Health Earth: Health for all on a single planet
•Transferir como PPT, PDF•
1 gostou•734 visualizações
Introduction to Health-Earth, "health for all on a single planet" The modern time, since approximately the start of the Industrial Revolution, is increasingly called the “Anthropocene” the human dominated era. Humans have not only become the dominant mammal on the planet (claimed as eight times the mass of all wild terrestrial mammals) but in so doing our species has changed the atmosphere, the climate, many ecosystems and the location, distribution and composition of part of the Earth’s crust, from gold to oil and other fossil fuels. Humans are now a geological force, for good or ill. What does this all mean for human health, both now and in the future? “Health-Earth” (H-earth) is a global network (nine research groups, six countries and one UN University) of interdisciplinary public health scientists, established in 2014, that seeks to advance the understanding of these complex and interlinked issues in the context of global health. A symposium on this topic, with five speakers from four countries, has been accepted for the 27th conference of the International Society for Environmental Epidemiology (ISEE), to be held in Sao Paulo, Brazil in September. The symposium seeks to position the interaction between the changing Earth system and human health within the legitimate scope of environmental epidemiology and public health more broadly. The problems of the Anthropocene, created by our species, are potentially solvable. This is an important, conceptual and scientific challenge for public health, the whole scientific community, and, for all of society. These challenges include but extend beyond that of global anthropogenic climate change, beyond our generation, and even this century. Bio Prof Colin D Butler graduated in medicine in 1987 from the University of Newcastle and has three postgraduate qualifications relevant to public health, including a PhD from the ANU (2002). In 1989 he co-founded the NGO BODHI. He is a former ARC Future Fellow (2011-2015) and is sole editor of Climate Change and Global Health (CABI 2014) and lead editor of Health of People, Places and Planet. Reflections based on Tony McMichael’s four decades of contribution to epidemiological understanding (ANU Press, forthcoming). He contributed to the health chapter of the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and was a co-ordinating lead author for the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, including its conceptual framework. He has to date given 67 invited talks overseas, in 16 countries. In 2009 he was named “one of a hundred doctors for the planet”, by the French Environmental Health Association, in the lead up to the Copenhagen climate conference. In 2014 Colin was arrested in NSW for protesting what he calls “Australia’s coal frenzy”. In the same year he co-founded Health-Earth. He has worked at UC since 2012.
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Semelhante a Health Earth: Health for all on a single planet
Semelhante a Health Earth: Health for all on a single planet (20)
Mais de Australian National University
Mais de Australian National University (20)
Último
Último (20)
Health Earth: Health for all on a single planet
- 1. CRICOS #00212K Prof Colin Butler June 5, 2015
- 2. CRICOS #00212K Institutional co-founders (to date) Australia: Univ Canberra Canada: Victoria Univ Finland: Univ Oulu UK: Univ Liverpool Strathclyde Uni Malaysia: UNU International Institute Global Health New Zealand: Massey Uni USA: Univ Cal San Diego Univ Washington
- 3. CRICOS #00212K Kenneth Boulding (1910-93) The Economics of the coming Spaceship Earth (1966) “the only person who believes in perpetual economic growth is either a madman or an economist”
- 4. CRICOS #00212K 4 • Modelled world economy and environment – Many scenarios modelled from 1900 to 2100 – Most lead to “overshoot and collapse” • Widely believed to forecast resource scarcity and collapse by year 2000 – leading to false claims that it was wrong Club of Rome’s Limits to Growth 1972
- 5. CRICOS #00212K 5 Limits to growth Earth from Mars, 2005
- 6. CRICOS #00212K 6 “Demand will create a parachute”
- 7. CRICOS #00212K Prof A.J. (Tony) McMichael 1942-2014
- 9. CRICOS #00212K A/Prof Colin D Butler (colin.butler@anu.edu.au) National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health Australian National University, Australia Three wise epidemiologists Nikko Toshogu Shinto Shrine, Tokyo. Photo: Rangaku 1976, 2008 Limits to growth and public health: where is environmental epidemiology? APOLOGIES: future generations 23rd ISEE meeting, Barcelona, September, 2011
- 10. CRICOS #00212K Peak health? Brijnath, McMichael, Butler, Nature, 2012
- 11. CRICOS #00212K Planetary Boundaries A safe operating space or humanity Steffen et al, 2015 What does this mean for society? And for health?
- 12. CRICOS #00212KCRICOS #00212K Integrated Science for Sustainable Transitions http://www.iiasa.ac.at/web/home/about/events/1504 28-IGBP.html State of the art lecture on sustainability science.. Yet nothing on health (including in Future Earth)
- 13. CRICOS #00212KCRICOS #00212K Emerging issue in global health curricula but far too little, given topic’s importance
- 16. CRICOS #00212K Towards: “eco-social” determinants of health Focus on either social or ecological often incomplete – need to see the inter-relationships, otherwise policy solution lacking Health issue Illustrative determinant social ecological rural suicide indebtedness drought conflict in Yemen “political” water scarcity Rwandan genocide 1994 ethnic tension, “youth bulge” fertile land scarcity ebola in West Africa poor health services, poverty deforestation heatstroke poverty, vulnerability global warming famine, undernutrition discrimination, lack of “entitlement” aquifer depletion, climate change migration government policy, poverty, oppression flooding - sea level rise, worse storms, or both
- 18. CRICOS #00212K Rohingya and Bengali refugees – May 2015
- 19. CRICOS #00212K Damascus, 2014. Line for food aid from UN Relief and Works Agency in a great city - large parts of which have been destroyed by civil war, along with basic food supply infrastructure
- 20. CRICOS #00212KPNAS - 2015
- 21. CRICOS #00212K
- 23. CRICOS #00212K Former PM John Howard (2013): quoted as "compelling" one of Mr Lawson's claims .. that unmitigated warming would leave future generations 8.4 times better off, compared with 9.4 times richer in the absence of climate change In other words – nothing to worry about complete dismissal of thresholds, “dangerous” or – worse - “runaway” CC
- 24. CRICOS #00212K
- 25. CRICOS #00212K raise substantial funds creatively teach and train publish and advocate collaborate within and across disciplines aims Make these issues far more visible in the the global health agenda
- 26. CRICOS #00212K Wael Al-Delaimy* Univ California San Diego1,2 Sir Harry Burns* Strathclyde Uni former chief medical officer Scotland1,3 Colin Butler* Univ Canberra1,2,4,5,6, Tony Capon*UN Univ Int’l Institute for Global Health – director1,3,7 Kristie Ebi^ Uni Washington1,2,4,6 Trevor Hancock*, Victoria Univ, 1st leader Canadian Green Party1,3 Jouni Jaakola* Univ Oulo, WHO Collaborating Centre Glob Envtl Change1,2 Andy Morse^ Univ Liverpool Centre for Infection and Global Health6 John Potter * Massey Univ, Univ Washington (emeritus Prof) former director Public Health Sciences division, Fred Hutchison Cancer Institute Seattle3 1. Global Health 2. International Society for Environmental Epidemiology 3. Public Health 4. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 5. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 6. Earth System Science Partnership 7. International Council for Science Other expertise includes medicine (*), climate science (^) Individual co-founders/ expertise/ links/ distinctions (selected) Collaborations with low-income settings and capacity building recognised as a priority
- 29. CRICOS #00212K
- 30. CRICOS #00212K Vatican official calls for moral awakening on global warming April 28, 2015
Notas do Editor
- The Division of Global Health, Department of Family and Preventive Medicine invites you to a special lecture: H-Earth is an emerging collaboration of 9 co-founding institutions in 7 countries, which seeks to find self-interested reasons to place the issue of greater health, social and environmental equity more central to the global health agenda. It argues that many of the most pressing problems global health faces are neither mainly social nor mainly environmental, but “eco-social”. It thus follows that solutions must also be eco-social, they cannot be mainly technological. Climate change exemplifies a global health problem which cannot be solved by applying resources mainly to high income populations. While most commentators have argued that climate change largely threatens to harm the health of the poor its foreseeable social consequences include mass migration, conflict, rising food prices, and social instability that would affect all social classes. H-Earth seeks to train, educate, and motivate a cohort of public health workers, in collaboration with other disciplines, to better integrate Earth system science not only with health, but planetary scale social science. About the Speaker: Colin Butler is a Professor at the University of Canberra, and an Australian Research Council Future Fellow on the topic of "Health and Sustainability: Australia in a Global Context". Dr. Butler is especially interested in future global health, including the consequences of global environmental changes such as to the climate, ecosystems, energy sources and resource depletion. He has published widely, and given many invited talks on topics including food security, population growth, ecology and infectious diseases. His collaborations include the World Health Organization, the Special Programme on Tropical Diseases Research, and the World Medical Association. He is co-founder of the NGO BODHI, which is active since 1989, especially in India. He is sole editor of Climate Change and Global Health (CABI, Sept 2014) and the senior editor of Health of Planet, People and Places Reflections based on Tony McMichael’s four decades of contribution to epidemiological understanding (ANU E Press, 2015). He is a member of the scientific steering committee of Global Environmental Change and Human Health, which part of the Earth System Science Partnership. His research interests include Sustainability, Human rights and their links with human health. Please RSVP to Kati Gonsalves at [email_address] Two suggestions – perhaps the second in better for the Scripps interface – but is it too social for them? (Have to run now, Wael, to dinner). Health Earth (H-Earth): why do we need it? What is it? What might it do? Prof Colin Butler The meaning of global health is shifting from traditional tropical medicine and international health to the aspiration of health for all on a single planet. Even in developed countries, sustainable health depends on improved health in poor places. Put simply, a fairer world is in the collective self-interest of us all. Three examples concern Ebola, antibiotic resistance and climate change. None of these problems can be satisfactorily addressed by focussing resources primarily in high income populations. The control of Ebola requires a vast expansion of “health literacy” not just in West Africa but among poorer people in developed countries. Inequality is an important driver of medical tourism which risks the unwelcome import of highly problematic antibiotic-resistant pathogens in exchange. While climate change appears most likely to harm the health of the poor it also risks social consequences (e.g. due to sea level rise) from which no-one can be safe. H-Earth is an emerging collaboration of nine co-founding institutions (7 countries) which seeks to make these and similar issues central to the global public health agenda. Its co-founders are linked through the late Prof Tony McMichael, who coined the term “Planetary Overload”. H-EARTH seeks to complement but not duplicate existing global health networks. It has a strong ethical basis. In summary, it argues that many of the most pressing problems global health faces are neither mainly social nor mainly environmental, but “eco-social”. It thus follows that solutions must also be eco-social, they cannot be mainly technological. Climate change and health from a Health Earth (H-Earth) perspective Prof Colin Butler H-Earth is an emerging collaboration of nine co-founding institutions (7 countries) which seeks to find self-interested reasons to place the issue of greater health, social and environmental equity more central to the global public health agenda. H-Earth seeks to complement but not duplicate existing global health networks. It has a strong ethical basis. It argues that many of the most pressing problems global health faces are neither mainly social nor mainly environmental, but “eco-social”. It thus follows that solutions must also be eco-social, they cannot be mainly technological. Climate change exemplifies a global health problem which cannot be solved by applying resources mainly to high income populations. While most commentators have argued that climate change largely threatens to harm the health of the poor its foreseeable social consequences include mass migration, conflict and social instability, including from rising food prices. These effects will feedback to affect us all. H-Earth seeks to train, educate, and motivate a cohort of public health workers, in collaboration with other disciplines, to better integrate Earth system science not only with health, but planetary scale social science. Best wishes Colin From: Al-Delaimy, Wael [mailto:waldelaimy@ucsd.edu] Sent: Sunday, 12 October 2014 5:32 PMTo: Colin.ButlerSubject: RE: travel confirmed LA - San Diego Colin, why don’t you send me a synopsis of that so that I send around and gauge interest from the scripps institute of oceanography to see if we hold the talk there or at the medical school. In general this is a new topic for health sciences so it might not attract as much audience but the undergraduate or scripps folks might be interested. Wael From: Colin.Butler [mailto:Colin.Butler@canberra.edu.au] Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2014 11:22 PMTo: Al-Delaimy, WaelSubject: RE: travel confirmed LA - San Diego Thanks very much Wael As for my talk what duration do you suggest and what is the likely audience? Broadly though, I propose to talk about Health-Earth: what it is, why we need it, what it might do. I am giving a similar talk in Liverpool, for 30 mins including questions, but I could talk a bit longer .. depends on what you think is the audience’s interest and attention span.. Also a similar talk in Seattle, most likely. Best wishes Colin From: Al-Delaimy, Wael [mailto:waldelaimy@ucsd.edu] Sent: Sunday, 12 October 2014 5:17 PMTo: Colin.Butler; Anne Hirsch ([email_address])Subject: RE: travel confirmed LA - San Diego Dear Colin, I will work with my assistant to arrange your booking in a nearby hotel. She will know if we can book and pay for it or if you have to pay for it and then we reimburse you. Also, please provide you the title of a talk, a short paragraph about the talk and a short bio for you so we can begin planning the talk and book the room. I will come pick you from the train station. More later.. Wael From: Colin.Butler [mailto:Colin.Butler@canberra.edu.au] Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2014 11:05 PMTo: Anne Hirsch ([email_address])Cc: Al-Delaimy, WaelSubject: travel confirmed LA - San Diego Dear Anne and Wael I have just booked a ticket on the train from LA to San Diego: Sunday Nov9 Depart 4:10 PM (Union Station) Arrive: 7:03 PM Wael, do you have a suggestion where I might stay? If possible I would like to stay walking distance from the campus. I depart San Diego Lindberg Field on Tues Nov 11 at 10.12 am Kind regards Colin Prof Colin D Butler Australian Research Council Future Fellow Faculty of Health, University of Canberra Visiting Fellow, National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Australian National University Tel: +61(0)2-6201-2194 E: [email_address] W: http://www.canberra.edu.au/faculties/health/courses/public-health/staff-profiles/butler-colin www.bodhi.net.au https://twitter.com/ColinDavdButler blog “Climate Change and Global Health” (CABI) (Editor CD Butler) in press: Health of People, Places and Planet. Reflections based on Tony McMichael’s four decades of contribution to epidemiological understanding, Editors Colin D Butler, Jane Dixon, Tony Capon
- Kenneth Boulding Kenneth Boulding, an Economist, Philosopher and Poet, Dies at 83By SYLVIA NASARPublished: March 20, 1993 Kenneth Boulding, a much-honored but unorthodox economist, philosopher and poet, died yesterday. He was 83. His assistant, Vivian Wilson, said Professor Boulding, who had taught at the University of Colorado in Boulder since 1977, died at his home after a long bout with cancer. Nominated at different times for Nobel Prizes in both peace and economics, Professor Boulding was renowned less for a single contribution to economics than for a large number of interesting intellectual and moral insights that both charmed and challenged his fellow social scientists. In addition to writing three dozen books, three volumes of poetry and 800 articles, Professor Boulding — whose white mane, stammer and pointed wit made him distinctive — lectured frequently and entertainingly. “Ken Boulding is like wine that can’t be shipped very far,” said Mancur Olson, a professor of economics at the University of Maryland. “His talks, his writing were so full of brilliant asides that no summary does them justice.” Early Successes The son of a plumber, Kenneth Ewart Boulding was born in grimy Liverpool, England, in 1910. He won a chemistry scholarship to Oxford, said Mark Blaug, professor emeritus at the University of London, but soon switched to economics. In 1931, at age 22, he had his first paper — a short but brilliant work on economics — accepted by the Economic Journal, edited by John Maynard Keynes, the British economist. After fellowships at Harvard University and the University of Chicago and a short spell teaching at the University of Edinburgh in Scotland, Professor Boulding came to the United States for good. He taught at several colleges around the country before settling at the University of Colorado. Like the American economist Paul Samuelson and the British economist Nicholas Caldor, Professor Boulding initially concentrated on adding his own insights to Keynes’s theory that depressions are due to too little private spending and that governments should run deficits to end them. His first book, “Economic Analysis,” was an introductory textbook that over four editions between 1941 and 1966 blended Keynesian and neoclassical economic theory into a coherent synthesis. Professor Blaug said the book was “remarkable in showing how far one can go in economics by using no tool more complicated than that of demand and supply.” Professor Boulding, from a family of deeply religious Methodists, became a Quaker as a young man and remained a passionate if unconventional Christian throughout his life. An ardent pacifist, he opposed Word War II and lost his wartime post as an economist at the League of Nations. Concerns Beyond Economics His spiritual and philosophical concerns ultimately led him to look far beyond economics. “Imagine someone who was half Milton Friedman, half Mahatma Ghandi,” said Professor Olson, who knew Professor Boulding well and credits him for influencing his own work. Professor Boulding invented new areas of economics, including the economics of peace, and published a book of that title in 1945. (An Ayer edition is still in print.) Professor Boulding won the John Bates Clark Medal of the American Economic Association in 1949, a prize given every two years to the economist under age 40 judged to have made a significant contribution to economic thought. The award was recognition that Professor Boulding was one of the best and brightest of his generation of economists. After that, he increasingly wandered from the traditional concerns of economics. “He left economics,” said Wassily Leontief, himself a Nobel Prize winner in economics. “He became a universal philosopher.” Though an outsider among modern economists, Professor Boulding was heaped with many honors. He became president of the American Economic Association in 1968 and was awarded dozens of honorary degrees. Part of his charm was his rare diversity. He wrote rhymed poetry (one of his books was entitled “Beasts, Ballads and Bouldingisms”), sculptured, painted water colors and, friends said, used to sing entire Gilbert and Sullivan musicals from memory and could recite nearly all of Wordsworth. Professor Boulding is survived by his wife, Dr. Elise M. Boulding, a professor emerita of sociology at Dartmouth College; five children, J. Russell, of Bloomington, Ind., Mark, of Denver, Philip, of Olalla, Wash., William, of Durham, N.C., and Christie Boulding-Graham of Wayland, Mass., and 16 grandchildrenhttp://www.colorado.edu/econ/Kenneth.Boulding/ http://www.personal.psu.edu/~dxl31/research/otherstuff/boulding.html http://www.panarchy.org/boulding/systems.1956.html http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/conversations/Boulding/kboulding-con0.html http://www.eoearth.org/article/Boulding,_Kenneth_Ewart http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLjhaaP9bP8
- Conjuring a parachute At 7:30 pm on Wednesday 20 JuneWhere: At the Fenner Building, ANU Prophets of the impending collapse of civilisation are increasing in number and credibility, bolstered by accumulating evidence. Glib reassurances of hope, technological rescue and reminders of previous false prophets of doom no longer bring relief; new strategies are needed. These include eroding the social contract that permits actions that poison our collective future, analysis of denial, and exposure of oppression. We need to create “social vaccines”; new fables that can help thwart collapse. Principally, we need a vast social movement; with scores of overlapping approaches. These are just a few. Associate Professor Colin D Butler is an Australian Research Council Future Fellow. His topic concerns Australia’s social sustainability, in a global context of increasing resource scarcity. He is a medically trained epidemiologist, National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Australian National University. In 2009 he was named one of “a hundred doctors for the planet”. -----Original Message----- From: Colin Butler Sent: Sunday, 5 February 2012 10:39 AM To: Jenny Wanless Subject: RE: Talk to NSF in June Jenny Perhaps I could talk on this general topic (communication, hostility, denial, partying - "shopping therapy" - eg Dubai tower, Qatar soccer, "small wins", a "social vaccine"). Below is a long abstract, (accepted) for a meeting on emergent risk to be held at Princeton in September. Below that is part of a recent grant application, of relevance. Attached is a recent editorial, also relevant, and a book review of McKibben's "Eaarth". Fundamentally, though, I think a grossly dysfunctional (even if understandable) human response to the proximity of a looming crisis makes the crisis inevitable; think of Europe pre WWII, the French Court pre revolution.. Important to keep some hope, though! Colin PS I welcome comments, including ones that are critical. *** Understanding cyclic vulnerability to reduce the risk of global collapse Colin D Butler Australian National University (Princeton emerging risk conference) Population vulnerability is cyclic, analogous to immunity. Following epidemics, surviving populations have sufficient antibodies to inhibit repeat infection until a sufficient number of immunologically vulnerability people accrue, due to waning immunity and the maturing of a new generation. Other forms of cyclic risk exist, driven by the waxing and waning of collective memory and behaviour and amplified by the rise and fall of social mechanisms. Three examples are global conflict, inequality and economic history. In the first, strong global social forces following World War II (WWII) led to a sufficiently vigorous social contract to inhibit very large-scale state violence, fortified by numerous institutions including the United Nations. Almost 70 years later, the social immunity generated by the two World Wars is still fairly powerful, though some of the institutions are weakening. The second example concerns inequality. Following the Depression and WWII sufficient social forces were liberated to reduce inequality of several forms; in the US memory of the gilded age faded, in the UK the National Health Service was born, and the global wave of decolonisation appeared unstoppable. However, gradually, many forms of inequality have reappeared, including in most formerly Communist nations. Economic history comprises the third example. Economic booms and busts have occurred since at least the Great Tulip frenzy (1634-37), and the cycle continues, not least because mainstream opinion in new generations asserts that the problem has been solved and a new generation of naive speculators and investors is seduced. Today, global civilisation itself is threatened. This risk may be emergent, as defined by this meeting, but is also ancient and recurrent. Numerous civilisations have collapsed in the past; what differs today is the global scale of this risk. This is plausible due not only to globalisation but also to the convergence of several forms of risk immuno-naïveté. This vulnerability has also been described as arising from the Cornucopian Enchantment, a period since roughly 1980, when most economists, decision makers and even the academy reached quasi-consensus that the problem of scarcity had been permanently solved. This hubris seemed rational to a new generation, trained and rewarded to think that economics and ingenuity would of themselves solve all major problems; such pride was fortified (for a time) by data regarding cheap food, cheap energy and declining global hunger. However, in the last decade, data have accumulated that show not just diminishing reserves (eg oil); but less contestable evidence such as rising prices (oil, food), rising unemployment and increased social resentment. Nevertheless, most policy makers remain wedded to the old-world thinking that has helped create these developing, interacting crises. What can be more important than to reduce the emergent risk of global civilisation collapse? Failure to lower this risk may lead to a dramatic change in global consciousness, following a period likely to make the Dark Ages seem desirable. Instead, it is vital to immunise a sufficient number of people who can then demand, develop and support the requisite radical new policies. These include acceptance that resources are limited, development of green economic systems that will price negative externalities, and revival of fairness of opportunity. **** part of the grant application: Project 5.3 Climate change and public health communication [Butler, Steffen] There is increasing evidence that both suppression ((C. D. Butler, 2000; Oreskes & Conway, 2010) and cognitive barriers (eg denial, bias to optimism) inhibit understanding of the risk of adverse global change, including to the climate (C. D. Butler, 2011; Diethelm & McKee, 2009; Ornstein & Ehrlich, 1989). These impede policy uptake. Improved understanding of collective social and cognitive factors that protect or endanger civilisation, and thus population health, is an urgent research need. For example, global abhorrence of further war followed World War II, leading to the birth of the United Nations and other peace-promoting institutions (C. D. Butler, 2000). Although weakening, their influence persists, as if the horror of the previous decades had produced a temporary global social vaccine. To prevent future global eco-social collapse, workers can devise social vaccines which balance dysfunctlonal arousal (Weick, 1984) (likely to trigger outcomes such as despair and indifference) and a placebo, which induces complacency. Methods: This project will review and synthesise the emerging literature in this field and also interview key informants (including CIs McMichael and Steffen) concerning perceived barriers which inhibit policy uptake. Outcomes will include conference presentations and an edited book. Benefits should include better uptake of difficult messages by populations and thus policy makers. -----Original Message----- From: Jenny Wanless [mailto:jennifer.wanless@gmail.com] Sent: Sun 05/02/2012 09:42 To: Colin Butler Subject: Re: Talk to NSF in June Indeed I remember that you spoke to us. And yes,we have made very little progress - or more probably gone backward since that time. More and more of the public are vociferously opposed to any idea that humans are inducing climate change or anything else harming the earth. It even seems that more deny evolution. It is very puzzling. At NSF we have a couple of groups who have been talking about this recently. Tony McMichael said he had had an overwhelmingly hostile reaction to an article he published recently. He said that scientists are realising that they are failing to communicate, and wondering where they have gone wrong. If you have any answers we would be delighted to hear them - but I am not hopeful. Our meetings are on the third Wednesday, so it would be 20th June, 7.30pm. Speakers have half an hour to an hour, but we do want some time for discussion, and we finish about 9pm. And I don't deserve any congratulations - Ian did it, not me. But I am pleased to have brought up a mathematician. Jenny On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Colin Butler <[email_address]>wrote: > ** > > Jenny > > Thanks .. and congratulations to you and your son.. > > I am planning to hear Nicole Foss on the 13th, and probably my topic > will be somewhat related; I will try to come up with a title and short > description after hearing her. Please do not hesitate to nag me if you > think I have overlooked advising you. > > Do you have a provisional date in June, and also a suggested time to speak? > > You may recall that I spoke to N&SF in early 1998 - we have more or > less continued with business as usual since that time; indeed you > might say since Limits to Growth appeared, 40 years ago. > > Best wishes > > > Colin > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jenny Wanless > [mailto:jennifer.wanless@gmail.com<jennifer.wanless@gmail.com> > ] > Sent: Sat 04/02/2012 20:49 > To: Colin Butler > Subject: Re: Talk to NSF in April > > That would be great - it sounds very relevant. Please let me know in > another month or so whether that still suits you, and a title for yout > talk. > Tony told me it was the recent round, so I took his word for it. > Actually I am the proud mother of a Future Fellow - our younger son > Ian was awarded it in the recent round, but he is in Pure Maths - Combinatorics. > I'm very glad that you were awarded it in something to do with > sustainability - maybe the Government will take some notice of it. > JennyW > > On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Colin Butler <Colin.Butler@anu.edu.au > >wrote: > > > ** > > > > Jenny > > > > Yes, I do remember you - of course! > > > > The Future Fellowship was actually awarded in late 2010, not the > > most recent round. > > > > Its topic is "Health and sustainability: Australia in a global context." > > > > I have a pretty hectic time in the next three months, but perhaps a > > talk in June or so would be possible? > > > > Best wishes > > > > Colin > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jenny Wanless > > [mailto:jennifer.wanless@gmail.com<jennifer.wanless@gmail.com> > <[email_address]> > > ] > > Sent: Sat 04/02/2012 11:31 > > To: Colin Butler > > Subject: Talk to NSF in April > > > > Dear Colin - remember me? I'm still secretary of the Nature and > > Society Forum. Last week I asked Tony Capon whether he would talk to > > NSF at our 18th April meeting. He suggested you instead. He told me > > that you > received > > a Future Fellowship in the recent ARC round of grants. > > Congratulations - that is very prestigious. What is your field? > > Anway, I am sure it is something that is relevant to our concerns It > > has been a long time since > we > > heard from you, so I do hope you will agree to talk to us some time > > even > if > > April does not suit you. > > Jenny Wanless > > > > > > Even before that World Health Day I heard a joke. Two people have fallen from a very tall building. One is an ecologist and the other is an economist. The ecologist is terrified, but the economist is supremely calm. Don’t worry, he says, “demand will create a parachute”. The person who told us that joke was vilified by many people; some of you will have heard of him. His name is Paul Ehrlich. If we go back to the vaccine analogy, it is very clear that Ehrlich alienated many people because his message was too painful. I personally think, on good days, that a parachute is possible. But we are not going to use that parachute unless we can see the ground, and unless we can anticipate the consequences of hitting it, and I think far too, many people, including policy makers, politicians and what we could call the consuming class of about 1 billion people are in denial. They cannot see the ground, though by now, perhaps a few hundred million can, and they are calling very hard for the ripcord to be pulled. -----
- Looking Back on the Limits of Growth Forty years after the release of the groundbreaking study, were the concerns about overpopulation and the environment correct? | | | Share on redditReddit | Share on diggDigg | Share on stumbleuponStumble | Share on emailEmail | More Sharing Services By Mark Strauss Smithsonian magazine, April 2012, Subscribe View More Photos » Chart Sources: Meadows, D.H., Meadows, D.L., Randers, J. and Behrens III, W.W. (1972) (Linda Eckstein) Photo Gallery (1/2) Explore more photos from the story More from Smithsonian.com Thinking About Futurism Is it Too Late for Sustainable Development? Recent research supports the conclusions of a controversial environmental study released 40 years ago: The world is on track for disaster. So says Australian physicist Graham Turner, who revisited perhaps the most groundbreaking academic work of the 1970s,The Limits to Growth. Written by MIT researchers for an international think tank, the Club of Rome, the study used computers to model several possible future scenarios. The business-as-usual scenario estimated that if human beings continued to consume more than nature was capable of providing, global economic collapse and precipitous population decline could occur by 2030. However, the study also noted that unlimited economic growth was possible, if governments forged policies and invested in technologies to regulate the expansion of humanity’s ecological footprint. Prominent economists disagreed with the report’s methodology and conclusions. Yale’s Henry Wallich opposed active intervention, declaring that limiting economic growth too soon would be “consigning billions to permanent poverty.” Turner compared real-world data from 1970 to 2000 with the business-as-usual scenario. He found the predictions nearly matched the facts. “There is a very clear warning bell being rung here,” he says. “We are not on a sustainable trajectory.” Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/Looking-Back-on-the-Limits-of-Growth.html#ixzz2aopH5KZr Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter
- WN – en route to Africa
- WN - Syria
- Kelley, C.P., Mohtadi, Shahrzad., Cane, Mark.A. Seager, Richard, and Kushnir, Yochanan., 2015. Climate change in the Fertile Crescent and implications of the recent Syrian drought. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science (USA).
- http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/the-claims-are-exaggerated-john-howard-rejects-predictions-of-global-warming-catastrophe-20131105-2wzza.html 'The claims are exaggerated': John Howard rejects predictions of global warming catastrophe Date November 6, 2013 Comments 822 Nick Miller Europe Correspondent View more articles from Nick Miller Follow Nick on Twitter Email Nick inShare submit to reddit Email article Print Reprints & permissions Abbott ducks questions on Howard climate speech John Howard praised the PM for challenging the global warming consensus. Here's Tony Abbott's response. Autoplay OnOff Video feedback Video settings Australian politics: full coverage Hearings to examine Abbott's climate claims London: Former prime minister John Howard has poured scorn on the "alarmist" scientific consensus on global warming in a speech to a gathering of British climate sceptics, comparing those calling for action on climate change to religious zealots. I am unconvinced that catastrophe is around the corner Mr Howard said he was an "agnostic" on climate science and he preferred to rely on his instinct, which told him that predictions of doom were exaggerated. Former Prime Minister John Howard told the Global Warming Policy Foundation, a group of UK climate change sceptics, a global agreement on climate change action is unlikely. Photo: Dom Lorrimer He also relied on a book written by a prominent climate sceptic, which scientists have attacked as ignorant and misleading. Advertisement And he called on politicians not to be browbeaten into surrendering their role in determining economic policy. Nuclear power – a "very clean source of energy" - shale oil and fracking were solutions to the world's energy needs, Mr Howard said. Mr Howard's speech in London on Tuesday night was to the Global Warming Policy Foundation, a think tank established by Nigel Lawson, one of Britain's most prominent climate change sceptics, former chancellor in the Thatcher government and father of TV chef Nigella. Mr Howard revealed before the speech that the only book he had read on climate change was Lawson's An Appeal to Reason: a Cool Look at Global Warming, published in 2008. Mr Howard said he read it twice, once when he was writing his autobiography, when he used it to counter advice for stronger action on climate change given to him by government departments when he had been prime minister. But the book has been attacked by climate experts. Mr Howard quoted as "compelling" one of Mr Lawson's claims in the book: that unmitigated warming would leave future generations 8.4 times better off, compared with 9.4 times richer in the absence of climate change (the book in fact uses the numbers 8.5 and 9.5). That calculation is based on "sleight of hand and faulty logic", said Bob Ward, policy director at the London School of Economics Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, and it ignores the possibility of warming at the higher end of estimates by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Sir John Loughton, lead editor of the first three reports by the IPCC, the UN's climate panel, called the book "neither cool nor rational", saying it showed a "surprising ignorance of elementary statistical analysis" and ignored the impact of more frequent floods and droughts. When told of Mr Howard's comments, climate scientist Tim Flannery said it was unclear which particular aspects of the science the former prime minister was doubtful about. Contrary to Mr Howard’s assertions, Professor Flannery said climate scientists had established a direct link between global warming and an increased risk of extreme weather and events such as bushfires. Professor Flannery recommended some additional reading material for Mr Howard, when told that the only book the former prime minister had read on climate change was Mr Lawson's tome. ''Particularly prime ministers should be reading the science and should be familiarising themselves with what the experts are saying rather than what some commentator happens to be saying,'' Professor Flannery said. ''I would just say [to Mr Howard], go to the IPCC report summaries, go to the Climate Commission reports that explain those things in simple language.'' A spokesman for Environment Minister Greg Hunt said about Mr Howard's speech: ''Government accepts the science that climate change is real. We will take action to reduce domestic emissions by 5 per cent by 2020, but we'll do it without a carbon tax which hurts households and business.'' Tuesday night's speech was titled "One religion is enough". In notes for the speech distributed beforehand, Mr Howard said he chose the title "in reaction to the sanctimonious tone employed by so many of those who advocate … costly responses to what they see as irrefutable evidence that the world's climate faces catastrophe". He said policy makers were faced with attempts to "intimidate" them with the mantras of 'follow the science' and 'the science is truly settled'." However, it was the job of politicians to make public policy, and they should not surrender that role, Mr Howard said. "The ground is thick with rent-seekers. There are plenty of people around who want access to public money in the name of saving the planet. "Politicians who bemoan the loss of respect for their calling should remember that every time they allow themselves to be browbeaten by the alleged views of experts they contribute further to that lack of respect." Economic growth in developing countries was much more important than countering global warming, Mr Howard said, and the West had no right to deny economic development to the rest of the world in the name of climate change. He accused the IPCC of including "nakedly political agendas" in its advice. Mr Howard said he had always been an agnostic on global warming. He had not "totally" rejected the conclusions of scientists, although he recalled the "apocalyptic warnings of the Club of Rome" – a think tank that in 1972 mistakenly predicted population growth would lead to a major economic and food supply crisis in the early 1990s. Mr Howard said his government proposed a carbon emissions trading scheme in 2006 in the face of a political "perfect storm" on the issue. Now the "high-tide of public support for over-zealous action on global warming has passed", he said. He said it was unlikely there would ever be a global agreement on climate change action. "I don't see a real prospect of that happening," he said. Mr Howard also criticised "zealous advocates of action of global warming" and "alarmists" for attempting to exploit the NSW bushfires in October. He pointed out that a big bushfire in Victoria took place 163 years ago, "when the planet was not experiencing any global warming. You might well describe all of this as an inconvenient truth." Renewable energy sources should be used when it makes economic sense, but nuclear energy should be used in the long term, and the ‘shale revolution' would be a game-changer in the energy debate, Mr Howard said. Speaking in London before the speech, Mr Howard said climate change activists saw the issue as a substitute religion. "It's the latest progressive cause," he said. But the global financial crisis had caused the general population to become more sceptical. "I don't know whether all of the warnings about global warming are true or not," he said. "You can never be absolutely certain that all the science is in. "I am unconvinced that catastrophe is around the corner. I don't disregard what scientists say. I just don't accept all of the alarmist conclusions. "I instinctively feel that some of the claims are exaggerated." He was sceptical about science that linked climate change to the increased likelihood of extreme weather events or bushfires. "Australia has always had extreme weather events," he said. "The first Australians knew how to deal with [the risk of bushfires] through regular backburning. It's something that's worth contemplating." He said renewable energy should be used only when it was affordable and would not hurt poorer families or developing countries. He predicted that shale oil and gas had opened up a "tantalising prospect" of an energy independent US, which would dominate energy policy in that country and would "dwarf" consideration of a carbon trading scheme. In Australia, nuclear power should be "kept on the table" and used as it became better value for money. With Jonathan Swan
- Massey University; Chair, Asia Cohort Consortium; Former Director, Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; Professor Emeritus of Epidemiology, University of Washington
- http://www.saskwind.ca/blogbackend/2014/9/17/wind-solar-cost-declines-renewables-growth
- https://www.google.com.au/search?q=Tesla%27s+Powerwall&biw=1920&bih=950&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=7AFHVfi1IMK4mAWxxYDIAw&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ#imgrc=naTB6IIlI9D8uM%253A%3BCxr_fp8gCRRjUM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Ficdn3.digitaltrends.com%252Fimage%252Ftesla-powerwall-7-970x548-c.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.digitaltrends.com%252Fhome%252Ftesla-energy-is-the-companys-line-of-batteries%252F%3B970%3B546
- http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/apr/28/vatican-climate-change-summit-to-highlight-moral-duty-for-action Vatican official calls for moral awakening on global warming At climate change summit Cardinal Peter Turkson warns on burning of fossil fuels, in a likely precursor to highly anticipated encyclical on the environment Pope Francis shakes hands with the UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, during a meeting at the Vatican. Photograph: Osservatore Romano/Reuters Stephanie Kirchgaessner in Vatican City Tuesday 28 April 2015 23.30 AEST Last modified on Wednesday 29 April 2015 20.12 AEST Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via Email Share on LinkedIn Share on Google+ Shares 13,194 Increasing use of fossil fuels is disrupting Earth on an “almost unfathomable scale”, a top Vatican official has said, warning that a “full conversion” of hearts and minds is needed if global warming is to be conquered. The statement by Cardinal Peter Turkson, Pope Francis’s point man for peace and justice issues, was made at a Vatican summit on Tuesday, which focused on climate change and poverty. His call for a moral awakening of politicians and people of faith is a likely precursor to the highly anticipated encyclical on the environment, which was drafted by Turkson and which Pope Francis is expected to release in June. “In our recklessness, we are traversing some of the planet’s most fundamental natural boundaries,” warned Turkson. “And the lesson from the Garden of Eden still rings true today: pride, hubris, self-centredness are always perilous, indeed destructive. The very technology that has brought great reward is now poised to bring great ruin.” Ban Ki-moon, the United Nations secretary-general who delivered the keynote address at the summit, said he believed the pope’s encyclical – coupled with the pontiff’s planned speeches before the UN general assembly and a joint session of the US Congress – would have a profound impact on climate change negotiations. “[The encyclical] will convey to the world that protecting our environment is an urgent moral imperative and a sacred duty for all people of faith and people of conscience,” Ban said. While he declined to comment on any details of the encyclical following his morning meeting with the Argentinean pontiff – the document has already been written and is being translated – he said he was counting on the pope’s “moral voice and moral leadership” to help accelerate talks. Pope Francis’s September address will be the first time any pope has spoken before a special session of the general assembly. Advertisement Both Turkson and Ban emphasised that scientists and people of faith were united in their call for action. “Science and religion are not at odds on climate change. Indeed, they are fully aligned. Together, we must clearly communicate that the science of climate change is deep, sound and not in doubt,” Ban said. Turkson called on leaders of all faiths to be good role models. “Think of the positive message it would send for churches, mosques, synagogues, and temples all over the world to become carbon neutral,” he said. “At a time like this, the world is looking to faith leaders for guidance. This is why Pope Francis has chosen to issue an encyclical on protecting the environment at this unique moment in time.” The Protect the Earth, Dignify Humanity meeting has brought about a rare meeting of minds between scientists and religious officials on climate change, even if they frame their arguments in different ways. Teresa Berger, a professor at the Yale Divinity School, said she believed the encyclical would have an overarching theological vision – one of “a God-sustained universe, anchored in a theology of creation as articulated in the biblical witness. And based on this, Pope Francis will probably not mince words, but note as evil, for example, the sin of exploiting the Earth.” Francis has already said he believes global warming is mostly manmade and that a Christian who does not protect God’s creation “is a Christian who does not care about the work of God”. He has also linked environmental exploitation to social and economic inequality, saying: “An economic system centred on the god of money needs to plunder nature to sustain the frenetic rhythm of consumption that is inherent to it.” Activists hope the summit and the encyclical will influence the next round of international negotiations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which will take place in Paris in November. The pope, whose foray into diplomacy helped spur negotiations between the US and Cuba, is expected to address the topic in a speech before the UN in New York in September. Some conservatives in the US, where the Republican party has fiercely resisted attempts to regulate greenhouse gases and questioned the scientific consensus on global warming, have criticised the pope for getting involved in the issue. “Francis sullies his office by using demagogic formulations to bully the populace into reflexive climate action with no more substantive guide than theologised propaganda,” Maureen Mullarkey wrote in First Things, a conservative journal. Another conservative group, the Heartland Institute, which seeks to discredit established science on global warming, held its own meeting in Rome on Monday – and will hold a second on Tuesday – in which officials derided the pope for taking on the issue. Heartland Institute takes climate foolishness to a Biblical level Read more “You demean the office that you hold and you demean the church whom it is your sworn duty to protect and defend and advance,” said Lord Christopher Monckton, a prominent climate sceptic and former policy adviser to the former British prime minister, Margaret Thatcher. Monckton’s opinions have been refuted by scientists, who have called his statements “very misleading” and “profoundly wrong”. The summit at the Vatican has been organised by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, and its stated goal is to help “elevate the importance of the moral dimensions of protecting the environment in advance of the papal encyclical and to build a global movement to deal with climate change and sustainable development”.