Peter Cochrane's Blog: New Year wishes

Simple ways to avoid the cataclysms inflicting our societies

By Peter Cochrane, 5 January 2009 13:05

COMMENT

Compiled in my hotel room in Swindon UK and dispatched via a free wi-fi service

Christmas lunch seems long past and the decorations have been packed away until next year. It's a new year and I have been pondering the events of the last one and the past few decades. It has been abundantly clear for a long time that our politicians, bankers and managers in every sphere have failed to grasp a few essential basics.

So rather than put together a set of personal resolutions for the new year I thought I would post a wish list. I know it is a long shot but just suppose for a minute we could get them all to grasp the following fundamental concepts:

  1. Everything in our universe is fundamentally non-linear
  2. Chaos is the natural mode
  3. Linearity is just a special case, or short-lived window
  4. Everything is connected. Nothing is 100 per cent independent or isolated. The key to cause and effect is the degree of coupling and/or connectedness
  5. Correlation does not imply causality
  6. Technology is actively engaged in exacerbating points 1 to 5 above
  7. To date we have no mathematics or computer models capable of dealing with points 1 to 6 in the general case and we have thus had to be very specific and focused
  8. Making linear assumptions, hugely simplifying models, following hunches, assuming history is a good guide, dreaming up policies on the fly and guessing are fundamentally lethal in a world governed by points 1 and 2
  9. We live in a closed system (Planet Earth) with finite resources

So what does it all mean? Let's address this with a few specific examples.

Example 1: Global warming

We all know that CO2 is the big problem and it is down to the pollution created by the human race, right? Wrong! CH4 (methane) is potentially a far bigger cause for concern. Not only is it far more difficult/impossible to control, it is present in our atmosphere to similar damage levels as CO2.

What is really worrying though is that the experts cannot agree just how much is in the atmosphere, where it all comes from and goes to, and worse, by what multiple it is worse as a greenhouse gas than CO2. The most commonly assumed number seems to be around 20 or 21 fold but I have found publications citing 60, and even 170-fold worsening factors. So depending on which figures you choose, CH4 is or isn't on a par with CO2.

The extremely crude planetary models we have seen to date make it impossible to say for sure what is happening. The net result is a 'change all the light bulbs and recycle everything society' based on very poor assumptions generated by questionable computer models and various well-meaning (or not?) political/scientific agendas.

We have known and understood a lot about the oil, and other base materials that have run down since the Club of Rome Reports in the 1970s. We have also known about the implications of overpopulation and limits to food production for at least three decades.

Given what we know, it is surprising to see huge investments in 'not a hope' transport, recycling and alternative energy schemes that actually exacerbate the very problems we are trying to address. Even worse, we have failed to fund the big programmes necessary to address the key problems and major opportunities that might just save the day.

Example 2: Money crisis
During the past decade we have had three big money problems caused by ignorance, fear, greed and the creation of false value. The dot-com Bust, the Enron/Worldcom Debacles and now the Sub-Prime Disaster are symptomatic of the same failure mechanisms. At a most fundamental level I figure ignorance and greed are the primary drivers in every case!

If our models for global warming are poor, then our models of the global banking system are 100 times worse - if they exist at all! In truth, no one knows how the system works but no one is willing to admit it, or confess to their ignorance, or even ask the question.

We have seen this situation building for a long time. From the Great Depression of the 1930's to Black Monday in 1987, there have been a lot of hints and near misses. Well hang on to your wallets because it ain't over yet - for sure we are going to see a lot more!

As the world gets more connected and reaction times get shorter, we are priming the planet for a series of 'limit cycle events' amplified by the fact that everything and everyone is online and reacting in near unison.

This has been evident in this latest banking fiasco initiated by fundamentally flawed business models driven by greed, and aided and abetted by the orchestration of the media and online banking. The result? Near synchronous money movements and investment decisions on a global scale resulting in a chaotic system collapse.

Example 3: Growth
Every academic, accountant, financier, banker, politician and manager I know has been brought up on a diet of 'growth is good'. But is continued growth sustainable? Well, no. It mostly appears to be unsustainable and bad for overall business and the planet.

Finite resources dictate that most sectors cannot grow continually on a global scale. The 'bit business' looks like it could be one exception provided the energy and materials sector can keep supplying.

Moore's Law may well be endless (for all intents and purposes) and our capacity to generate, transmit, store and use bits has no end in sight. At the same time the energy per bit demand is falling, and our software profligacy can be cut back by more than 99 per cent. We really don't require applications of greater than 1GB to write a letter or send an email - 1MB will do the job nicely!

Unfortunately, most other sectors like transport, food and material goods and services - the heart of GDP generation - are most certainly limited. And of course, so is the population of our planet. The biggest and most difficult changes for human systems are therefore going to be caused by the essential move to sustainable GDP generation and overall societal support.

The big problem is that no one has been educated and trained in such a task area, and the books haven't been written, the models have yet to be created and societal change has to be engineered.

In the past change on such a scale has typically taken more than a lifetime (or two) but I'm not at all sure that we have that luxury this time around.

The good news is our technology and our young people have both the will and, most likely, the fundamental tools to do the job. The bad news is that those politicians, bankers and managers in positions of power today don't!

Comments

There are 24 comments. Join the discussion

  1. 1. drew stephenson

    Good blog again, i wish someone could explain point 5 to the mainstream media though...

  2. 2. Mark Allen

    Reading this prompted me to ask whether Peter has any views on the Singularity ideas promoted by Vinge et al?

  3. 3. J.Wickins

    For a short while I thought the fmous graph "showing" that a shortage of pirates "causes" global warming was eating into the correlation/causation ignorance. Alas, I was wrong. People still ascribe causation to correlation, or get cause and effect the wrong way around.

    Regarding C02 - in terms of the life of the Earth, Homo sapiens evolved in an abberant low-C02 atmosphere. Regression to the mean may be at work.

  4. 4. Nicky Bearsted

    Dear Peter

    There are many aspects of your blog I could comment on, but I would like to concentrate on one area, which is how policy gets made. It seems to me that one of the major problems of the political process is that too many decisions are based on peoples' prejudices and ideals, not on the facts. There was an interesting article in the Economist over the CHristmas period pointing out that we are the product of evolutionary prssures, and that policies that ignore basic human nature are doomed to fail.

    Any more comment would be a blog of its own.

    Regards

    Nicky Bearsted

  5. 5. Ranko Pinter

    Again, a thought-provoking article from Peter. To the " ... ignorance, fear, greed and the creation of false value" that he correctly identified, I would also add DISHONESTY as the other vital ingredient (human failing) that has been responsible for the current crisis

  6. 6. Srinivasan Gopal

    What a fantastic piece of writing on the new year wish list.

  7. 7. David Flint

    Peter,
    You really need to get your facts right. The atmosphere now contains 384 ppm of carbon dioxide but only 1.7 ppm of methane.

    Methane is a much more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide but still makes only a minor contribution to the total effect.

    And you don't need a blind faith in computer models to see the problem. Things we can measure, like CO2 concentration, temperature, arctic ice cover and thickness and discharge rates from glaciers, show not merely increasing change but accelerating change. We are pushing Earth's atmosphere ever faster into unknown, but potentially catastrophic, territory.

  8. 8. Philip Stewart

    Excellent article - needs to be read by many more people than will see it here.

    Two points, both related to education. First, if the books haven't been written, why don't you make a start on writing them? It's about time somebody introduced some common sense into academic research.

    Second, can we really have faith in young people? We have made such a lash-up of educating them that many of them simply don't know anything about the world we live in and its history

  9. 9. Mark Hosey

    I suspect you mean disorder (in the thermodynamic sense), not chaos.
    A wise man once observed that nature abhors a vacuum but it is more generally true that nature abhors relative excesses.
    Over time nature always redistributes an excess and the greater the initial excess the faster the redistribution proceeds if unhindered by external means.
    In short the tendency toward equilibrium (or disorder) in all dynamic systems is the natural mode.
    For some reason though economists and politicians appear to be ignorant of many of the consequences of artificially generated excesses. They dogmatically ignore the fact that the greater the excess the greater the external influences must be to maintain that excess and the faster and bigger the inevitable crash is when the external influences are removed.
    Economic “bubbles and crashes” and “boom and bust” cycles are made of this. They are driven by, amongst other things, an excess of debt, excessive disparity between rich and poor, an excess in money supply in an economy with a lack of intrinsic wealth, an excess of trust in and a lack of control over those that influence the economy, the unrelenting maximisation of profit and minimisation of effort with little regard to quality.

  10. 10. Jim Craig

    Hi Peter, Happy New Year, great article as ever. One point re CH4, although 23 times more damaging than CO2 it exists in our atmosphere for a lot less time than CO2.
    About 20 years versus 200.

    So the effects we are feeling now are from CO2 released during the industrial revolution fossil fuel burning.

    I couldn't agree more with your list and examples.

  11. 11. Peter Cochrane

    Drew = With the media I often wonder to what % they are the actual cause of many things! Peter

  12. 12. Peter Cochrane

    Mark = The singularity you mention seems to have various definitions:

    1) The point at which our machines take over and we are no longer needed

    2) The point when our machines are smarter than we are

    3) The point when our technology peaks and can progress no further

    4) etc etc

    I'm not sure I really worry about any of these as much as I do about some stupid human act that probably poses an even bigger threat.

    In true chaotic fashion, for example, the financial crises seem to be arriving at closer spaced intervals and have bigger and bigger peaks.

    Then of course there is the 'genetic engineering on the kitchen counter brigade' who might stumble on something really nasty...and so on.

    But for me it is human greed and stupidity that seems the bigger threat!

    Peter

  13. 13. Peter Cochrane

    J Wickins = I have also used that graph a few times.....it seems to entertain, but the subtlety seems to escape people! Peter

  14. 14. Peter Cochrane

    Nicky = How very true, and the older people get the worse it seems to become....in politics anyway! Peter

  15. 15. Peter Cochrane

    Ranko = Sadly a lot of the financial system seems to use this as a fundamental assumption and/or property! Peter

  16. 16. Peter Cochrane

    Srinivasan + Thank you - pleased you liked it! Peter

  17. 17. Peter Cochrane

    Philip = Thanks! It is 10 years since I last published a book and i keep getting berated by my wife et al for not getting my finger out!

    I think the age old problem is that of reducing a really complex problem set to a level that Joe Public can understand without totally bastardizing the science and subtlety.

    This is something I have spent my life trying to do - and for a full book it would need quite an effort.....I'll have to think some more...

    Peter

  18. 18. Peter Cochrane

    Mark = Thanks for this - I agree with you - but I do mean choas. That is the tendency to near (a)periodic or (a)cyclic action in any non-linear system.

    It is the tsunami, the giant wave, the power surge.....laser lock and loss of lock....etc.Peter

  19. 19. Peter Cochrane

    Jim = Thanks for this - and you are quite correct. The point I was trying to make was that we have a uni-dimensional, simple minded, and whooly inadequte model. As a result we are rushing about expending resources - but to what effect?
    Are we helping or hindering the situation? We just don't know.

    Look out for my comments to David Flint for a further insight....and a confession!

    Peter

  20. 20. Peter Cochrane

    David = Many thanks indeed for this - and you made me wince! Late last year I was at a 'green conference' where a number of 'experts on global warming' presented their views.

    This line: "CH4 (methane) is actually a far bigger cause for concern and is present in our atmosphere to similar (or even greater) levels than CO2" is a direct quote.

    At the time I blanched - and you are right - I should have checked, but hey, these were leading experts and no one else picked up on it. So I said nothing! This is definitely not my style - I goofed!!

    So you prompted me to do some digging and guess what:

    I am finding CH4 concentration quotes spanning 1.6ppm to 3.4ppm.

    Also, the cited 'badness factor' quoted for CH4 v CO2 spans 20/21 thro 60 and even up as high as 170.

    So now it perhaps adds up - or not ?

    384 x 1 = 384 for CO2

    & (1.6 to 3.4) x (20 to 170) = 32 to 578 for CH4

    Confused yet? I am! I cannot find a set of stable numbers on which are universally accepted as true. And perhaps the above calculation explains why no one contested the point.

    The other possibility of course is that I misheard or misunderstood. Either way I should have checked!

    I'm asking my editor to amend the text
    to get closer to the truth (as I can!).

    One thing we should remember though - is we have no clue how to control/adjust CH4.

    We can all see that something is happening - but what we don't know for certain is what and how. So I favour being prudent of course, but I don't think panic actions in uncertain directions are likely to help!

    Many thanks again, Peter

  21. 21. Kevin

    Peter,
    Can you expand more on a few points.

    Why do transport, recycling and alt energy schemes exacerbate the problem?

    What are the 'big programmes' that are not being funded?

    Thanks
    Kevin

  22. 22. Bruce Campbell

    Good analysis. I especially agree with the short-termism sentiments about the financial and "atomic" based economy; a me-first attitude is reductio ad absurbem. Eventually the person who gets it all dies alone.

    And, the cause and effect quandry so reminds me of Monty Python and the Holy Grail. "If she ways the same as a duck, she must be a witch."

  23. 23. Joshua Davidson

    Thank you for these valuable insights Peter and happy 2009. The challenges ahead are very real and you illustrate them well. I can only hope that blogs like yours continue to be a driving educational force to help us through these challenges.

    I have completed a nice little credit circle:

    crunch, crisis, calamity, catastrophe, calm, comfortable, crazy!!...and back to crunch.

    I hope we can break the circle.

  24. 24. new

    sub prime has again showed that ignorance and greed is still a big hurdle for mankind to cross and that we still have not learnt from our past mistakes..
    nice post
    thanks for sharing this info
    i hope this new year somehow bring some good news to already weakened global economy..
    happy new year

Post your comment

In order to post a comment you need to be registered and logged in.

Log in or create your silicon.com account below

Will not be displayed with your comment

By signing up for this service, you indicate that you agree to our Terms and Conditions and have read and understood our Privacy Policy.

Questions about membership? Find the answers in the Membership FAQ