begin by killing kidnappers, drug dealers and extortionists, but soon they begin killing their relatives, and then their friends, or those they think are their friends, and then the friends’ families, until everyone is suspect and they might come knocking at your own door, as happened to us in Colombia — as happened to my own father, when he was gunned down in the streets of Medellín.  To allow private armies, even if they are supposedly for self-defense, is to create a monster like the Hydra: If you cut off one head, two more grow back”

When the State breaks down, here’s what happens, it can only guarantee security and the rule of law in certain areas, which tend to be the big cities. The farther away you get from cities, the more likely police officers are corrupt, judges are threatened by local dictators with their private armies, and bribery keeps anyone  from doing anything.  This is a pattern that can be throughout history as Turchin describes in his book Secular Cycles.

Alice Friedemann  www.energyskeptic.com  Author of Life After Fossil Fuels: A Reality Check on Alternative Energy; When Trucks Stop Running: Energy and the Future of Transportation”, Barriers to Making Algal Biofuels, & “Crunch! Whole Grain Artisan Chips and Crackers”.  Women in ecology  Podcasts: WGBH, Planet: Critical, Crazy Town, Collapse Chronicles, Derrick Jensen, Practical Prepping, Kunstler 253 &278, Peak Prosperity,  Index of best energyskeptic posts

Abadfeb H (2014) Colombia’s Warning for Mexico. New York Times.

Most everyone agrees: The only thing worse than killing is being killed. If our lives are threatened, we have the right to defend ourselves, with force if necessary. In a civilized society, that defense is delegated to the state.

Vigilante self-defense groups arose to protect people in Colombia in the 1990s.

Because the state was losing the war against the guerrilla army — essentially a drug cartel — and drug lord Pablo Escobar’s private army, the state gave the green light to these groups. They were made up of agricultural laborers, trained by soldiers, and financed by landowners and agribusinesses.  When the vigilantes began to extort money from the very businessmen who were financing them, they were declared illegal. But it was already too late. They had become clandestine paramilitary groups, using the same weapons as those they were fighting: kidnapping, murder of innocents, drug trafficking.

What has been going on these last few months in Mexico, in the western state of Michoacán, makes me fear that the same thing is happening there today. “Autodefensas” have organized to drive out the vicious local drug cartel, called the Knights Templar. After first demanding that the vigilantes disband, the government of President Enrique Peña Nieto has now sanctioned them as part of the Rural Defense Corps — at least nominally under the control of the military.

Sometimes the United States — which badly misunderstands Latin American realities — asks for elimination of illicit crops, total war on drugs or extermination of guerrilla forces. The most obedient governments ignore what might be real solutions — like cutting off the source of the cartels’ enormous wealth by legalizing drugs — and instead attempt to carry out these requests. They send their national armies to undertake the thankless task of fighting against their own compatriots. That’s what Felipe Calderón, Mexico’s previous president, tried.

But these wars to the death always fail.

This is what we learned in Colombia: When the state is not present, it is local tyrants who take power and brutally impose their rules, which are nothing more than the defense of their privileges. The old Hobbesian concept, that the natural state of mankind is that man is a wolf to man, seems confirmed in these involuntary Latin American anarchist experiments. The strongest and richest wolf (from trafficking drugs or illegal mining) dominates the other wolves.

The vigilantes appear to be a cure — they are seen as saviors — but in reality they are part of the illness, one more illegal army, acting without restraints and financed by dirty money.

Posted in Crime, Gangs, Corrupt police, Private security | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Colombia’s Warning for Mexico

Eduardo Porter : Next Crisis from Rising Interest Rates? (New York Times)

A World Unprepared, Again, for Rising Interest Rates. Feb 11, 2014. Eduardo Porter. New York Times.

I was living in São Paulo in 1997 when, out of the blue, an investment banker I knew called to ask about Brazilian cocktails. He didn’t want one. He needed a name for a potential economic crisis, in the vein of Mexico’s Tequila affair in 1994 and Thailand’s Tom Yum Kung debacle, which was unfolding at the time.

As unlikely as it seemed to most Brazilians then, the crisis did arrive. A default by the Russian government in 1998 set off a run on Brazilian bonds, as investors rushed to pare their holdings in emerging markets by selling the most liquid among them. Suffering from large trade and budget deficits and a shrinking stock of foreign reserves, Brazil was forced a few months later to sever the real’s link to the dollar and let it sink.

That’s when it dawned on me that we weren’t living in my parent’s economy anymore.

The stable American economic order lasted more than 3 decades from the end of WWII, when economic cycles were essentially driven by the Federal Reserve’s raising and lowering of interest rates to combat inflation.

It started to crumble with the severing of the link between gold and the dollar and the twin oil crises of the 1970s. That ushered in an era of footloose capital, unshackled by three decades of increasing deregulation, that led to the global tides that now drive economic ups and downs.

That Brazilian morning 17 years ago has come to mind again as the Fed has started gradually reducing the amount of money it pumps into the economy. The move could hardly have been a surprise, because the Fed announced as early as last spring that it would begin doing so by the end of 2013. The Fed’s action has had an easing effect on domestic interest rates.

And yet around the world, financial markets have swooned as if struck by lightning.

The reasoning behind investors’ abrupt change of heart makes a certain sense. China’s economic slowdown will blunt the exports of commodity producers, weakening their trade balances. Macroeconomic management in many developing countries has been poor. Budget and trade deficits in some are way too high.

The pullout of capital from developing countries around the world has an eerie resemblance to the seemingly unlikely financial wave that emerged from Asia, crossed through Russia and Eastern Europe and ended up walloping Brazil.

As Carmen M. Reinhart, a renowned international economist at Harvard’s Kennedy School, put it, capital bonanzas, inevitably followed by financial crises, are “older than the hills.  The problem is, the cycles of boom and bust seem to keep getting worse. Whether the Fed continues removing monetary stimulus at the same pace or it pauses, perhaps worried by sluggish job growth, long-term interest rates eventually will rise.

The world is not prepared. And it’s even less prepared for the bigger crisis that we seem doomed to suffer after this one.

Lawrence Summers, President Obama’s former top economic adviser, recently articulated an idea that suggests booms and busts, each one bigger than the last, might be with us for a while.

At a speech at the International Monetary Fund last November, he said that the global economy was suffering from “secular stagnation,” persistent low growth caused by the fact that there are more savings around than profitable investments to be made.

There could be several reasons, including slowing labor force growth or declining productivity. Cautious consumers and businesses burned by the crisis might be prone to save more and invest less. Income inequality might blunt consumption.

Regardless of the cause, a persistent savings glut would make bubbles much more likely. “In an era of secular stagnation, when equilibrium interest rates are low, there will be more financial stability problems,” Mr. Summers told me.

This rings a bell. Asian countries emerged from the 1990s intent on never suffering like that again. It’s debatable whether their primary motivation was to build trade surpluses or to amass financial war chests against future attacks. The fact is they bulked up on savings, held back on consumption and investment, and amassed huge caches of foreign reserves.

Sunk into Treasury bonds, these reserves drove a speculative boom in the “emerging market” of the moment: American subprime mortgages.

It was a wave of money that — to the confusion of Alan Greenspan, the Fed chairman at the time — the Fed seemed powerless to manage. When it did stop, as all such waves do, the housing bubble came to a cataclysmic end.

Is there anything to be done about the new unstable order?

“International monetary cooperation has broken down,” said Raghuram G. Rajan, India’s central bank chief, a couple of days after he was forced to raise interest rates to keep the rupee from sinking.

Posted in Crash Coming Soon, Interest Rates | Comments Off on Eduardo Porter : Next Crisis from Rising Interest Rates? (New York Times)

Banks get around Bonus Rules = less money to take back after risky bets go bad

February 13, 2014. Banks in London Devise Way Around Europe’s Bonus Rules. Jenny Anderson. New York Times.

Since the 2008 crisis, regulators around the world have tried to rein in bonuses, worried that big payouts encourage excessive risk-taking by bankers and traders.

These new packages undermine what bank regulators worldwide have sought to do for 6 years: force banks to stagger the payment of bonuses over much longer periods. Such deferrals enable the money to be taken back if bets go bad. The new structures pay more upfront and leave less available to take back.

But bank giants in London such as Goldman Sachs, Bank of America Merrill Lynch and Barclays are flouting the restrictions by structuring new pay packages that try to satisfy both their emboldened regulators and their very expensive employees.

So goodbye, big bonus.  Hello, role-based pay.  Other banks have called their new payments “allowances.” At least one labeled it “reviewable salary.

“These are bonuses in disguise,” said Philippe Lamberts, a Belgian member of the Green Party in the European Parliament.

“This may leave us not just no better off, but worse off from the management of systemic risk,” said Andrew Tyrie, chairman of the Treasury Select Committee and a Conservative member of Parliament. The commission on banking standards that he led concluded, among other issues, that compensation needed to include longer deferrals and more take-backs to discourage excessive risk-taking.

Posted in Crash Coming Soon, No Reforms | Comments Off on Banks get around Bonus Rules = less money to take back after risky bets go bad

Matt Taibbi : Commodity Scams on Wall Street Will Cause the Next Crash

The Vampire Squid Strikes Again: The Mega Banks’ Most Devious Scam Yet

Banks are no longer just financing heavy industry. They are actually buying it up and inventing bigger, bolder and scarier scams than ever.

Matt Taibbi.  February 12, 2014.  Rolling Stone.

Below is the beginning of the article which I’ve both shortened and highlighted.  Do read the entire piece if you have time, because the details and history of how this may unfold are fascinating, especially if you want to understand how this new kind of corruption is likely to be a factor in the next financial crash.   

Call it the loophole that destroyed the world. In 1999 Congress crafted a law that would make possible a broader concentration of financial and industrial power than we’ve seen in more than a century. But the crazy thing is, nobody at the time quite knew it. Most thought the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 – also known as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act – was just the latest and boldest in a long line of deregulatory handouts to Wall Street that had begun in the Reagan years.

Wall Street had spent much of that era arguing that America’s banks needed to become bigger to compete globally with the German and Japanese-style financial giants, which were about to swallow up all the world’s banking business.

Bank lobbyists pushed a new law designed to wipe out 60-plus years of bedrock financial regulation. The key was repealing the famed Glass-Steagall Act separating bankers and brokers, which had been passed in 1933 to prevent conflicts of interest within the finance sector that had led to the Great Depression. Now, commercial banks would be allowed to merge with investment banks and insurance companies, creating financial megafirms potentially far more powerful than had ever existed in America.

But it took until now to understand the most explosive part of the bill, which additionally legalized new forms of monopoly, allowing banks to merge with heavy industry. A tiny provision in the bill also permitted commercial banks to delve into any activity that is “complementary to a financial activity and does not pose a substantial risk to the safety or soundness of depository institutions or the financial system generally.”  Complementary to a financial activity. What the hell did that mean?  It turns out that pretty much everything is considered complementary to a financial activity.

Fifteen years later, in fact, it now looks like Wall Street and its lawyers took the term to be a synonym for ruthless campaigns of world domination.

Today, banks like Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan Chase and Goldman Sachs own oil tankers, run airports and control huge quantities of coal, natural gas, heating oil, electric power and precious metals. They exert direct control over the supply of a whole galaxy of raw materials crucial to world industry and to society in general, including everything from food products to metals like zinc, copper, tin, nickel, aluminum, and uranium.

But banks aren’t just buying stuff, they’re buying whole industrial processes. They’re buying oil that’s still in the ground, the tankers that move it across the sea, the refineries that turn it into fuel, and the pipelines that bring it to your home. They’re also betting on the timing and efficiency of these same industrial processes in the financial markets – buying and selling oil stocks on the stock exchange, oil futures on the futures market, swaps on the swaps market, etc.

Allowing one company to control the supply of crucial physical commodities, and also trade in the financial products that might be related to those markets, is an open invitation to commit mass manipulation. It’s something akin to letting casino owners who take book on NFL games during the week also coach all the teams on Sundays.

The situation has opened a Pandora’s box of horrifying new corruption possibilities, but it’s been hard for the public to notice, since regulators have struggled to put even the slightest dent in Wall Street’s older, more familiar scams. In just the past few years we’ve seen an explosion of scandals – from the multitrillion-dollar Libor saga (major international banks gaming world interest rates), to the more recent foreign-currency-exchange fiasco (many of the same banks suspected of rigging prices in the $5.3-trillion-a-day currency markets), to lesser scandals involving manipulation of interest-rate swaps, and gold and silver prices.

But those are purely financial schemes. In these new, even scarier kinds of manipulations, banks that own whole chains of physical business interests have been caught rigging prices in those industries. For instance, in just the past two years, fines in excess of $400 million have been levied against both JPMorgan Chase and Barclays for allegedly manipulating the delivery of electricity in several states, including California. In the case of Barclays, which is contesting the fine, regulators claim prices were manipulated to help the bank win financial bets it had made on those same energy markets.

And last summer, The New York Times described how Goldman Sachs was caught systematically delaying the delivery of metals out of a network of warehouses it owned in order to jack up rents and artificially boost prices.

By exploiting loopholes in a dense, 15-year-old piece of financial legislation, Wall Street has effected a revolutionary change that American citizens never discussed, debated or prepared for, and certainly never explicitly permitted in any meaningful way: the wholesale merger of high finance with heavy industry. This blitzkrieg reorganization of our economy has left millions of Americans facing a smorgasbord of frightfully unexpected new problems. Do we even have a regulatory structure in place to look out for these new forms of manipulation? (Answer: We don’t.) And given that the banking sector that came so close to ruining the world economy five years ago has now vastly expanded its footprint, who’s in charge of preventing the next crash?

But the potential for wide-scale manipulation and/or new financial disasters is only part of the nightmare that this new merger of banking and industry has created. The other, perhaps even darker problem involves the new existential dangers both to the environment and to the stability of the financial system. Long before Goldman and Chase started buying up metals warehouses, for instance, Morgan Stanley had already bought up a substantial empire of physical businesses – electricity plants in a number of states, a firm that trades in heating oil, jet fuels, fertilizers, asphalt, chemicals, pipelines and a global operator of oil tankers.

How long before one of these fully loaded monster ships capsizes, and Morgan Stanley becomes the next BP, not only killing a gazillion birds and sea mammals off some unlucky country’s shores but also taking the financial system down with them, as lawsuits plunge the company into bankruptcy with Lehman-style repercussions?

The regulators are almost worse. Remember the 2008 collapse happened when government bodies like the Fed, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision – whose entire expertise supposedly revolves around monitoring the safety and soundness of financial companies – somehow missed that half of Wall Street was functionally bankrupt.

Now that many of those financial companies have been bailed out, those same regulators who couldn’t or wouldn’t smell smoke in a raging fire last time around are suddenly in charge of deciding if companies like Morgan Stanley are taking out enough insurance on their oil tankers, or if banks like Goldman Sachs are properly handling their uranium deposits.

“The Fed isn’t the most enthusiastic regulator in the best of times,” says Brown. “And now we’re asking them to take this on?”

Banks in America were never meant to own industries. This principle has been part of our culture practically from the beginning of our history. The original restrictions on banks getting involved with commerce were rooted in the classically American fear of overweening government power – citizens in the early 1800s were concerned about the potential for monopolistic abuses posed by state-sponsored banks.

Later, however, Americans also found themselves forced to beat back a movement of private monopolies, in particular the great railroad and energy cartels built by robber barons of the Rockefeller type who, by the late 1800s, were on the precipice of swallowing markets whole and dictating to the public the prices of everything from products to labor. It took a long period of upheaval and prolonged fights over new laws like the Sherman and Clayton anti-trust acts before those monopolies were reined in.

Banks, however, were never really regulated under those laws. Only the Great Depression and years of brutal legislative trench warfare finally brought them to heel under the same kinds of anti-trust concepts that stopped the robber barons, through acts like Glass-Steagall and the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956. Then, with a few throwaway lines in a 1999 law that nobody ever heard of until now, that whole struggle went up in smoke, and here we are, in Hobbes’ jungle, waiting for the next catastrophe to unfold.

Read the full article here

Posted in Commodity Scams, Crash Coming Soon, No Reforms | Comments Off on Matt Taibbi : Commodity Scams on Wall Street Will Cause the Next Crash

Set the planet on fire: Burn underground coal to gasify it. Worse than Fracking.

Fire in the hole: After fracking comes coal. 13 February 2014 by Fred Pearce. NewScientist.

Setting fire to coal underground could answer our energy prayers, or start an environmental disaster on a bigger scale than ever before. Without a way to capture all the carbon and store it out of harm’s way, it could raise the world’s temperature by 10 degrees or more.

If you thought shale gas was a nightmare, you ain’t seen nothing yet. A subterranean world of previously ignored reserves is about to be opened up. These are the vast coal deposits that have proved unreachable by conventional mining, along with gas deposits around them. To the horror of anyone concerned about climate change, modern miners want to set fire to these deep coal seams and capture the gases this creates for industry and power generation. Some say this will provide energy security for generations to come. Others warn that it is a whole new way to fry the planet.

A primitive version of the technology behind this Dantean inferno of underground coal gasification (UCG) has already been running for 50 years in the former Soviet republic of Uzbekistan. Some 300 meters beneath the plains east of Tashkent, Stalin’s engineers and their successors have been burning a seam of brown coal that can’t be mined conventionally. There are two well heads on the surface: one pumps air down to fan the flames while the other retrieves a million cubic meters of combustion gases a day. Scrubbed of coal dust, cooled and compressed on site, the gases are then sent down a pipeline that snakes across the countryside to a sprawling power station on the outskirts of the industrial town of Angren, where they are burned to generate electricity.

If it can be scaled up successfully, the Australian engineers who bought the operation seven years ago think it could transform the world’s energy markets, open up trillions of tons of unmineable coal and provide a new carbon-based energy source that could last a thousand years.

With trials of UCG under way globally from China to Queensland, and South Africa to Canada, the stakes are high. Not least for the atmosphere. Is this burning desire for fossil fuel pushing us towards disaster?

Until recently, only reserves with rich concentrations of coal, oil and natural gas were exploited – but not any more. With those reserves approaching exhaustion, the hunt is on to tap huge volumes of “unconventional” energy sources, particularly natural gas, or methane. With these we could keep the lights on, power vehicles, deliver feedstock for the chemicals industry, and quite possibly heat the planet, for centuries to come.

In the past decade, the focus has been on shale gas: methane tightly trapped in tiny pores and fractures in shale, a sedimentary rock made up of mud and clay mixed with minerals such as quartz. Capturing that gas required 2 crucial new technologies. Horizontal drilling launched from conventional vertical wells can penetrate for up to 3 kilometers along shale beds. And hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, blasts high-pressure water into the shale to fracture the rock and release the gas. As well as opening up the shale, these technologies open the door to a wide range of alternative sources of methane. They can release methane trapped within coal seams, for example, notably in the coalfields of Wyoming and Montana. Methane is often produced as seams develop, as the coal becomes compacted and heated deep underground. The gas has always been the bane of coal mining, but if collected and pumped to the surface, it becomes an asset.

According to the International Energy Agency’s latest estimates, some 400 trillion cubic meters of economically recoverable methane lies trapped in coal and shale beds around the world. It roughly doubles estimates of how much gas miners may be able to get their hands on. But that is just the start. There might be even more gas down there in different rock strata, much of which has migrated from coal seams over millions of years. And why limit the plan to existing gas? The real prize, the miners say, is to create yet more methane by setting fire to the huge amount of unmineable coal lurking underground.

Setting fire to coal and capturing the gaseous emissions has long been routine above ground. Till half a century ago, many of us got our gas for heating and cooking from gas works that ignited and “gasified” coal. The combustion converts the carbon in the coal to carbon dioxide while providing heat for subsequent reactions in which the CO2 reacts with steam to produce hydrogen, carbon monoxide and methane.

In most countries, gas works were replaced by natural gas from oil fields. But now the idea is to turn coal seams into underground gas works. That, say proponents of the idea, exploits coal once thought too deep, too costly or too dangerous to exploit. It also saves time and money in mining, and land isn’t spoiled by mines and waste dumps – not to mention the costs and environmental hazards of conventional gas works. Any nasty by-products can be left below ground (see diagram).

The idea of UCG originated with the German engineer William Siemens in the 1860s. It was first tried out a century ago by British Nobel prizewinning chemist William Ramsay, at the end of tunnels in conventional mines in the Durham coalfield in northern England. The experiments successfully produced useful gas, but only the Soviet Union followed it up.

Then in the 1990s, Australian engineers led by Len Walker, and Cliff Mallett from CSIRO, the Australian government research agency, developed their own systems that borrowed techniques in horizontal drilling from the US oil industry. Walker set up Linc Energy and began trials at Chinchilla, in Western Downs, Queensland. Within two years the plant had shown UCG was feasible.

By 2002, both Linc and Mallett’s Carbon Energy appeared on the brink of commercial operation. In 2006, Walker also set up Cougar Energy. And in 2007, Linc bought into Soviet operational experience by acquiring a controlling stake in the Uzbek operation. But then things turned sour.

Following groundwater contamination with benzene during UCG trials in the US, the Queensland state regulators wanted to be sure that underground fires wouldn’t create similar problems that surface later. In 2011 the Queensland authorities shut down Cougar’s operations at Kingaroy after benzene and toluene seeped into a nearby water borehole. And last July, a state-sponsored scientific review vetoed commercial operations by Linc and Carbon Energy until the companies could demonstrate safe decommissioning, by extinguishing the fires, shutting off reactions and preventing groundwater contamination. Both companies reacted angrily. They say decommissioning is no big deal, but demonstrating you can do it for a commercial-size operation is difficult when you don’t actually have such an operation. In response, Linc announced that it is shutting its Chinchilla project after more than a decade of production, and moving to China and the US. Meanwhile Carbon Energy is busy in China, Argentina and Chile, and Walker’s Cougar Energy has shifted its attention to Indonesia.

All systems go

Despite those setbacks, Julie Lauder, CEO of the UK-based UCG Association, says the success of the Chinchilla trials was a “eureka moment” for the nascent industry and there have never been more UCG trials set to go round the world (see map). At Cook Inlet in Alaska, and Swan Hills in Alberta, Canada, there are plans to go commercial as early as 2015. Excited by the success of shale gas in the US, UCG enthusiasts think their time may have come. And nowhere more so than in the UK, where they know a thing or two about coal. While there is plenty of coal untouched beneath the rolling hills of England, some of the best coal is out of reach, under the North Sea. These seams are now the prime targets for half a dozen British start-ups, including the biggest and most ambitious, Five Quarter Energy.

Late last year, I sat with the company’s three founders in a hotel suite in the heart of Newcastle upon Tyne in north-east England. We were less than a hundred meters from the banks of the River Tyne, where since the 13th century they have cut coal to fuel domestic grates and industrial boilers. Coal mining in the region has virtually ground to a halt in the past 30 years, but there is still plenty down there, says Harry Bradbury, a British-born geologist, formerly of Yale University. “More than 70 per cent of UK coal has never been mined; it is still underground. We want to burn it where it sits to revive new industry.”

The team are still working out the detailed chemical engineering. “The black arts lie in controlling the combustion,” says Roddy. “We want to produce the valuable hydrogen, methane and carbon monoxide, while minimizing gases we can’t use, such as carbon dioxide.” Pumping down oxygen rather than air raises the temperature of combustion and produces more methane and less CO2. The perfect combustion temperature, says Roddy, is 1500 °C, “but 900 °C is good enough”. The Uzbek plant, by contrast, pumps down air rather than oxygen, burns at cooler temperatures and delivers ten times as much CO2 as methane.

But the Five Quarter team have even bigger plans. They say the other strata beneath the North Sea are full of methane too, and they want to tap that in a strategy they call “deep gas winning”. For instance, there is a shale seam below the coal that is their prime target. Fracking could release the gas in that. And nearby layers may all contain methane from the coal. “We believe we can harvest these at the same time,” says Bradbury. He reckons that underground subsidence created by the burning coal seam will help liberate this gas.

This is a break with the orthodox narrative of UCG entrepreneurs. Most insist, in public at least, that strata surrounding the coal seams are impermeable, and that any pollutants released by burning will stay within the seam. Not so, says Bradbury. “The rocks above, in particular, will be disturbed. They will be fractured. Even if they were impermeable before, they won’t be afterwards. It is inevitable. We estimate the disturbance will extend up to 60 times higher than the width of the seam.”

If this is true, could toxic by-products migrate into aquifers used for drinking water, as happened during Cougar’s Queensland trial? As with the exploitation of shale gases, the potential contamination of underground water is a major technical and public relations challenge. But Bradbury says the dangers are greatly reduced when the coal seams you are tapping are beneath the sea. Water under the seabed is not used for public supplies, and is unlikely to be in future because most of it is saline. For him the appeal of deep gas winning is the ability to harvest more gas from a bigger area – both from coal combustion, and the stuff that has migrated out of the coal or is trapped in shale seams.

Not just a fuel

Such gas is undoubtedly valuable. Most obviously, the methane can be delivered to domestic consumers or burned in power stations to generate electricity. But there are other options. In Australia they have been turning it into liquid fuel for vehicles. “Unlike with shale gas, we are not just bringing methane to the surface,” said Bradbury. “We are bringing up a cocktail of gases.” Five Quarter is eyeing another potential market for these gases (see “Chemical Toolkit“).

North-east England’s large chemicals industry is short of cheap feedstock. So North Sea coal gas could be a lifesaver. Roddy, who once ran a local chemical plant, pictures turning hydrogen, carbon monoxide and CO2 into acetic acid and acetates; and hydrogen and CO2 into methanol. The region already has a pipeline network for supplying hydrogen. Similarly, in Scotland, the giant Grangemouth chemicals complex is importing gas from North America while coal seams sit unused just a few hundred meters offshore under the Firth of Forth. Bradbury argues that a UCG revolution in the UK could dramatically reduce the price of some feedstocks for a chemicals industry that has threatened to decamp to the US, where costs are lower. “If we don’t solve the problem, then the chemicals industry will go.”

Other UCG enthusiasts around the world are also keen to start – they say their technology is ready and the gases they can generate are in demand as both fuel and chemical feedstock. The trick will be to convince the regulators, investors and the industry partners who will all have to come on board to turn UCG into big business.

Late last year, the British government dipped its toe in the water when it set up an Office for Unconventional Gas and Oil and stumped up £15 million to help fund Five Quarter’s plans for a plant to clean and distribute its gas. And Bradbury claims he has a big name industrial collaborator to announce soon. Meanwhile, the business press is full of stories about the presence of Algy Cluff among the UK holders of UCG offshore licenses, a charismatic figure who made his name and money in North Sea oil exploitation in the 1970s.

Bradbury would be the first to admit that coal still has an image problem. Nevertheless, it is the world’s most abundant fossil fuel and the great majority of it can only be accessed by burning the coal where it lies. UCG could quadruple recoverable coal reserves in the US.

An assessment by the World Energy Council puts the proportion of global coal that is readily recoverable at 15 to 20 per cent of the total, which Gordon Couch of the International Energy Agency’s Clean Coal Centre puts at 18 trillion tonnes. Potentially, UCG could unleash the energy from the other 80 to 85 per cent – enough to supply the world, at current requirements, for 1000 years.

Industrialists may salivate at the idea of burning all that coal, but for the climate the prospect is truly terrifying. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change recently reckoned that the world needs to limit total emissions of carbon, from now on, to less than half a trillion tons just to keep global warming below 2 °C. Most climate analysts agree even burning a large fraction of conventional fossil fuel reserves would produce unacceptable warming, let alone what could be released by UCG.

Burning dilemma

What to do? Either we have to leave the fuel in the ground, or develop a global industry for capturing CO2 at the source and storing it out of harm’s way. In the case of UCG that would mean capturing the CO2 produced both when the coal is burned underground and when the resulting methane is burned in power stations. Climate scientists such as Myles Allen at the University of Oxford argue that carbon capture and storage (CCS) is the only practical way forward. And this is where UCG has something to offer. Burning coal in situ leaves huge voids that are ideal places for burying captured CO2. And the infrastructure created to bring coal gas to the surface, purify it and deliver it to power stations would be ideal for carrying the CO2 away again.

So far efforts to kick-start CCS technology have failed. A plan to burn UK coal seams beneath Hatfield in South Yorkshire, to supply gas to a power station and strip out CO2 for burial beneath the North Sea, was scrapped by the government in late 2012, despite backing from the European Union. Ministers said it did not offer value for money.

But Bradbury remains enthusiastic. “Half the cost of CCS will be transport and storage,” he says. “Why not pay for it through profits made from extracting the gas from the coal seams?” Nice idea. But suppose things don’t work out as expected. What if there are no profits? Even fracking, which is now seen as a deliverer of golden eggs, took three decades to become profitable. What if CCS technology proves as slow to develop as UCG has already been? A 2007 study by the Massachusetts Institute of technology concluded that commercial CCS development was unlikely before 2030, and since then little progress has been made. And what if the regulators backslide on their insistence that UCG cannot go forward without CCS? To its critics, UCG still sounds like playing Russian roulette with the climate – and the onus is on those who want to develop yet more fossil fuels to prove them wrong.

This article appeared in print under the headline “Beyond fracking”

Posted in Coal, Global Warming | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Set the planet on fire: Burn underground coal to gasify it. Worse than Fracking.

Kaplan on West Africa

Preface. This article interest me because I want to understand what collapse from energy decline will be like where I live.  The same patterns appear over and over in this category of collapsed and collapsing nations.

Alice Friedemann  www.energyskeptic.com  Author of Life After Fossil Fuels: A Reality Check on Alternative Energy; When Trucks Stop Running: Energy and the Future of Transportation”, Barriers to Making Algal Biofuels, & “Crunch! Whole Grain Artisan Chips and Crackers”.  Women in ecology  Podcasts: WGBH, Planet: Critical, Crazy Town, Collapse Chronicles, Derrick Jensen, Practical Prepping, Kunstler 253 &278, Peak Prosperity,  Index of best energyskeptic posts

The Coming Anarchy Shattering the Dreams of the Post Cold War. Robert D. Kaplan. 1994. New York Times.

The minister said that in 45 years he had never seen things so bad. Today there is the revenge of the poor, of the social failures, of the people least able to bring up children. The boys who took power in Sierra Leone come from houses like this, pointing at a corrugated metal shack teeming with children. In three months these boys confiscated all the official Mercedes, Volvos, and BMWs and willfully wrecked them on the road.

Tyranny is nothing new in Sierra Leone or in the rest of West Africa. But it is now part and parcel of an increasing lawlessness that is far more significant than any coup, rebel incursion, or episodic experiment in democracy. Crime was what my friend, a top-ranking African official whose life would be threatened were I to identify him, really wanted to talk about. Crime is what makes West Africa a natural point of departure for my report on what the political character of our planet is likely to be in the 21st century.

The cities of West Africa at night are some of the unsafest places in the world. Streets are unlit, the police often lack gasoline for their vehicles; armed burglars, carjackers, and muggers proliferate.

When I was in the capital, Freetown, last September, eight men armed with AK-47s broke into the house of an American man. They tied him up and stole everything of value. Forget Miami: direct flights between the United States and the Murtala Muharnmed Airport, in neighboring Nigeria’s largest city, Lagos, have been suspended by order of the U.S. Secretary of Transportation because of ineffective security at the terminal and its environs. A State Department report cited the airport for “extortion by law enforcement and immigration officials.” This is one of the few times that the U.S. government has embargoed a foreign airport for reasons that are linked purely to crime.

In Abidjan, effectively the capital of the Cote d’Ivoire, or Ivory Coast, restaurants have stick- and gun-wielding guards who walk you the 15 feet or so between your car and the entrance, giving you an eerie taste of what American cities might be like in the future. An Italian ambassador was killed by gunfire when robbers invaded an Abidjan restaurant. The family of the Nigerian ambassador was tied up and robbed at gunpoint in the ambassador’s residence. After university students in the Ivory Coast caught bandits who had been plaguing their dorms, they executed them by hanging tires around their necks and setting the tires on fire. In one instance Ivorian policemen stood by and watched the “necklacings,” afraid to intervene. Each time I went to the Abidjan bus terminal, groups of young men with restless, scanning eyes surrounded my taxi, putting their hands all over the windows, demanding “tips” for carrying my luggage even though I had only a rucksack. In cities in six West African countries I saw similar young men everywhere—hordes of them. They were like loose molecules in a very unstable social fluid, a fluid that was clearly on the verge of igniting.

“You see,” my friend the Minister told me, “in the villages of Africa it is perfectly natural to feed at any table and lodge in any hut. But in the cities this communal existence no longer holds. You must pay for lodging and be invited for food. When young men find out that their relations cannot put them up, they become lost. They join other migrants and slip gradually into the criminal process.

“In the poor quarters of Arab North Africa there is much less crime, because Islam provides a social anchor: of education and indoctrination. Here in West Africa we have a lot of superficial Islam and superficial Christianity. Western religion is undermined by animist beliefs not suitable to a moral society, because they are based on irrational spirit power. Here spirits are used to wreak vengeance by one person against another, or one group against another.”

Many of the atrocities in the Liberian civil war have been tied to belief in juju spirits, and the BBC has reported, in its magazine Focus on Africa, that in the civil fighting in adjacent Sierra Leone, rebels were said to have “a young woman with them who would go to the front naked, always walking backwards and looking in a mirror to see where she was going. This made her invisible, so that she could cross to the army’s positions and there bury charms … to improve the rebels’ chances of success.”

Finally my friend the Minister mentioned polygamy. Designed for a pastoral way of life, polygamy continues to thrive in sub-Saharan Africa even though it is increasingly uncommon in Arab North Africa. Most youths I met on the road in West Africa told me that they were from “extended” families, with a mother in one place and a father in another. Translated to an urban environment, loose family structures are largely responsible for the world’s highest birth rates and the explosion of the HIV virus on the continent. Like the communalism and animism, they provide a weak shield against the corrosive social effects of life in cities. In those cities African culture is being redefined while desertification and deforestation-also tied to overpopulation-drive more and more African peasants out of the countryside.

A premonition of the future West Africa is becoming the symbol of worldwide demographic, environmental, and societal stress, in which criminal anarchy emerges as the real “strategic” danger. Disease, overpopulation, unprovoked crime, scarcity of resources, refugee migrations, the increasing erosion of nation-states and international borders, and the empowerment of private armies, security firms, and international drug cartels are now most tellingly demonstrated through a West African prism. West Africa provides an appropriate introduction to the issues, often extremely unpleasant to discuss, that will soon confront our civilization.

There is no other place on the planet where political maps are so deceptive. Start with Sierra Leone. According to the map, it is a nation-state of defined borders, with a government in control of its territory. In truth the Sierra Leonian government, run by a 27-year-old army captain, Yalentine Strasser, controls Freetown and part of the rural interior by day. In the government’s territory the national army is an unruly rabble threatening drivers and passengers at most checkpoints. In the other part of the country units of two separate armies from the war in Liberia have taken up residence, as has an army of Sierra Leonian rebels. The government force fighting the rebels is full of renegade commanders who have aligned themselves with disaffected village chiefs. A pre-modern formlessness governs the battlefield, evoking the wars in medieval Europe prior to the 1648 Peace of Westphalia, which ushered in the era of organized nation-states.

As a consequence, roughly 400,000 Sierra Leonians are internally displaced, 280,000 more have fled to neighboring Guinea, and another 100,000 have fled to Liberia, even as 400,000 Liberians have fled to Sierra Leone. The third largest city in Sierra Leone, Gondama, is a displaced-persons camp. With an additional 600,000 Liberians in Guinea and 250,000 in the Ivory Coast, the borders dividing these four countries have become largely meaningless.

Even in quiet zones none of the governments except the Ivory Coast’s maintains the schools, bridges, roads, and police forces in a manner necessary for functional sovereignty. The Koranko ethnic group in northeastern Sierra Leone does all its trading in Guinea. Sierra Leonian diamonds are more likely to be sold in Liberia than in Freetown. In the eastern provinces of Sierra Leone you can buy Liberian beer but not the local brand.

In Sierra Leone, as in Guinea, as in the Ivory Coast, as in Ghana, most of the primary rain forest and the secondary bush is being destroyed at an alarming rate. I saw convoys of trucks bearing majestic hardwood trunks to coastal ports. When Sierra Leone achieved its independence, in 1961, as much as 60 percent of the country was primary rain forest. Now 6 percent is. In the Ivory Coast the proportion has fallen from 38 percent to 8 percent. The deforestation has led to soil erosion, which has led to more flooding and more mosquitoes. Virtually everyone in the West African interior has some form of malaria.

Sierra Leone is a microcosm of what is occurring, albeit in a more tempered and gradual manner, throughout West Africa and much of the underdeveloped world: the withering away of central governments, the rise of tribal and regional domains, the unchecked spread of disease, and the growing pervasiveness of war. West Africa is reverting to the Africa of the Victorian atlas. It consists now of a series of coastal trading posts, such as Freetown and Conakry, and an interior that, owing to violence, volatility, and disease, is again becoming, as Graham Greene once observed, “blank” and “unexplored.” However, whereas Greene’s vision implies a certain romance, as in the somnolent and charmingly seedy Freetown of his celebrated novel The Heart of the Matter, it is Thomas Malthus, the philosopher of demographic doomsday, who is now the prophet of West Africa’s future. And West Africa’s future, eventually, will also be that of most of the rest of the world.

Consider “Chicago” — not the one in Illinois, but a slum district of Abidjan, which the young toughs in the area have named after the American city. (“Washington” is another poor section of Abidjan.) Although Sierra Leone is widely regarded as beyond salvage, the Ivory Coast has been considered an African success story, and Abidjan has been called “the Paris of West Africa.” Success, however, was built on two artificial factors: the high price of cocoa, of which the Ivory Coast is the world’s leading producer, and the talents of a French expatriate community; whose members have helped ran the government and the private sector. The expanding cocoa economy made the Ivory Coast a magnet for migrant workers from all over West Africa: between a third and a half of the country’s population is now non-Ivorian, and the figure could be as high as 75% in Abidjan. During the 1980s cocoa prices fell and the French began to leave. The skyscrapers of the Paris of West Africa are a facade. Perhaps 15% of Abidjan’s population of three million people live in shantytowns like Chicago and Washington, and the vast majority live in places that are not much better. Not all of these places appear on any of the readily available maps. This is another indication of how political maps are the products of tired conventional wisdom and, in the Ivory Coast’s case, of an elite that will ultimately be forced to relinquish power.

Chicago, like more and more of Abidjan, is a slum in the bush: a checkerwork of corrugated zinc roofs and walls made of cardboard and black plastic wrap. It is located in a gully teeming with coconut palms and oil palms, and is ravaged by flooding. Few residents have easy access to electricity, a sewage system, or a dean water supply. The crumbly red laterite earth crawls with foot-long lizards both inside and outside the shacks. Children defecate in a stream filled with garbage and pigs, droning with malarial mosquitoes. In this stream women do the washing. Young unemployed men spend their time drinking beer, palm wine, and gin while gambling on pinball games constructed out of rotting wood and rusty nails. These are the same youths who rob houses in more prosperous Ivorian neighborhoods at night. One man I met, Damba Tesele, came to Chicago from Burkina Faso in 1963. A cook by profession, he has four wives and thirty-two children, not one of whom has made it to high school. He has seen his shanty community destroyed by municipal authorities seven times since coming to the area. Each time he and his neighbors rebuild. Chicago is the latest incarnation.

Fifty-five percent of the Ivory Coast’s population is urban, and the proportion is expected to reach 62% by 2000. The yearly net population growth is 3.6%. This means that the Ivory Coast’s 13.5 million people will become 39 million by 2025, when much of the population will consist of urbanized peasants like those of Chicago.

Chicago, which is more indicative of Africa’s and the Third World’s demographic present-and even more of the future-than any idyllic junglescape of women balancing earthen- jugs on their heads, illustrates why the Ivory Coast, once a model of Third World success, is becoming a case study in Third World catastrophe.

President Fe1ix Houphouet-Boigny, who died last December at the age of about 90, left behind a weak duster of political parties and a leaden bureaucracy that discourages foreign investment. Because the military is small and the non-1vorian population large, there is neither an obvious force to maintain order nor a sense of nationhood that would lessen the need for such enforcement. The economy has been shrinking since the mid-1980s. Though the French are working assiduously to preserve stability, the Ivory Coast faces a possibility worse than a coup: an anarchic implosion of criminal violence-an urbanized version of what has already happened in Somalia. Or it may become an African Yugoslavia, but one without ministates to replace the whole.

Because the demographic reality of West Africa is a countryside draining into dense slums by the coast, ultimately the region’s rulers will come to reflect the values of these shantytowns. There are signs of this already in Sierra Leone-and in Togo, where the dictator Etienne Eyadema, in power since 1967, was nearly toppled in 1991, not by democrats but by thousands of youths whom the London-based magazine West Africa described as “Soweto-like stone-throwing adolescents.” Their behavior may herald a regime more brutal than Eyadema’s repressive one.

The fragility of these West African “countries” impressed itself on me when I took a series of bush taxis along the Gulf of Guinea, from the Togolese capital of Lom6, across Ghana, to Abidjan. The four-hundred-mile journey required two full days of driving, because of stops at two border crossings and an additional eleven customs stations, at each of which my fellow passengers had their bags searched. I had to change money twice and repeatedly fill in currency-declaration forms. I had to bribe a Togolese immigration official with the equivalent of eighteen dollars before he would agree to put an exit stamp on my passport. Nevertheless, smuggling across these borders is rampant. The London Observer has reported that in 1992 the equivalent of $856 million left West Africa for Europe in the form of “hot cash” assumed to be laundered drug money. International cartels have discovered the utility of weak, financially strapped West African regimes.

The more fictitious the actual sovereignty, the more severe border authorities seem to be in trying to prove otherwise. Getting visas for these states can be as hard as crossing their borders. The Washington embassies of Sierra Leone and Guinea the two poorest nations on earth, according to a 1993 United Nations report on “human development”-asked for letters from my bank (in lieu of prepaid round-trip tickets) and also personal references, in order to prove that I had sufficient means to sustain myself during my visits. I was reminded of my visa and currency hassles while traveling to the communist states of Eastern Europe, particularly East Germany and Czechoslovakia, before those states collapsed.

Ali A. Mazrui, the director of the Institute of Global Cultural Studies at the State University of New York at Binghamton, predicts that West Africa-indeed, the whole continent-is on the verge of large-scale border upheaval.

In the 21st century France will be withdrawing from West Africa as she gets increasingly involved in the affairs [of Europe). France’s West African sphere of influence will be filled by Nigeria-a more natural hegemonic power… It will be under those circumstances that Nigeria’s own boundaries are likely to expand to incorporate the Republic of Niger (the Hausa link), the Republic of Benin (the Yoruba link) and conceivably Cameroon.

THE FUTURE COULD be more tumultuous, and bloodier, than Mazrui dares to say. France will withdraw from former colonies like Benin, Togo, Niger, and the Ivory Coast, where it has been propping up local currencies. It will do so not only because its attention will be diverted to new challenges in Europe and Russia but also because younger French officials lack the older generation’s emotional ties to the ex-colonies. However, even as Nigeria attempts to expand, it, too, is likely to split into several pieces. The State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research recently made the following points in an analysis of Nigeria:

Prospects for a transition to civilian rule and democratization are slim…. The repressive apparatus of the state security service … will be difficult for any future civilian government to control…. The country is becoming increasingly ungovernable…. Ethnic and regional splits are deepening, a situation made worse by an increase in the number of states from 19 to 30 and a doubling in the number of local governing authorities; religious cleavages are more serious; Muslim fundamentalism and evangelical Christian militancy are on the rise; and northern Muslim anxiety over southern [Christian] control of the economy is intense … the will to keep Nigeria together is now very weak.

Given that oil-rich Nigeria is a bellwether for the region—its population of roughly ninety million equals the populations of all the other West African states combined-it is apparent that Africa faces cataclysms that could make the Ethiopian and Somalian famines pale in comparison. This is especially so because Nigeria’s population, including that of its largest city, Lagos, whose crime, pollution, and overcrowding make it the dich6 par excellence of Third World urban dysfunction, is set to double during the next twenty-five years, while the country continues to deplete its natural resources.

Part of West Africa’s quandary is that although its population belts are horizontal, with habitation densities increasing as one travels south away from the Sahara and toward the tropical abundance of the Atlantic littoral, the borders erected by European colonialists are vertical, and therefore at cross-purposes with demography and topography. Satellite photos depict the same reality I experienced in the bush taxi: the Lome-Abidjan coastal corridor-indeed, the entire stretch of coast from Abidjan eastward to Lagos-is one burgeoning megalopolis that by any rational economic and geographical standard should constitute a single sovereignty, rather than the five (the Ivory Coast, Ghana, Togo, Benin, and Nigeria) into which it is currently divided.

As many internal African borders begin to crumble, a more impenetrable boundary is being erected that threatens to isolate the continent as a whole: the wall of disease. Merely to visit West Africa in some degree of safety, I spent about five hundred dollars for a hepatitis B vaccination series and other disease prophylaxis. Africa may today be more dangerous in this regard than it was in 1862, before antibiotics, when the explorer Sir Richard Francis Burton described the health situation on the continent as “deadly, a Golgotha, a Jehannum.” Of the approximately twelve million people worldwide whose blood is HIV-positive, eight million are in Africa. In the capital of the Ivory Coast, whose modem road system only helps to spread the disease, 10 percent of the population is HIV-positive. And war and refugee movements help the virus break through to more-remote areas of Africa. Alan Greenberg, M.D., a representative of the Centers for Disease Control in Abidjan, explains that in Africa the HIV virus and tuberculosis are now “fast-forwarding each other.” Of the approximately four thousand newly diagnosed tuberculosis patients in Abidjan, 45 percent were also found to be HIV-positive. As African birth rates soar and slums proliferate, some experts worry that viral mutations and hybridizations might, just conceivably, result in a form of the AIDS virus that is easier to catch than the present strain.

It is malaria that is most responsible for the disease wall that threatens to separate Africa and other parts of the Third World from more-developed regions of the planet in the twenty-first century. Carried by mosquitoes, malaria, unlike AIDS, is easy to catch. Most people in sub-Saharan Africa have recurring bouts of the disease throughout their entire lives, and it is mutating into increasingly deadly forms. “The great gift of Malaria is utter apathy,” wrote Sir Richard Burton, accurately portraying the situation in much of the Third World today. Visitors to malaria-afflicted parts of the planet are protected by a new drug, mefloquine, a side effect of which is vivid, even violent, dreams. But a strain of cerebral malaria resistant to mefloquine is now on the offensive. Consequently, defending oneself against malaria in Africa is becoming more and more like defending oneself against violent crime. You engage in “behavior modification”: not going out at dusk, wearing mosquito repellent all the time.

And the cities keep growing. I got a general sense of the future while driving from the airport to downtown Conakry, the capital of Guinea. The forty-five-minute journey in heavy traffic was through one never-ending shanty-town: a nightmarish Dickensian spectacle to which Dickens himself would never have given credence. The corrugated metal shacks and scabrous walls were coated with black slime. Stores were built out of rusted shipping containers, junked cars, and jumbles of wire mesh. The streets were one long puddle of floating garbage. Mosquitoes and flies were everywhere. Children, many of whom had protruding bellies, seemed as numerous as ants. When the tide went out, dead rats and the skeletons of cars were exposed on the mucky beach. In twenty-eight years Guinea’s population will double if growth goes on at current

rates. Hardwood logging continues at a madcap speed, and people flee the Guinean countryside for Conakry. It seemed to me that here, as elsewhere in Africa and the Third World, man is challenging nature far beyond its limits, and nature is now beginning to take its revenge.

AFRICA MAY BE as relevant to the future character of world politics as the Balkans were a hundred years ago, prior to the two Balkan wars and the First World War. Then the threat was the collapse of empires and the birth of nations based solely on tribe. Now the threat is more elemental: nature unchecked. Africa’s immediate future could be very bad. The coming upheaval, in which foreign embassies are shut down, states collapse, and contact with the outside world takes place through dangerous, disease-ridden coastal trading posts, will loom large in the century we are entering. (Nine of twenty-one U.S. foreign-aid missions to be closed over the next three years are in Africa-a prologue to a consolidation of U.S. embassies themselves.) Precisely because much of Africa is set to go over the edge at a time when the Cold War has ended, when environmental and demographic stress in other parts of the globe is becoming critical, and when the post-First World War system of nation-states-not just in the Balkans but perhaps also in the Middle East-is about to be toppled, Africa suggests what war, borders, and ethnic politics will be like a few decades hence.

To understand the events of the next fifty years, then, one must understand environmental scarcity, cultural and racial dash, geographic destiny, and the transformation of war. The order in which I have named these is not accidental. Each concept except the first relies partly on the one or ones before it, meaning that the last two-new approaches to mapmaking and to warfare-are the most important. They are also the least understood. I will now look at each idea, drawing upon the work of specialists and also my own travel experiences in various parts of the globe besides Africa, in order to fill in the blanks of a new political atlas.

THE ENVIRONMENT AS A HOSTILE POWER

FO R A WH I LE the media will continue to ascribe riots and other violent upheavals abroad mainly to ethnic and religious conflict. But as these conflicts multiply, it will become apparent that something else is afoot, making more and more places like Nigeria, India, and Brazil ungovernable.

Mention “the environment” or “diminishing natural resources” in foreign-policy circles and you meet a brick wall of skepticism or boredom. To conservatives especially, the very terms seem flaky. Public-policy foundations have contributed to the lack of interest, by funding narrowly focused environmental studies replete with technical jargon which foreign-affairs experts just let pile up on their desks.

It is time to understand “the environment” for what it is: the national-security issue of the early twenty-first century. The political and strategic impact of surging populations, spreading disease, deforestation and soil erosion, water depletion, air pollution, and, possibly, rising sea levels in critical, overcrowded regions like the Nile Delta and Bangladesh-developments that will prompt mass migrations and, in turn, incite group conflicts-will be the core foreign-policy challenge from which most others will ultimately emanate, arousing the public and uniting assorted interests left over from the Cold War. In the twenty-first century water will be in dangerously short supply in such diverse locales as Saudi Arabia, Central Asia, and the southwestern United States. A war could erupt between Egypt and Ethiopia over Nile River water. Even in Europe tensions have arisen between Hungary and Slovakia over the damming of the Danube, a classic case of how environmental disputes fuse with ethnic and historical ones. The political scientist and erstwhile Clinton adviser Michael Mandelbaum has said, “We have a foreign policy today in the shape of a doughnut-lots of peripheral interests but nothing at the center.” The environment, I will argue, is part of a terrifying array of problems that will define a new threat to our security, filling the hole in Mandelbaum’s doughnut and allowing a post-Cold War foreign policy to emerge inexorably by need rather than by design.

(C) 2000 Robert D. Kaplan All rights reserved. ISBN: 0-375-50354-4

Posted in Collapsed & collapsing nations, West Africa | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Kaplan on West Africa

Ashvin Pandurangi: A Probabilistic Assessment Of Short-Term Inflation, Deflation, Hyperinflation And Serious Deflation

A Probabilistic Assessment Of Short-Term Inflation, Deflation, Hyperinflation And Serious Deflation. Nov 3, 2010. Ashvin Pandurangi.

 
The blogosphere has been rife with debates over whether the U.S. economy will experience inflation or deflation over the next year or two. Typically, those on either side of the debate believe that, regardless of the specific outcome, it will be severe and destructive, but there are some who believe it will be a milder process. It has also become clear that those on either side of the debate are almost certain that we will experience the outcome they advocate. I am of the view that the best we can do in our complex financial economy (which is highly inter-connected to the global economy) is discuss the broad factors that make one or the other more likely to occur. It appears to me that there are at least three critical questions which should be answered to determine probabilities of outcomes in the controversial inflation/deflation debate:

  1. What do the financial elites want to happen given the current economic circumstances?
  2. Will the Administration (includes Congress for this discussion) and/or Federal Reserve  attempt to pursue policies that accommodate the elites’ preferences?
  3. If the answer is “yes” to #2, can the Administration and/or Fed be successful in achieving these goals.

After considering how much wealth is controlled by the elites (top 1% holds 43% of financial wealth) [1], and therefore how much political influence they exert, we can assume the answer to #2 will almost always be “yes”. This answer is further reinforced by past political experience and a bit of common sense. That leaves us with #1 and #3, which are difficult questions to answer with high levels of certainty. However, many insightful analysts have attempted to answer these questions using facts, data, trends and experience, and have produced very plausible predictions.

Many people may criticize the following analysis for leaving out many different factors that could potentially affect the likelihood of inflationary or deflationary outcomes. However, when too many variables are included, the analysis required to determine chances of specific outcomes grows disproportionately more difficult. This article has attempted to use broad strokes to sketch a general picture of the probabilities involved, sacrificing detailed calculations for targeted clarity. It is somewhat of a perturbation approach, where a few primary factors are used to create a “ballpark estimate”, and then this estimate can be later refined by including smaller, more detailed factors. For example, when physicists attempt to predict the motion of the Earth within the solar system and through the universe, they cannot factor into their calculations every gravitational force that acts on the Earth. Instead, they focus first on the Sun’s gravitational effect, since it is the most influential force by a large factor. After making this relatively simple calculation, they can gradually add in the effects of the next most influential bodies, but they will never arrive at an exact prediction of the Earth’s motion because the calculations eventually become too complex.

Before delving into the discussion, I must note that it will be based on several different assumptions for the sake of simplicity. Instead of mentioning them within the discussion, I will just list them up front and let the readers decide whether they are reasonable or not:

– The financial elites do not want severe deflation or hyperinflation, since these outcomes would wipe out the value of their numerous debt assets or wipe out the value of all their dollar- denominated holdings respectively.

– The Administration/Fed will almost always attempt to pursue the policies that the elites want them to (95% of the time for inflation; 90% for deflation)

– The financial elites cannot unilaterally (without Administration/Fed) make decisions that will affect the probabilities of inflation or deflation (we will assume they will make self-interested lending decisions).

– The Administration/Fed’s attempts to inflate, if they choose that option, will not be significantly counter-acted by currency devaluations of other countries. They may have a temporary effect, but financial/militaristic incentives to work with the American power elites and threats of protectionism will balance this dynamic out.

– Hyperinflation will only occur when financial elites prefer inflation, and severe deflation will only occur when elites prefer deflation.

– Issues associated with peak oil/resources will not be a factor within the next few years.
The following definitions of inflation and deflation, borrowed from The Automatic Earth, will be used [1]:

  • Inflation – Marginal increases in the amount and velocity of credit money relative to goods/services.
  • Deflation – Marginal decreases in the amount and velocity of credit money relative to goods/services.

What do Power Elites Prefer – Policies Supporting Mild Inflation or Mild Deflation?
            Mild Inflation (25%)

The argument for power elites preferring mild inflation is perhaps the most intuitive. Inflation of the money (credit) supply to devalue the currency should lead to rising asset prices, as more money is chasing the same supply of assets. Financial elites have large investments in real estate, stocks, bonds and commodities and should therefore benefit from higher prices and interest rates. If consumer prices are also supported, then there could be a resumption of hiring by various businesses, which would certainly help restore some confidence in the economic structures of the status quo elite. In a more general sense, inflation manufactured via another credit bubble would return the economy to a state of consistent growth, allowing power elites to continue playing their cruel games. However, this argument contains the following assumption, which may simply be incorrect: that creating a modest amount of growth in the money supply, by getting debt-money to investors and consumers, will actually lead to higher prices.

The prominent blogger Charles Hugh Smith (“CHS”) has provided a very insightful argument for why the elites would not prefer mild inflation [2]. To understanding a key part of this argument, it’s important to note that the economic situation now is unlike it has ever been in the last 60-70 years and also that the elites are aware of this fact. There has been an enormous, decades-long credit bubble in the private sector (~300% Debt/GDP in 2008), and now the consumers, who make up 70% of GDP, are buried beneath a mountain of debt. Despite the Administration and Fed’s programs to inject trillions into the economy via stimulus and quantitative easing, the velocity of money has remained stagnant as investors, small businesses and consumers hesitate to lend, invest or borrow. It is very plausible that a modest increase in money supply will simply lead businesses and consumers to pay down some debt and hoard any remaining cash in the face of future uncertainty. We certainly see a version of this dynamic in the stock market, where institutional investors continue pulling money out of equities despite the recent rallies [3].

For the above reasons, the economy will most likely be in a prolonged period of low growth and subdued asset price inflation despite modest amounts of further stimulus or monetary easing. Even some of the major investment banks (financial elites), such as Goldman Sachs, have predicted a negative GDP print in Q4 2010. [4]. The current dynamic for elites is much different than the one existing after the Great Depression, where losses on cash holdings from consistent devaluation of the dollar via inflation were more than offset by returns on asset investments. CHS points out that the dollar has lost more than 95% of its value since 1913, but the Dow Jones Industrial Average has actually risen at about seven times the rate of dollar depreciation over the same time period. It would be prudent to assume that the elites have learned their lesson from 1966-1981, when a period of “stagflation” (low growth coupled with high price inflation) wiped out much of the value in their stock and bond holdings. [5]. The last thing the elites would want is a period of inflation in consumer prices, which eats up the value of their debt assets, but doesn’t contribute to high returns on financial investments.

Elites prefer Mild Deflation (75%)

CHS explains that mild deflation, on the other hand, would increase the purchasing power of elites holding cash, money market instruments and short-term treasuries, while also increasing their returns on debt assets. When inflation is negative, the real interest rate paid on debt (= nominal IR – rate of inflation) is higher than the nominal rate. As long as the deflation doesn’t become too severe and wipe out heavily indebted consumers, businesses and governments, the financial elites can continue making decent returns while setting themselves up to buy various assets for pennies on the dollar in the future. [6]. By maintaining their wealth and political control, the elites can also ensure that any new regulations or fiscal/monetary policies continue to be in their favor (backstops of the housing market, monetization of treasury debt, higher taxes on the middle class to pay interest on public debt, welfare benefits to quell social unrest, watered down “reform”, etc.). Therefore, on whole, it seems significantly more likely that power elites would prefer a path of mild deflation above all else, but the question of whether it is even possible to maintain this Japan-style malaise still remains.

What can the Administration and/or Fed Accomplish?

Mild Inflation (10%)

It would appear that the Administration and Fed have been completely geared towards creating inflation up to this point in time. The former attempted to re-capitalize major banks with TARP and mark-to-fantasy accounting, promote consumer spending with stimulus and stabilize housing prices through Fannie, Freddie and the Federal Housing Administration. It has also provided billions in jobless benefits and other aid to struggling citizens. The Fed has attempted to stabilize the housing market and banks’ balance sheets through asset purchases of mortgage-backed securities and zero-interest rate policy. The latter, along with the direct monetization of treasury bonds by the Fed, also serve to finance the Administration’s deficits at low interest rates (banks borrow at 0% and lend to the government at 1-4%).

Despite all of these measures, consumer price inflation remains close to 0% (excluding energy/food) [7], unemployment remains close to 22% [8] and consumer credit continues to contract [9]. Of course, the stock and bond markets have benefited greatly from these policies since the beginning of 2009. The former, however, has become increasingly unstable this year as retail investors continue to opt out in large numbers and robots with synchronized time horizons are left to buy and sell to each other. [10], [11]. The bond market, however, is much bigger than the stock market and its stability is significantly more crucial for the power elites and politicians. It appears at this time that, although it is in a huge bubble, the bond market will remain relatively stable due to investors’ preferences for “safe havens”, the desire of external creditors’ to support our consumer economy, and, of course, the permanent open market operations (“POMO”) of the Fed.

            Hyperinflation (30%)

Many commentators involved in the inflation/deflation debate believe that, in pursuit of inflation, the Administration/Fed will inadvertently jump start a process of hyperinflation. This argument typically follows the following logic: every time the economy renews its deflationary pressure, the politicians and central bankers will keep spending/printing money to fight it off, and eventually we will reach a tipping point of confidence in the U.S. economy and its currency as a reliable means of exchange. History certainly seems to suggest the first part of this argument is accurate, but the sociopolitical dynamics involved have significantly changed in the last few years. Both the public and politicians who pander to them have expressed much disdain for further spending or printing, and on top of that, its unclear how many trillions would even be necessary to combat the deflationary pressure. As mentioned above, the elites must maintain relative stability in the bond market to protect their holdings and the current power structure, and another $5-10 trillion in printed money would be counter-productive to this goal. For these reasons, it seems unlikely that the government will print enough money to spark hyperinflation, but that certainly does not mean we can rule it out.

A blogger named Gonzalo Lira has produced a series of articles presenting a unique perspective on how hyperinflation could occur. [12]. To summarize, he believes that a temporary spike in commodity prices (such as oil) will lead to institutional asset managers selling a portion of their large treasury holdings (paying artificially low yields) to buy into the ramp. This small sell-off will occur before a somewhat large treasury auction, and so the Fed will step in and buy to stabilize yields. Similar to what we currently see during the POMO operations, asset managers and primary dealers (“PDs”) will start unloading larger amounts of treasuries onto the Fed to turn a quick profit and reinvest proceeds into the commodity space. Asset managers will then begin to dump huge portions of their holdings, since they see the PDs selling and the Fed buying a large volume of treasuries at a time when they are already on edge about the precarious nature of the economy and bond markets. This cycle represents a classic positive feedback, where asset managers dump treasuries for liquidity, causing the Fed’s buying to stabilize yields, causing even more managers to dump while there is still a willing buyer with unlimited cash. All of this action will occur within a few hours at most, and the managers will turn to commodities as a relatively safe and perhaps quite profitable place to invest their cash.

Mr. Lira believes that physical commodities will be perceived as the only sure store of value, and will therefore shoot up between 150-250% by the end of this panicked week. Once this spike translates into significantly higher gas prices at the pump, average consumers will begin selling all of their paper assets and buying hard commodities out of fear of prices continuing to rise in the future. [13]. It is easy to see how this process will eventually translate into a self-reinforcing spiral, where almost all discretionary assets will be swapped for energy, food and other essentials, eventually leading to skyrocketing prices and hyperinflation. What’s even more frightening is that the Administration and Fed will be practically helpless to do anything about it at this point, since their limited tools will be woefully inadequate once the consumer has lost complete confidence in the currency.

Although it presents a very interesting hyperinflation scenario, the problem I see with Mr. Lira’s argument is two-fold:

(1) A large, temporary spike in oil prices is unlikely to occur or lead to a treasury-dumping spiral – The spark for a short-term spike in oil prices would have to be a major disruption of Middle East supply through a military conflict or a voluntary embargo by exporting nations. In contrast to 1973, when OPEC nations decided to place an embargo on oil exports due to Western support of Israel in the Yom Kippur War [14], the U.S. now has strategic military bases throughout the Middle East and would not allow such an embargo to even take place. [15]. Any further military conflicts that take place in this region will have the U.S. military directly involved, and it will certainly do everything it can to make sure America’s share of oil supply is not disrupted. In fact, a prerequisite for any military action would be to have a solid plan for securing production facilities in the region.

If the supply of oil to America is disrupted by military action in the Middle East, then the Administration will most likely institute price controls on gas at the pump. Mr. Lira states that these controls would simply create a black market for goods and do nothing to reverse the underlying hyperinflation, but he is assuming these controls would only occur after there is a run on treasuries and hyperinflationary concerns reach the average consumer. It is more likely that the government will immediately cap the price of oil, perhaps through an executive order in the name of “national security”, which will destroy the incentivize for asset managers to dump large amounts of treasuries for commodities in the first place. When the potential upside gains of commodity plays can be artificially limited, it would be very risky for investors to bet against the federal government.

(2) The outstanding debt obligations of consumers/businesses are still excessive – The major reason why the U.S. economy naturally faces a deflationary depression is because there is too much private debt outstanding, and the need to destroy this debt suppresses aggregate demand for consumer goods or financial assets. Currently, when the price of oil gets significantly above $85/bbl, consumers are priced out of the market and demand destruction ensues, since demand is still relatively elastic to price changes. A temporary spike in oil prices would most likely lead asset managers to sell off stocks and commodities as well, since they are worried that consumers will heavily cut back on spending and pay off debts. This process is what the U.S. experienced in 2008 after oil hit $140+/bbl, and although the circumstances have changed since then, the underlying realities of excessive debt and artificially high consumer demand are still present. From this perspective, a temporary spike in oil prices would actually trigger a deflationary collapse rather than hyperinflation.

Mild Deflation (30%)

According to analysts such as Dr. Steve Keen, “Mish” Shedlock and Nicole Foss, the Fed is simply “pushing on a string” when it sets to generating inflation in the economy. [16], [17], [18]. Without any desire of consumers to borrow or creditors to lend at affordable rates, the trillions printed by the Fed will simply lay dormant as excess reserves or, at best, help keep the financial markets relatively stable. As for the Administration, it would have to give away a whole lot more “free money” before consumers and businesses begin spending/investing again in any meaningful manner. The best the government can do at this point is pump liquidity into asset markets and continue handing out benefits to the unemployed and poor among us. As CHS explains, the main goal here is to keep consumers paying off credit cards and mortgages, tax revenues flowing, financial markets somewhat stable and the general population placated, while economic actors continue to deleverage. [].

If the goal of power elites and the government is to manage this process of mild deflation, then perhaps the Fed is not pushing on a string at all. CHS has produced another piece which clearly shows that the government’s policies since 2008 have merely served to keep the system alive by transferring wealth from taxpayers to the top 10% of the population. Specifically, the Fed has blown more speculative bubbles in stocks, real estate and commodities, which mostly benefits the owners of financial wealth and also reduces the purchasing power of the bottom 90% through artificially high energy/food prices. Much of the toxic mortgage debt has been removed from the elites’ balance sheets and handed to the taxpayer through various government programs. [19]. This path has not been one to sustainable inflation, but rather one that keeps the power elites in business while cash flows in the general economy slowly dry up and investment capital relocates to emerging markets.

Severe Deflation (60%)

As mentioned before, however, the political capital for further deficit spending and monetary easing is drying up quickly as well. The Republicans have taken back the House of Representatives, picked up a few seats in the Senate and will certainly oppose further stimulus by the Administration. John Taylor has suggested that the Fed will also be on a much tighter leash when Congressman Ron Paul becomes head of the sub-committee overseeing its operations. [20]. Although the Fed will most likely shovel out another $500B-$2T in treasury purchases via “QE2” (waiting for the announcement as I write this), it is becoming clear that there are diminishing returns to its efforts. A QE2 package that is smaller than the initial QE program, and only targets treasury bonds, will only serve to keep interest rates low and perhaps give a small, temporary boost to equity markets. It will certainly fail to stave off further deleveraging in an economy worth ~$14 trillion that also has trillions more in unserviceable debt.

So the question becomes whether the Fed’s incremental liquidity programs can at least maintain modest deflation. The best answer to this question seems to be “not too likely”. The Fed actually has little ability to counter-act the debt deflation in the consumer economy, since it cannot print money and give it directly to small businesses and consumers, and Congress will also have its hands tied after the elections. What the fiscal conservatives fail to realize is how fast the economy will unravel once government subsidies are drawn down. Dr. Keen points out that the trillions spent and printed by the government after 2008 helped to decelerate the rate of credit contraction in the private sector, and this deceleration actually reduced unemployment and projected the illusion of an economic recovery. For this deceleration to continue, the private debt to GDP ratio would soon have to begin increasing again, and this is extremely unlikely to occur in an economy with ridiculously high levels of debt. [21]. If and when housing prices begin falling again, pushed along in no small part by the “fraudclosure” crisis, we can be certain that the acceleration of debt destruction will turn positive. The excessive debt, inventory and over-capacity of American consumers, businesses and markets will reveal itself in full force, and the economy will be caught in a deflationary spiral once again.

The Guesstimated Probabilities of Each Outcome

In the perturbation sense, the strongest influences governing inflation or deflation are the natural state of the economy, the preferences of American power elites and the policy tools of the Administration and Fed. We can express the results of the simplistic inflation/deflation analysis by translating the qualitative discussion above into percentage probabilities, based on general conclusions regarding the likelihood of each outcome. To summarize, power elites would prefer mild deflation over mild inflation at a ratio of about 3 to 1, when considering the current economic circumstances. Similarly, the Administration/Fed will be able to achieve mild deflation over mild inflation at a ratio of about 3 to 1. Hyperinflation will occur three times as often as mild inflation when power elites prefer inflation (mainly due to Mr. Lira’s scenario), and severe deflation will occur twice as often as mild deflation when elites prefer deflation. The following table lists these percentage probabilities along with the chance that the government will agree to pursue the power elites’ preferred policy, and multiplies down each column to acquire a resulting probability of each outcome.

 

Mild Inflation Hyperinflation Mild Deflation Severe Deflation
Preferences of PE 25% 25% 75% 75%
Government Ability 10% 30% 30% 60%
Chance of Agreement 95% n/a 90% n/a
Resulting Probability 3% 8% 21% 45%

**probabilities are rounded to nearest whole number

The resulting probabilities above add up to 77%, which leaves another 23% for outcome combinations and also further refining of the stated outcomes’ probabilities. Perhaps the initial assumptions could be modified to make the analysis more realistic. Some readers may feel that I have derived faulty probabilities from the discussion, or even that the discussion itself contains flawed logic. I encourage readers to take the framework and general discussion points that are presented in this article and generate their own probabilities for specific outcomes. The analysis could also be refined by including the next most influential factors that have been left out for purposes of simplified calculation (i.e. European sovereign debt crisis, global currency devaluations, coordination by international elites, geopolitical factors, etc.). Personally, I believe that the probabilities listed above are at least a ballpark estimate of potential outcomes over the next year or two. Of course, without extensive data-mining and the use of computer-simulated dynamic models, we may have to simply rely on time to eventually tell the tale.

Posted in Inflation or Deflation | Comments Off on Ashvin Pandurangi: A Probabilistic Assessment Of Short-Term Inflation, Deflation, Hyperinflation And Serious Deflation