Changing seasons already take their toll on people
Failing synchrony of crucial natural events due to global heating isn’t only causing havoc for animals and plants, it is also already having destabilising consequences for many low-income communities (25 June, p 42).
In 2009, I co-wrote the report for Oxfam, based on observations in 15 lower-income countries. There was agreement that marked seasonal shifts were occurring in temperature, in ecosystem responses and in the timing, intensity and quantity of rainfall.
Low-income communities described: shorter and more interrupted growing seasons, which reduced agricultural production; greater unpredictability, which necessitated more investment of time, energy and scarce resources; and existential shocks to belief systems and cultural practices, involving bewilderment, disorientation and a sense of loss. These changes were strengthening trends to move out of agriculture and rural areas.
We concluded that for many of the world’s lowest-income people, these changes already constituted a serious additional threat to food security. No doubt this is worse now.
If time isn't real, then what about space-time?
Despite all the hype, there is no escaping the fact that time has no tangible, physical properties, so can only exist as an abstract concept (18 June, p 38). It is derived by counting some natural astronomical and subatomic cycles to build calendars and clocks for the purpose of timekeeping.
Because space-time is only a mathematical model that relies on the abstract concept of time, we should question whether it exists as an entity in its own right, too.
The US was once close to adopting the metric system
Regarding Chris Stokel-Walker’s review of Beyond Measure, opposition to the metric system hasn’t been limited to the UK (18 June, p 34).
Back in the 1970s, the US Congress passed the Metric Conversion Act, which declared metric as the preferred system, and the country soon began a programme of testing road signs marked in kilometres, a first step towards helping citizens to accept the metric system.
But action by Charles Grassley, a Republican congressman, killed that effort. “Forcing the American people to convert to the metric system goes against our democratic principles,” he said.
Apparently, retaining a system that hinders the ability to interact with an increasingly globalised marketplace was seen by politicians as a measure of US exceptionalism. It still is.
Lockdown's lessons lead to climate pessimism
If Perry Bebbington cites correct figures for emissions reduction during lockdowns, it seems that limiting temperature rise to 2掳C will require cutbacks in economic activity to medieval levels (Letters, 25 June). It is unlikely that industry, let alone politicians and the populace, will willingly accept the associated changes, especially in living standards. Of course, climate consequences from a temperature rise of 2掳C or more may be equally unacceptable 鈥� but unavoidable.
Oil giants have the might to help solve our problems (1)
If we are to maintain and support the world population in a modern lifestyle, we need to find ways to produce hydrocarbon-based products from an alternative, sustainable source at a scale similar to our current oil-based processes (25 June, p 27). The only organisations that currently have the resources, know-how and knowledge to do this at large scale are those same industries that currently use oil-based technologies.
Oil giants have the might to help solve our problems (2)
Zak Coleman argues that universities must stop taking research money from the fossil fuel industry because of “a climate crisis that those firms are driving”.
Those firms are providing us with necessary fuels, production of which isn’t illegal or immoral. It provides work for many, income for shareholders, tax and even research funding for universities.
Just imagine a cold, dark world with no heating, electrical power, transport or production.
Urbanites are greener than rural communities
John Fewster implies that “dense communities of urbanites” use resources more mindlessly than “pastoral folk” (Letters, 25 June). As an urbanite, I live in a flat whose carbon footprint is likely to be far lower than that of a detached home in the country.
Furthermore, while I recognise that my “food miles” are likely to be greater, I walk to the shops and can commute by bus or train, while many non-urbanites must often travel long distances by car. I suspect the overall environmental impact per capita of a dense community is lower than that of their rural neighbours.
Why nuclear is no answer to short-term dilemmas (1)
Graham Reynolds posits a false dichotomy: calamitous global warming or “safe” nuclear waste (Letters, 25 June). Building hundreds or thousands of nuclear reactors in the next 30 years would worsen global warming due to the front-loading of their emissions from construction and concrete, any putative benefits only coming when it is too late. Existing nuclear plants should be run for as long as it is safe to do so, but no new ones should be, or need to be, built.
Why nuclear is no answer to short-term dilemmas (2)
It is a misconception that any particular source of cheap energy can get us out of the climate crisis. Cheap energy only drives more consumption, and so resource extraction. Instead, we need sustainable, steady-state consumption and population.
For the record {16 July 2022}
Heritable genome editing is banned in many countries, but not globally (2 July, p 18).
In our “The longevity diet” box in our piece on age-defying diets (2 July, p 38), we shouldn’t have mentioned complete fasting. Please don’t attempt any form of fasting without medical supervision.