Dear Friend,
Conference of Parties (COP) 25 is on in Madrid. The COP25 is going through discussions and debates. Problems are raised and solutions are sought in the COP. Prospects are searched while promises are made in the conference. But, the outcome of the COP25 may not be hopeful. Political leaders and climate diplomats are meeting in Madrid for two weeks of talks amid a growing sense of crisis.
Kindly support honest journalism to survive. https://countercurrents.org/subscription/
If you think the contents of this news letter are critical for the dignified living and survival of humanity and other species on earth, please forward it to your friends and spread the word. It's time for humanity to come together as one family! You can subscribe to our news letter here http://www.countercurrents.org/news-letter/.
In Solidarity
Binu Mathew
Editor
Countercurrents.org
Hope At COP 25
by Countercurrents Collective
Conference of
Parties (COP) 25 is on in Madrid. The COP25 is going through discussions and debates. Problems are raised and solutions are sought in the COP. Prospects are searched while promises are made in the conference. But, the outcome of the COP25 may not be hopeful. Political leaders and climate diplomats are meeting in Madrid for two weeks of talks amid a growing sense of crisis.
Conference of Parties (COP) 25 is on in Madrid. The COP25 is going through discussions and debates. Problems are raised and solutions are sought in the COP. Prospects are searched while promises are made in the conference. But, the outcome of the COP25 may not be hopeful.
Political leaders and climate diplomats are meeting in Madrid for two weeks of talks amid a growing sense of crisis.
The COP25 was due to be held in Chile, but was cancelled by the government due to weeks of civil disturbances.
Spain stepped in to host the event, which will see 29,000 attendees over the two weeks of talks.
The COP25 meeting aims to step up ambition so that all countries increase their national commitments to cut emissions. The meeting follows on the heels of three UN reports, which stressed the increased urgency of limiting dangerous climate change.
Almost every country in the world has now signed and ratified the Paris climate agreement. Under the terms of the pact these countries will have to put new climate pledges on the table before the end of 2020.
However, the U.S. has recently informed its withdrawal from the climate accord. Last month, U.S. President Donald Trump began the process of withdrawing from the Paris deal.
The climate crisis is increasing every moment, and life on this planet is facing the threat of extinction.
Stop digging and drilling
According to UN Secretary General António Guterres, “the point of no return is no longer over the horizon”.
Speaking ahead of the meeting, he said political leaders had to respond to the imminent climate crisis.
“In the crucial 12 months ahead, it is essential that we secure more ambitious national commitments – particularly from the main emitters – to immediately start reducing greenhouse gas emissions at a pace consistent to reaching carbon neutrality by 2050.
“We simply have to stop digging and drilling and take advantage of the vast possibilities offered by renewable energy and nature-based solutions,” said Guterres.
Guterres also called for more action from the U.S., the world’s second biggest emitter, warning that some of the world’s biggest economies were failing to cut carbon fast enough.
“We see already strong commitment from many governments and the business and financial community – the problem is that the most important polluters, the countries that have the biggest [emissions of] greenhouse gases are lagging behind.”
He praised the EU for its plans to cut emissions drastically by 2030, and cited China, India, Japan and the US as countries needing to join in to meet the challenge.
“This is also an issue for public opinion, for youth and civil society, for cities and regions – we see everywhere a new determination that makes me hopeful,” he added. “I’m hopeful, but not yet entirely sure as there is still a long way to go and we are still lagging behind.”
Ministers and officials from more than 190 countries gathered in Madrid on Monday for the start of two weeks of talks aimed at ironing out technical details of the 2015 Paris agreement, which needs to be completed for nations to focus on the progress on cutting carbon emissions.
Some 50 world leaders are expected to attend the meeting in Madrid. But U.S. President Donald Trump will not be among them.
Activists and campaigners assembled inside the conference and outside, but there was a lack of the pageantry and passion that have characterized recent COPs, galvanized by the signing of the Paris accord in 2016, seen as paving the way to international cooperation and preventing dangerous temperature rises.
The U.S. will continue to have a seat at the table of UN climate negotiations, as Trump has not withdrawn from the foundational treaty, called the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.
Several countries including Australia, Brazil and the US have elected leaders hostile to the Paris accord and action on emissions.
The COP25 signals the start of a frantic 12 months of negotiations, which will culminate in Glasgow with COP26 in November next year.
The U.S. became a signatory to the landmark Paris climate agreement in April 2016, under the Obama administration. But President Trump has said the accord would lead to lost jobs and lower wages for U.S. workers.
However, Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, will attend the conference with a congressional delegation.
While her presence has been welcomed, U.S. environmentalists want to see concrete steps on climate.
“While it’s great Speaker Pelosi is coming to Madrid in place of Trump, symbolic gestures are no substitute for bold action,” said Jean Su from the U.S. Center for Biological Diversity.
“America remains the number one historic contributor to the climate emergency, and even Democratic politicians have never committed to taking responsibility for our fair share.”
U.S. Congress commits to act on climate crisis
The U.S. will take action on greenhouse gases and engage with other countries on the climate emergency despite Donald Trump’s rejection of international cooperation, a delegation from the U.S. Congress has told the COP25.
Nancy Pelosi struck a defiant stance on Monday, declaring: “Congress’s commitment to action on the climate crisis is iron-clad. This is a matter of public health, of clean air, of clean water, of our children, of the survival of our economies, of the prosperity of the world, of national security, justice and equality. We now must deliver deeper cuts in emissions.”
Her rallying call came as developing countries accused the U.S. president of “ecocide” and the UN secretary-general said the world’s biggest emitters were falling behind.
Article 6 of the Paris Agreement
Article 6 of the Paris Agreement is a contentious issue, which will occupy climate diplomats in the COP25 more than any other issue. Resolving Article 6, only two pages long and fails to describe how these systems will work and what rules will ensure to emissions cuts, is a major challenge for the COP25.
Under the Paris Agreement, countries agreed to set up a new global carbon market system to help countries decarbonise their economies at lower cost.
Countries have tried and failed to agree the rules governing this mechanism. It is the last section of the Paris accord rulebook which remains unresolved and it has the potential to make or break efforts to curb emissions.
The framework defined by Article 6 of the Paris Agreement is divided into three sections.
Article 6.2 allows countries to strike bilateral and voluntary agreements to trade carbon units.
Article 6.4 creates a centralized governance system for countries and the private sector to trade emissions reduction anywhere in the world. This system known as the Sustainable Development Mechanism (SDM) is due to replace the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), established under the Kyoto Protocol.
Finally, Article 6.8 develops a framework for cooperation between countries to reduce emissions outside market mechanisms, such as aid.
Under the Paris Agreement, a share of proceeds from the markets needs to be deployed to help developing countries adapt to climate impacts. Whether this applies to the centralized SDM market only or to all trading, including from bilateral agreements has not yet been agreed.
In an open letter to COP25 president and Chile’s environment minister Carolina Schmidt, more than 150 NGOs have called for the creation of a specific financing facility and debt relief to help vulnerable countries recover from loss and damage impacts. They argued regular contributions from wealthy countries and global taxes on financial transactions, international air travel and fossil fuels should finance the fund.
The letter comes after a report by a coalition of climate and environmental organizations estimated rich countries should provide an additional $50 billion per year by 2022 and $300 billion annually by 2030 to address loss and damage.
The WIM
The Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) – the 2013 international framework to address loss and damage –– is up for review in the COP25.
The framework intended that developed countries provide developing countries with finance, technology and capacity-building to help victims of climate change recover after extreme weather events or slower-onset climate disasters such as sea-level rise.
The WIM review is likely to see disagreements between rich and vulnerable countries at the COP25.
Tens of millions of people threatened
A report from Save the Children, says that what it calls “climate shocks” are threatening tens of millions of people in East and Southern Africa.
The NGO says 33 million people are at emergency levels of food insecurity due to cyclones and droughts. More than half of these are believed to be children.
Fight to the death
The president of an island nation on the frontline of climate crisis says the country is in a “fight to the death” after freak waves inundated the capital.
Powerful swells averaging 5m washed across the capital of the Marshall Islands, Majuro, last week.
President Hilda Heine said the Pacific nation had been fighting rising tides even before last week’s disaster.
At the meeting, Ms Heine commented: “Water covers much of our land at one or other point of the year as we fight rising tides. As we speak hundreds of people have evacuated their homes after large waves caused the ocean to inundate parts of our capital in Majuro last week.”
She added: “It’s a fight to the death for anyone not prepared to flee. As a nation we refuse to flee. But we also refuse to die.”
At the Madrid summit, ambassador Lois Young, from the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), which represents low-lying coastal countries and small island nations, launched a rebuke to the world’s big polluters.
“We are disappointed by inadequate action by developed countries and outraged by the dithering and retreat of one of the most culpable polluters from the Paris Agreement,” she said.
“In the midst of a climate emergency, retreat and inaction are tantamount to sanctioning ecocide. They reflect profound failure to honor collective global commitment to protect the most vulnerable.
“With our very existence at stake, COP 25 must demonstrate unprecedented ambition to avert ecocide.”
Climate Scientists: Planetary Emergency, Planet In Peril, Act Now
by Dr Gideon Polya
A paper co-authored by some eminent climate scientists and just published in the prestigious scientific journal Nature, analyses critical tipping points impacted by man-made climate change, and concludes: “Act now… the evidence from tipping points alone suggests that we are in a state of planetary emergency: both the risk and urgency of the situation are acute… The stability and resilience of our planet is in peril.
International action — not just words — must reflect this”.
A paper co-authored by some eminent climate scientists and just published in the prestigious scientific journal Nature, analyses critical tipping points impacted by man-made climate change, and concludes: “Act now… the evidence from tipping points alone suggests that we are in a state of planetary emergency: both the risk and urgency of the situation are acute… The stability and resilience of our planet is in peril. International action — not just words — must reflect this”.
A climate change-related “tipping point” for a particular phenomenon (e.g. loss of Arctic summer sea ice) is the point at which the change is irreversible. Successive IPCC reports over past decades warned of the likelihood of tipping points being reached at various degrees of global warming. However the authors provide a Figure showing that IPCC-estimated “High” to “Very High” risk of rapid and irreversible changes in the climate system has progressively occurred at lower average warming over the last 20 years. Thus an approximate simplification of this Figure is that IPCC-perceived “High” to “Very High” risk occurred at +5.5C (2001), +5C (2007), +4C (2013) and +2C (2018) [1].
The authors conclude that “If current national pledges to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions are implemented — and that’s a big ‘if’ — they are likely to result in at least 3 °C of global warming. This is despite the goal of the 2015 Paris agreement to limit warming to well below 2 °C… if tipping points are looking more likely, then the ‘optimal policy’ recommendation of simple cost–benefit climate-economy models aligns with those of the recent IPCC report [2]. In other words, warming must be limited to 1.5 °C. This requires an emergency response” [1].
Noting a “Moderate” risk of tipping points exceedances in the range of + 1-2C and that the global warming is now about +1C above the pre-industrial, one can well ask whether a sane individual would board a plane that had a “Moderate” risk of crashing.
The authors then considered some key tipping points and their assessments are summarized below (with global consequences and amplifications in brackets).
(1). West Antarctica (Amundsen Sea embayment): the tipping point may have been exceeded (this could destabilize the rest of the West Antarctic ice sheet leading to circa 3 metres of sea-level rise on a timescale of 100s to 1000s of years, noting that this has happened in the past).
(2). East Antarctic ice sheet (Wilkes Basin): approaching a tipping point ( 3-4 metres in sea level rise on a timescale of 100s of years).
(3). Greenland ice sheet: melting at an increasing rate and the tipping point may be the circa +1.5C expected in about 2030 ( 7 metres sea level rise over 1000s of years).
(4). Arctic sea ice: massive sea ice loss already ( at +2C there is a 10–35% probability of near-total summer sea ice loss).
(5). Coral reefs: mass coral bleaching worldwide and loss of 50% of the coral of Australia’s iconic Great Barrier Reef due to warming, ocean acidification, pollution and Crown of Thorn predator population explosion (99% of tropical corals are predicted to be lost at +2C with massive loss of marine biodiversity and fisheries).
(6). Amazon rain rainforest: estimated tipping point at 20% – 40% deforestation with about 17% lost since 1970 ( the world’s largest rainforest, contains 1 in 10 known species, has a continent-scale climate impact, and is presently burning on a huge scale).
(7). North American boreal forest: warming in the sub-Arctic has led to insect pest population explosion, boreal (high latitude) tree die-off and fires ( some boreal forest regions are converting from being carbon sinks to a carbon sources).
(8). Arctic permafrost: irreversible thawing and release of carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) with Arctic warming about 2 times bigger than the global average (CH4 has an estimated Global Warming Potential (GWP) as low as 21 relative to the same mass of CO2 on a 100 year time-scale, but on a 20 year time scale and with aerosol impacts included it is 105).
(9). Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC): a key salt- and heat-conveying Atlantic Ocean circulation system subject to a 15% slow-down since the mid-20th century (Arctic sea-ice loss is increasing regional warming; Arctic warming and Greenland melting are putting fresh water into the North Atlantic; slowdown in the AMOC is destabilizing the West African monsoon, impacting drought in the Sahel region, drying the Amazon, disrupting the East Asian monsoon and warming the Southern Ocean with increased Antarctic ice loss).
The authors provide a further Figure that dramatically summarizes how the key changes summarized above can variously impact on each other, with AMOC having a key centrality. The authors comment: “We argue that cascading effects might be common. Research last year analysed 30 types of regime shift spanning physical climate and ecological systems, from collapse of the West Antarctic ice sheet to a switch from rainforest to savanna. This indicated that exceeding tipping points in one system can increase the risk of crossing them in others. Such links were found for 45% of possible interactions” [1].
The authors adduce paleo-climatological evidence that: “Atmospheric CO2 is already at levels last seen around four million years ago, in the Pliocene epoch. It is rapidly heading towards levels last seen some 50 million years ago — in the Eocene — when temperatures were up to 14 °C higher than they were in pre-industrial times. It is challenging for climate models to simulate such past ‘hothouse’ Earth states. One possible explanation is that the models have been missing a key tipping point: a cloud-resolving model published this year suggests that the abrupt break-up of stratocumulus cloud above about 1,200 parts per million of CO2 could have resulted in roughly 8 °C of global warming” [1].
Finally, the paper provides a compelling mathematical analysis: “We define emergency (E) as the product of risk and urgency. Risk (R) is defined by insurers as probability (p) multiplied by damage (D). Urgency (U) is defined in emergency situations as reaction time to an alert (τ) divided by the intervention time left to avoid a bad outcome (T). Thus: E = R × U = p × D × τ / T . The situation is an emergency if both risk and urgency are high. If reaction time is longer than the intervention time left (τ / T > 1), we have lost control” [1].
The authors conclude: “Act now. In our view, the evidence from tipping points alone suggests that we are in a state of planetary emergency: both the risk and urgency of the situation are acute… We argue that the intervention time left to prevent tipping [T] could already have shrunk towards zero, whereas the reaction time to achieve net zero emissions [τ] is 30 years at best. Hence we might already have lost control of whether tipping happens. A saving grace is that the rate at which damage accumulates from tipping — and hence the risk posed — could still be under our control to some extent. The stability and resilience of our planet is in peril. International action — not just words — must reflect this”.
Final comments.
The authors considered the Terminal Carbon Pollution Budget for a 50% chance of not exceeding +1.5C: “ The world’s remaining emissions budget for a 50:50 chance of staying within 1.5 °C of warming is only about 500 gigatonnes (Gt) of CO2. Permafrost emissions could take an estimated 20% (100 Gt CO2) off this budget, and that’s without including methane from deep permafrost or undersea [CH4-H2O] hydrates. If forests are close to tipping points, Amazon dieback could release another 90 Gt CO2 and boreal forests a further 110 Gt CO2. With global total CO2 emissions still at more than 40 Gt per year, the remaining budget could be all but erased already” [1].
In 2018 the IPCC issued a Report that detailed the numerous bad outcomes of a global +1.5 degree Centigrade (+1.5C) of warming versus the catastrophic outcomes from a +2C e.g. a further 70-90% decline of coral reefs at +1.5C versus more than 99% loss at +2C. Crucially, the IPCC Report says that for less than +1.5C coal burning must cease by 2050 but also declares that the Terminal Carbon Pollution Budget for a 66% chance of avoiding +1.5C (420 Gt CO2) will be used up in 10 years at a rate of 42 Gt Co2 per year [2-4].
Indeed the IPCC in its Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) stated (2014): “Emissions ranges for baseline scenarios and mitigation scenarios that limit greenhouse gas concentrations to low levels (about 450 ppm CO2-eq, likely to limit warming to 2°C above pre-industrial levels) are shown for different sectors and gases in Figure SPM.14” [5]. However according to Professor Ron Prinn (from100-Nobel-Laureate MIT) we may have already reached 478 ppm CO2-equivalent in 2013 [6-10] ( it is presently at nearly 500 ppm CO2-equivalent).
The German WBGU (2009) and the Australian Climate Commission (2013) have estimated that no more than 600 billion tonnes of CO2 can be emitted between 2010 and zero emissions in 2050 if the world is to have a 75% chance of avoiding a catastrophic +2C temperature rise [11, 12]. However a revised global annual GHG pollution of 64 Gt CO2-equivalent (properly taking land use and CH4 in to account) [13] means that this Terminal Carbon Pollution Budget was exceeded in 2019.
Australia (0.3% of world population, but with Domestic GHG pollution 2.1% of global GHG pollution and 4.5% with its huge Exported GHG pollution included) has a climate criminal policy (supported by both the ruling Coalition and the Labor Opposition) of unlimited coal, gas and iron ore exports, and it can be estimated that complete exploitation of Australia’s huge resources in these areas would mean exceeding the whole world’s 2009 Terminal Carbon Pollution Budget by a factor of 3 [14]. Similarly, the Global Warming Potential (GWP) of CH4 on a 20 year time frame and with aerosol impacts considered is 105 times that of CO2 [15] and the 50 Gt (billion tonnes) CH4 in the East Siberian Arctic Shelf that is predicted to be released in coming decades [16] is thus equivalent to 50 billion tonnes CH4 x 105 tonnes CO2-equivalent/tonne CH4 = 5,250 tonnes CO2-equivalent or about nine (9) times more than the world’s Terminal Carbon Pollution Budget. We are doomed unless we can stop this massive Arctic CH4 release [4, 8-10].
Humanity and the Biosphere are existentially threatened by nuclear weapons and climate change [17]. Eminent physicist Professor Stephen Hawking has stated the problem and solution very succinctly : “We see great peril if governments and societies do not take action now to render nuclear weapons obsolete and to prevent further climate change” [18, 19]. A paper co-signed by over 11,000 scientists has detailed trends in 24 climate-related areas over the last 40 years. Scientists became aware of the climate change threat from greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution in the 1980s, but in 21 of these 24 areas the trends are (a) huge, (b) in the wrong direction, and (c) linear or quasi-linear functions of time , with this allowing extrapolation from the present climate emergency to a climate catastrophe in 2030 [20-23] .
What can decent people do? It is effectively too late to avoid a catastrophic +2C temperature rise but decent people are obliged to do everything they can to make the future “less bad” for future generations. Decent people must act individually or better still act collectively (e.g. I am the secretary of the climate action group Banyule Climate Action Now (BCAN) that is based in Melbourne in the City of Banyule that has recently declared a Climate Emergency) [24].
Decent folk must (a) inform everyone they can about the worsening Climate Emergency, Climate Genocide and Intergenerational Inequity, (b) urge a climate revolution (peaceful and non-violent of course) with hundreds of millions out in the streets inspired by the likes of teenage activist Greta Thunberg, and (c) urge and apply Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) against all people, politicians, parties, collectives, corporations and countries disproportionately involved in the worsening Climate Genocide that is presently set to kill 10 billion people this century en route to a sustainable human population of merely 0.5-1.0 billion in 2100 [25]. There is no Planet B.
References.
[1]. Timothy Lenton, Johan Rockstrom, Owen Gaffney, Stefan Rahmsdorf, Katherine Richardson, Will Steffen and Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, “Climate tipping points – too risky to bet against” , Nature 575, 592-595, 27 November 2019: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03595-0 .
[2]. IPCC, “Global warming of 1.5 °C”, 8 October 2018: http://www.ipcc.ch/report/sr15/ .
[3]. IPCC, “Global warming of 1.5 °C. Summary for Policymakers”, 8 October 2018: http://report.ipcc.ch/sr15/pdf/sr15_spm_final.pdf .
[4]. Gideon Polya, “IPCC +1.5C avoidance report – effectively too late but stop coal burning for “less bad” catastrophes”, Countercurrents, 12 October 2018: https://countercurrents.org/2018/10/12/ipcc-1-5c-avoidance-report-effectively-too-late-but-stop-coal-burning-for-less-bad-catastrophes/ .
[5]. IPCC, “Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report, Approved Summary for Policy Makers”, 1 November 2014: http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/syr/SYR_AR5_SPM.pdf ).
[6]. Ron Prinn, “400 ppm CO2? Add other GHGs and its equivalent to 478 ppm”, Oceans at MIT, 6 June 2013: http://oceans.mit.edu/featured-stories/5-questions-mits-ron-prinn-400-ppm-threshold .
[7]. Gideon Polya, “International consensus-based IPCC Summary For Policymakers (2014) downplays acute seriousness of Climate Crisis”, Countercurrents, 12 November, 2014: http://www.countercurrents.org/polya121114.htm .
[8]. “Are we doomed?”: https://sites.google.com/site/300orgsite/are-we-doomed .
[9]. “Methane Bomb Threat”: https://sites.google.com/site/methanebombthreat/ .
[10]. “Too late to avoid global warming catastrophe”: https://sites.google.com/site/300orgsite/too-late-to-avoid-global-warming .
[11]. WBGU, “Solving the climate dilemma: the budget approach”: http://www.ecoequity.org/2009/10/solving-the-climate-dilemma-the-budget-approach/ .
[12 ]. Australian Climate Commission, “The critical decade 2013: a summary of climate change science, risks and responses”, 2013, p7: http://climatecommission.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/The-Critical-Decade-2013-Summary_lowres.pdf .
[13]. [49]. Robert Goodland and Jeff Anfang, “Livestock and climate change. What if the key actors in climate change are … cows, pigs and chickens?”, World Watch, November/December 2009: http://www.worldwatch.org/files/pdf/Livestock%20and%20Climate%20Change.pdf .
[14]. Gideon Polya, “Australia ‘s Huge Coal, Gas & Iron Ore Exports Threaten Planet”, Countercurrents, 15 May 2012: http://www.countercurrents.org/polya150512.htm .
[15 ]. Drew T. Shindell , Greg Faluvegi, Dorothy M. Koch , Gavin A. Schmidt , Nadine Unger and Susanne E. Bauer , “Improved Attribution of Climate Forcing to Emissions”, Science, 30 October 2009: Vol. 326 no. 5953 pp. 716-718: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/326/5953/716 .
[16]. Gail Whiteman, Chris Hope and Peter Wadhams, “Vast costs of Arctic change”, Nature, 499, 25 July 2013: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v499/n7459/pdf/499401a.pdf .
[17]. “Nuclear weapons ban, end poverty & reverse climate change”: https://sites.google.com/site/300orgsite/nuclear-weapons-ban .
[18]. Professor Stephen Hawking quoted in Will Dunham, “Nuclear, climate perils push Doomsday Clock ahead”, Reuters, 22 January 2007: https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN17314370 .
[19]. Stephen Hawking, “Brief Answers to the Big Questions”, John Murray, 2018, Chapter 7.
[20 ]. William Ripple et al.., “World scientists’ warning of a climate emergency”, BioScience, 5 November 2019: https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/advance-article/doi/10.1093/biosci/biz088/5610806 .
[21]. Gideon Polya, “Extrapolating 11,000 scientists’ climate emergency warning to 2030 climate catastrophe”, Countercurrents, 14 November 2019: https://countercurrents.org/2019/11/extrapolating-11000-scientists-climate-emergency-warning-to-2030-catastrophe .)
[22]. William J. Ripple et al., 15,364 signatories from 184 countries, “World scientists’ warning to Humanity: a second notice”, Bioscience, 13 November 2017: https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/advance-article/doi/10.1093/biosci/bix125/4605229 .
[23]. Gideon Polya, “Over 15,000 scientists issue dire warning to humanity on catastrophic climate change and biodiversity loss”, Countercurrents, 20 November 2017: https://countercurrents.org/2017/11/20/over-15000-scientists-issue-dire-warning-to-humanity-on-catastrophic-climate-change-and-biodiversity-loss/ .
[24]. “Banyule Climate Action Now”: https://sites.google.com/site/banyuleclimateactionnow/ .
[25]. “Climate Genocide”: https://sites.google.com/site/climategenocide/ .
Dr Gideon Polya taught science students at a major Australian university for 4 decades. He published some 130 works in a 5 decade scientific career, most recently a huge pharmacological reference text “Biochemical Targets of Plant Bioactive Compounds” (CRC Press/Taylor & Francis, New York & London , 2003). He has published “Body Count. Global avoidable mortality since 1950” (G.M. Polya, Melbourne, 2007: http://globalbodycount.blogspot.com/ ); see also his contributions “Australian complicity in Iraq mass mortality” in “Lies, Deep Fries & Statistics” (edited by Robyn Williams, ABC Books, Sydney, 2007: http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/ockhamsrazor/australian-complicity-in-iraq-mass-mortality/3369002#transcript ) and “Ongoing Palestinian Genocide” in “The Plight of the Palestinians (edited by William Cook, Palgrave Macmillan, London, 2010: http://mwcnews.net/focus/analysis/4047-the-plight-of-the-palestinians.html ). He has published a revised and updated 2008 version of his 1998 book “Jane Austen and the Black Hole of British History” (see: http://janeaustenand.blogspot.com/ ) as biofuel-, globalization- and climate-driven global food price increases threaten a greater famine catastrophe than the man-made famine in British-ruled India that killed 6-7 million Indians in the “forgotten” World War 2 Bengal Famine (see recent BBC broadcast involving Dr Polya, Economics Nobel Laureate Professor Amartya Sen and others: http://www.open.edu/openlearn/history-the-arts/history/social-economic-history/listen-the-bengal-famine ; Gideon Polya: https://sites.google.com/site/drgideonpolya/home ; Gideon Polya Writing: https://sites.google.com/site/gideonpolyawriting/ ; Gideon Polya, Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gideon_Polya ) . When words fail one can say it in pictures – for images of Gideon Polya’s huge paintings for the Planet, Peace, Mother and Child see: http://sites.google.com/site/artforpeaceplanetmotherchild/ and http://www.flickr.com/photos/gideonpolya/ .
From Standard Oil To Google: Can We Control Monopolies?
by Dr Arshad M Khan
If monopolies damage free-markets, there is an issue staring us in the face today: the digital colossi Google, Facebook and the aptly named Amazon. Then there is Apple with an iPhone monopoly. The market has been unable to check their increasing power.
One of the very first investigative journalists, Ida Tarbell went after the “throttling hand” of Standard Oil and John D. Rockefeller. By 1880, his company owned 90 percent of US oil, its transport and its sale.
Writing a series of articles over a two-year period, Tarbell’s expose led to a Supreme Court ruling in 1911 ordering the dissolution of Standard Oil — so massive, it was broken up into 34 corporations.
John D. Rockefeller who called the journalist Miss Tar Barrel — echoes of Donald Trump here — was the country’s first billionaire. If he spent his later years giving away much of his fortune to found universities and fund research, he had been in his younger days a ruthless competitor.
Monopolies controlling markets can set prices to their own liking. They can raise them to increase income or cut them to stifle competition. In effect, they are interfering with the free market forces so ardently espoused by University of Chicago economists. On this issue conservatives and liberals have common ground, but the question is what to do with monopolies. There is break-up and there is regulation.
Utilities are regulated but if one has been exposed to utility bills in many parts of the country, one has to wonder how well. The renowned economist George Stigler in a landmark study covering 60 years of electricity regulation (1900-1960), in regions with varying degrees of regulatory oversight, found the differences in prices to be negligible. The finding surprised economists, and it, added to Stigler’s enormous output, garnered him a Nobel Prize, the Nobel citation specifically noting the work.
If monopolies damage free-markets, there is an issue staring us in the face today: the digital colossi Google, Facebook and the aptly named Amazon. Then there is Apple with an iPhone monopoly. The market has been unable to check their increasing power.
The University of Chicago’s Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State has recently cast its gaze on the issue. A Stigler Center group headed by Yale economist Fiona Scott Morton analyzed the market structure of these digital behemoths. And last May she delivered its recommendation to the US Senate as part of a hearing on digital advertising and competition policy.
It is an interesting case because far from extracting high prices from a hapless public, two of the firms offer their products/services free, the third prides itself on the cheapest prices, at-home shopping and convenient delivery. Apple is a more conventional case holding sway over about 45 percent of cell phone users in the US through proprietary hardware and software.
In such a diverse environment what could the study group come up with but a regulatory body, a digital authority to regulate the industry — and a supreme irony given the major research finding of regulatory ineffectiveness from the man (George Stigler) whose name heads the Center shepherding their effort. Other economists also have been skeptical calling it the wrong tool to address a nonexistent problem. Yet the problem is not difficult to see.
There is a chilling nature to these websites and platforms as they follow your surfing, offering ads, purchase suggestions, other sites of interest, a looming presence behind your right shoulder. Something is not quite right when so much power is concentrated in so few corporations. Forget the invisible hand of free markets, there is an invisible hand guiding your clicking finger.
Dr Arshad M Khan (http://ofthisandthat.org/index.html) is a former Professor based in the U.S. whose comments over several decades have appeared in a wide-ranging array of print and internet media. His work has been quoted in the U.S. Congress and published in the Congressional Record. This article first appeared on Counterpunch.org
The Unfinished ‘Coup’: The End of Netanyahu’s Era and the Political Earthquake ahead
by Dr Ramzy Baroud
This time, nothing seems to work. Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has tried every trick in the book to save his political career and to avoid possible prison time. But for Israel’s longest-serving leader, the honeymoon is certainly almost over.
Can UN
Resolve The Rohingya Humanitarian Crisis?
by Askiah Adam
Can the UN end this humanitarian crisis now that the tragedy is squarely on the lap of this supranational organisation intended to prevent genocides and other crimes against humanity?
The Decline of Arab World: Leaders Who Could Not Lead
by Dr Mahboob A Khawaja
In absolute authoritarianism as the case across the Arab Middle East, extension of political anarchy and insanity has become a virtue but devotion to truth and political accountability is fast becoming offensive and undesirable. Today, sectarian conflicts have broken down all the features of socio-economic and political normality and devastated the Arab region. But recall the sectarian divides were engineered by the US and Britain in decade long occupation of Iraq to support their military
occupation
Quo Vadis, Lebanon?
by Andre Vltchek
Good bye, Lebanon, metaphorically and truly. Good bye to a country which, many believe, actually has already ceased to exist.
Hong Kong –– Pure Western Insanity
by Peter Koenig
The impunity with which the US aggresses Hong Kong is insane. Equally or more insane is western media coverage of what is going on in Hong Kong.
NRC and Citizenship Amendment: is it only about winning elections?
by Shahul Hameed Mattumannil
https://countercurrents.org/2019/12/nrc-and-citizenship-amendment-is-it-only-about-winning-elections
After the accomplishment of Mandir mission and revocation of special status given to Jammu and Kashmir, the two long cherished dreams of Hindu nationalism at least for the last two decades, the BJP is now heading to another elephantine mission, the redefining of citizenship regime of
the country. It is done through two routes: one, the citizenship amendment bill that would give citizenship to the persecuted minorities of selected neighbourhood; and the other, the implementation of National Registry of Citizenship at national level to weed out the “infiltrators” from the land.
Judge Loya case should be re-investigated if there is demand and need: Sharad Pawar
by Countercurrents Collective
NCP chief Sharad Pawar on Monday said that Central Bureau of Investigation Judge Brijgopal Harkishan Loya’s death should be re-investigated if there is a demand and need for it. Sharad Pawar said in an interview to a Marathi news channel, “If there is something in it [the demands], then maybe a re-investigation should be done.”
No comments:
Post a Comment