Taky zajimave

Zajímavá úvaha. pokud se technická civilizace z nějakého důvodu úplně položí tak její následovník už nebude mít možnost zopakovat překotnou industriální revoluci protože všechno co se dá jednoduše vytěžit a spálit už jsme jednoduše vytěžili a spálili takže jim to tak rychle nepůjde

takze jupi..?

Korporace slaví rekordní zisky, zatímco milionům lidí hrozí energetická chudoba
https://denikreferendum.cz/clanek/33411-korporace-slavi-rekordni-zisky-zatimco-milionum-lidi-hrozi-energeticka-chudoba?utm_source=ecomail&utm_campaign=2021_12_01_klimazpravodaj_2122021&utm_medium=email&utm_term=57216&ecmid=17185

Let's chose a "Biosphere regeneration" diet, not a "Climatarian" diet! - Thorsten Arnold's Homepage
https://thorstenarnold.com/lets-chose-a-pro-biosphere-diet/

I pledge to all listeners that we don’t vilify farm animals per se as culprits of environmental destruction. Instead, we need to take a close look at HOW we farm, and foster those production systems that revitalize natural cycles. We need to find systems that convert the full potential of solar energy while fostering biodiversity. We need faith in nature and in our human ingenuity to find symbiotic farming methods. Yes, I know that we could do this here in Ontario! And we need to find financial mechanisms that allow more regenerative farming such that we transform our landscapes: in the short run, that is less profitable than industrial farming. But it brings mostly positive externalities for our society. Today, short-sighted rent seeking behaviour mainly pushes financial investment into farmland re-zoning for urban development, which uses industrial farming as short-term “bridging activity” that saves property taxes while speculators are waiting for rezoning. We need to reverse this trend. Large-scale biosphere regeneration would buy humankind the time that we need to overcome our addiction to fossil fuels, with technological and lifestyle transitions.

This seems unlikely to you today? Imagine the year 2005: we could have dismissed “electric cars” because “the typical car” has a large environmental footprint – and electric cars are still cars, right? Well, electric cars are not “typical” cars – just like regenerative livestock is not “average” livestock and has a different environmental footprint. Back in 2005, electric vehicles was a negligible market segment, like ecological farming in Ontario is today. Within only 15 years, electric car and bike technology is maturing and at the verge of becoming mainstream! I am confident that we can produce more food on less land, in ways that heal our landscape and build climate resilience and sequester carbon. Based on our daily observation on our own farm, and globally emerging research in landscape regeneration.

But we need urban support. We cannot do this with a “climatarian diet” that is based on national average impact measurements of commodity foods. Such diet would just convert more wilderness into carbon monocultures. We need to go deeper, care more, sharpen our senses, and choose a “biosphere regeneration diet” – foods that grew by strengthening nature’s cycles. And we need to address speculative land purchases for re-zoning, which push land into cash cropping as interim stream for moderate profits and tax savings. We need strong allies from the urban population

TADEAS, TADEAS, TADEAS:

Global Fertilizer Shortage Sends Demand for Manure Soaring
https://news.yahoo.com/global-fertilizer-shortage-sends-demand-160001632.html

Prices of synthetic fertilizer, which rely on natural gas and coal as raw materials, have soared amid an energy shortage and export restrictions by Russia and China. That’s adding to challenges for agricultural supply chains at a time when global food costs are near a record high and farmers scramble for fertilizers to prevent losses to global crop yields for staples.

The Green Markets North American Fertilizer Price Index is hovering around an all-time high at $1,072.87 per short ton, while in China, spot urea has soared more than 200% this year to a record.

The demand for dung is playing out globally. In Iowa, manure is selling for between $40 to $70 per short ton, up about $10 from a year ago and the highest levels since 2012, according to Daniel Anderson, assistant professor at Iowa State University and a specialist on manure.

Manure is mostly a local market and truckloads won’t go further than 50 miles (80 kilometers), Anderson said. When crop, fertilizer and manure prices soared about a decade ago, more farmers reintroduced animals such as hogs and cattle onto their land, in part for their manure. That option could again be on farmers’ minds as fertilizer costs soar.

In Australia’s Queensland state, Brian Mclean, general manager of an organic fertilizer company, said that sales of his poultry manure compost are going through the roof. If interest keeps up at the same rate, people seeking ready-treated manure in the area would soon miss out.

“There wouldn’t be enough in total,” he said. In just the last few months he’s sold about 15,000 tons of the stuff, compared to around 2,000 tons the same time last year, though some of the renewed fervor has been driven by a bounce-back in weather conditions after years of drought, Mclean added.

In the U.K., not only are farmers scrambling for animal compost, but many are even trying to get their hands on treated sewage sludge containing human excrement, or biosolids. David Butler, who farms wheat, oats and peas in Wiltshire in the southwest of England, has traditionally relied on his own herd of cows to produce animal waste that he uses for his crops.

Front Matter | A Research Strategy for Ocean-based Carbon Dioxide Removal and Sequestration | The National Academies Press
https://www.nap.edu/read/26278/chapter/1#ii


Is ‘hacking’ the ocean a climate change solution? U.S. experts endorse research on carbon-removal strategies.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-solutions/2021/12/08/climate-change-ocean-carbon-storage/

the 300-page report from one of the country’s top research organizations argues that the United States should at least investigate whether ocean-based carbon-removal strategies are worthwhile.

The new report — released Wednesday and sponsored by ClimateWorks, a San Francisco-based nonprofit group — is adamant that carbon-dioxide removal is not a substitute for immediately eliminating fossil fuel use and curbing greenhouse gas pollution. It does not endorse any of the six strategies it considers or even advocate for CDR to be deployed.

Instead, it outlines a 10-year, $1.1 billion research program that would fill in crucial knowledge gaps about each technology.

Some of the questions are purely scientific, Doney said: “Does it actually work? Does it store carbon for sufficiently long periods of time? What are the environmental impacts?”

Many more questions are legal, economic or ethical: “How would you govern this? What are the dimensions of social acceptability?” Doney said. “If you could slow climate change or stabilize climate at a lower warming level, is that worth the trade-offs of these deliberate changes to the ocean? … These are things society needs to decide.”

The report also recommends the development of a research code of conduct for ocean-based CDR, with stipulations that the experiments be tightly regulated and involve experts from Indigenous groups and other vulnerable communities. The scientists say the $125 million foundational research agenda must include surveys, legal analyses and in-depth interviews with the people whose lives and livelihoods will be affected by the projects.

Experiments should be “co-produced with communities,” said Holly Buck, a sociologist at the University at Buffalo and a contributor to the report. Including locals in the design and deployment of projects will make them more equitable and could reveal insights scientists had never considered.

And researchers must be willing to change course, Doney said, if their work turns out to be ineffective or dangerous, or if more powerful methods come to light.

“This is the kind of deep dive we need,” said Kim Cobb, a climate scientist and oceanographer at the Georgia Institute of Technology who was not involved in the National Academies study. “It helps us to understand the potential benefits and downside risks and all the warts that you don’t get in the battles that are waged on op-ed pages.”l

2021 Can large herbivores enhance ecosystem carbon persistence?
https://www.cell.com/trends/ecology-evolution/fulltext/S0169-5347(21)00257-3

“Herbivores can increase the persistence of ecosystem carbon through redistributing carbon from aboveground vegetation pools vulnerable to disturbances into persistent soil pools.”

“This is particularly important in ancient fire-prone grasslands, but increasing disturbance frequencies across many ecosystems make herbivore restructuring of carbon pools relevant in a wider range of systems.”


pop:

Climate change: how elephants help pump planet-warming carbon underground
https://theconversation-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/theconversation.com/amp/climate-change-how-elephants-help-pump-planet-warming-carbon-underground-170415

#vision #leaders

Electrify Everything! Oslo Plans To Slash Emissions 95% By 2030 - CleanTechnica
https://cleantechnica.com/2021/12/08/electrify-everything-oslo-plans-to-slash-emissions-95-by-2030/

The largest oil and gas companies made a combined $174bn in profits in the first nine months of the year as gasoline prices climbed in the US, according to a new report.
The bumper profit totals, provided exclusively to the Guardian, show that in the third quarter of 2021 alone, 24 top oil and gas companies made more than $74bn in net income. From January to September, the net income of the group, which includes Exxon, Chevron, Shell and BP, was $174bn.

Exclusive: oil companies’ profits soared to $174bn this year as US gas prices rose | Oil and gas companies | The Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/dec/06/oil-companies-profits-exxon-chevron-shell-exclusive

K tomu jidlu ma kurzgesagt novy video, nejsou tam zadny prekvapivy nebo dobre orientujici cisla, jen vicemene spousta argumentu proti hovezimu. prekvapilo me, ze z pohledu celkovyho emisniho cyklu jsou na tom drubez a prasata stejne. za videni stoji, jako kazdej kurzgesagt

Is Meat Really that Bad?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1Hq8eVOMHs