How Long Have We Got To Live?

In our post “What A Beautiful Day, A Humpin’ an’ a Shovin'” Ecolizzy commented on the work of the work of James Lovelock, such as this review of The Revenge of Gaia, and asked what I thought. Lizzy also said she may have heard the same theories somewhere else. It was probably me again on a Newsnight Blog.

The state of the Earth and the climate change debate in the 21st century was stimulated by two influential works. First was our submission to a UN Environment and Development-UK report commissioned by the UK Government. Here in 2002 we gave the risk assessment that climate change was a greater threat than terrorism.  after the UK Government’s Chief Scientist gave it global publicity in 2004, it became a cliche on the environment. World leaders, media and environmental organisations all used it. TV companies based programming around it. Al Gore even quoted it when he was notified of his Nobel Prize.

Though to be fair it was more an attempt to draw attention away from the build up of war in Iraq, and towards a greater awareness of the ecological and environmental situation of the planet in general. The recommendation was to look at climate change and Africa rather than war as a solution to resolving problems with the global dynamic.  Climate change and Africa becoming the agenda of the 2005 Perthshire G8. The Stern Report then following on from the G8.

The second influential work was the report to the President from the Pentagon, An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario. This brought the climate problem to the White House and the American media.

Now Lovelock considers we have gone past a point of no return. That we have done so much damage to the planet it is irreversible. Later this week Prince Charles will make a statement that we have 100 months before change cannot be reversed.

Our view is in between. Our models indicate we have about 3.5 years. It is not though just an isolated climate change situation, it is the collapse of the planet’s total ecological life support system which is the problem.

Once we recognise that and all work together, we might just have a future for this beautiful planet and all life we share it with.


, , , ,

  1. #1 by ecolizzy on March 11, 2009 - 9:33 am

    Hhhhmmm well Roger listening to the news looks as though all your predictions of climate change ARE happening as you said. All much faster than we realise! I wonder how many millions more people we’ll get here before we sinK! ; )

  2. #2 by celticlion on March 11, 2009 - 12:41 pm

    They are happing at exactly the rate our models predicted 15 years ago. The rate of destabilization to the planets eco-system will increase due to other non climate change factors.

    It can be reversed but Celtic Lion needs the £ 2 billion to do it and that’s all going to the banks and financial institutions.

  3. #3 by ecolizzy on March 11, 2009 - 11:49 pm

    Roger £2 billion is peanuts considering the current bail outs!

    But I can’t see how the money would stop something (climate change) that’s already happening. I just cannot imagine what you have in mind!

  4. #4 by celticlion on March 12, 2009 - 12:38 am

    Lizzy I produced a £50 billion per year business plan to run the Millennium Dome as a global environmental management centre.

    It got short listed and should have won on the competition criteria but the Government decided against it. As part of the process if the Government had gone for it, the finance was available and the project team to put it together.

    The Government do not dispute the facts just they wouldn’t support it.

    If you have a nearby church hall or something arrange a meeting and I will come and give a talk. We must all work together to ensure our future and that of this beautiful planet before it is too late.

  5. #5 by ecolizzy on March 12, 2009 - 9:07 am

    Hi Roger, I’ve looked at the link. But surely this is just another developement company that were going to sponser you? And the reason your bid was rejected:

    “Petition Rejected
    This petition has been rejected because:

    It was commercial endorsement, promotion of a product, service or publication, or statements that amounted to adverts”

    I know the area of the Thames Gateway, it is going to fail, most of it is marshland, it will need massive defences to stop the sea coming in, which looking at the rise in sea levels will happen in the next 50 years. I presume they were backing your Dome idea because it would be part of all the infrastructure of the area.

    I’m dead against that ruddy dome, it was a waste of taxpayers money, and now it’s just a giant concert hall. And not a very good one either, I’ve never been, and don’t intend to go there, it’s just trash. Although I do like the look of the building!

    Can you explain further please, liz

  6. #6 by ecolizzy on March 12, 2009 - 9:25 am

    I’ve had another idea to get your thoughts and ideas out there Roger! ; ) Why don’t you make a Youtube promo? It’s amazing what happens with that site, things just bubble up on it. You should use your full name though, as there’s a lot of Roger Thomas’s on there!

    Although I did find this when searching for Celtic Lion;

    HHmmm in hindsight he seems to be wrong about George Matheson, the now defunct chairman of almost nationalised RBS!

    Your Celtic Lion idea appeared to be the project he was talking about, what on earth happened with it all? I could understand what he was saying about Scotlands advantages, but it’s got to be used in an environmentally friendly way, I suppose.

    What do you think about my idea then! ; ) liz

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: