21 Environmental Fallacies

There are many reasons why planting trees is a good idea, but don’t be deluded by the proposition that it will help address the challenge of global warming. Apart from the fact that it takes about 20 years before trees become effective at capturing atmospheric carbon, a bit of basic research shows that there is insufficient land available to plant the number of trees required to counteract CO2 emissions. (We run out of land after 187 days). This episode explains why we need to rethink assumptions that planting trees will offset human carbon emissions.

The ‘Climategate’ controversy started in 2009 when a whistleblower discovered that a scientist had manipulated data relating to changes in global temperature. An alternative interpretation of the incident is that hackers stole emails from The Climate Research Unit to throw doubt on climate data. The key point about this event is not so much that vested interests will seek to promote their agenda, but that the media seemed more interested in dramatic headlines than understanding the facts. In this podcast, we discuss Climategate and how public perceptions can be manipulated by misrepresenting scientific evidence.  

Various governments are investigating geoengineering as a possible option to mitigate the impact of global warming. In this podcast, we assess the risks of geoengineering and consider the dangers of unintended consequences. Some of the proposals are so bizarre that they would seem better suited to the pages of a comic magazine. However, we need to be wary of discounting an idea simply because it seems fanciful. Perhaps human ingenuity can manipulate the forces of nature?       

In this podcast, we struggle to understand the logic of converting natural environments to monocultures or the rationale for cutting down vast areas of forest. We question the reasons for using bioethanol when the energy required to produce one litre of fuel is less than the energy it generates. And why does the UN categorise biofuels as clean, green, renewable energy when they produce CO2 emissions that are comparable to burning fossil fuels? This is just one more in the list of 21 Popular Environmental Fallacies.  

The commitment by international governments to transition to electric vehicles is one of the success stories in the fight against climate change. However, the switch to electric vehicles brings its own set of problems, including constraints on critical materials, the urgent need to increase electrical generating capacity using genuinely green energy and the social, political and environmental consequences of poorly regulated mining activities. This podcast episode explains why the transition to electric vehicles could have a multitude of unintended consequences.

A global transition to renewable energy presents enormous challenges both in delivering the capacity required and in building an energy infrastructure capable of responding to fluctuating energy demand. This podcast episode considers the challenge of securing 100% of our energy from genuinely clean renewable sources, and it addresses the fallacy that ‘renewable energy cannot meet all of our energy needs.’

This podcast considers the impact of plastic pollution and explains why recycling is not a long-term solution. We discuss potential alternatives to oil-based plastic and identify a possible risk if scientists develop plastic-eating bacteria.

Aviation is going green. The development of ‘sustainable aviation fuels’ (SAF) can significantly reduce emissions from flying and offers the potential to reduce lifecycle emissions by up to 80%. Well, … that is the claim being made by certain sectors of the aviation industry. This podcast considers how these claims might have evolved and sets out some of the key issues that need to be understood.

This podcast episode considers the potential flaws and benefits of carbon capture technologies. We discuss the challenges facing carbon capture projects, including: the financial costs, implications for renewable energy, transporting captured carbon and the difficulties of disposal. The capability to capture carbon is one of the foundation stones of strategies to achieve Net Zero, and governments are committing billions to support carbon capture technologies. Could these funds be used more effectively? What percentage of global GDP would be required to capture all global CO2 emissions? Does a misplaced belief in carbon capture result in governments failing to address the fundamental causes of global warming? As usual, we try to find the light-hearted aspects of a serious topic.

Fallacy 12: Prosperity requires economic growth. This podcast episode considers the relationship between economic growth and prosperity. It looks at what we mean by prosperity and whether it is possible to have prosperity without growth. A continuing growth in GDP is no guarantee that the majority of people will enjoy increasing standards of living, but one thing is clear: ever-increasing economic growth is not sustainable on a planet of limited resources. This podcast discusses four possible scenarios as our global economy strives to become sustainable.

This podcast considers whether we can adapt to a changing climate. Our sophisticated global economies face huge challenges, and an effective response requires effective strategies and major investment (unfortunately, there is little evidence of either). Even if we divert a large proportion of GDP to protect our economic infrastructure, it will not be possible to prevent a collapse in the ecosystems that are fundamental to our survival. At what point will human efforts be overwhelmed by Nature? Do we have fifty years? A hundred years? Reports by the UN suggest that adaptation measures will become ineffective if global warming exceeds the 2.0 °C threshold. If this forecast is correct, that gives us about 25 years,  if we’re lucky.

This podcast episode explores how token gestures are used to justify our unsustainable lifestyles. We also discuss the characteristics of the human brain, which responds rapidly to threats that are obviously dangerous and imminent but struggles when faced with threats that are uncertain, complex and some point in the future. The problem is compounded by political processes that elect leaders promising ‘better times’ rather than those who advocate social and economic change. In the light of these issues, it is not surprising that the response to the climate crisis has been characterised by delusion, denial and prevarication.

The challenge of a growing global population is frequently linked to the threat of climate change. This is not surprising as a growing population will increase the demand for consumer goods and energy. This will increase the pressure on natural resources, and a growing energy demand is likely to accelerate the release of CO2 into the atmosphere. The challenges presented by population growth are particularly relevant on the continent of Africa, where the population is predicted to double within the next 30 years. How can highly developed economies be expected to tackle climate change if less developed economies are expanding so rapidly? This podcast examines the complex interdependencies between population growth, economic wealth and climate change.

This episode considers the challenge of transitioning to renewable energy. Rapid adoption of renewables is essential, but many governments appear reluctant to intervene in the energy market. Instead, there appears to be a reliance on free market forces. This strategy seems to be based largely on political ideology. However, this policy of abdicating responsibility to market forces does not apply to the fossil fuel sector, which receives massive financial support from governments. This discussion unpicks the contradictions and flaws in political strategies that rely on free market forces to drive the transition to renewables.

The carbon credit industry is integral to many of the strategies designed to limit the rise in global temperatures. Carbon credits provide a trading mechanism that enables the producers of carbon emissions to pay other organisations to undertake activities to offset the carbon emissions. In theory, this should prevent carbon emissions from warming the climate. In practice, it encourages the continued production of CO2 at a time when every effort should be dedicated to reducing CO2. However, there is a risk that carbon credits distort markets, slow the adoption of renewable technologies and create a false impression that we are making progress toward a cleaner, greener world. This episode provides an entertaining examination of an issue that is often poorly understood.

This episode considers the characteristics of good and bad environmental policies plus the complexities of cost-benefit analysis - who pays the cost and who enjoys the benefit. We also examine why governments might wish to perpetuate the view that we should not overreact to fears about global warming.

This episode considers whether we should feel reassured by political claims that ‘We are on track’.  What does ‘On Track’ mean? Is this ‘On Track’ to achieve Net Zero? Is this ‘On Track’ to avoid temperatures exceeding the two-degree Centigrade upper limit? Is this ‘On Track’ to meet some other, vague and unspecified, climate targets? Scientific evidence shows that carbon emissions are increasing and global warming is accelerating. A dispassionate assessment of the current situation would suggest that we are far from being ‘On Track’. It is unclear whether claims that we are ‘On Track’ are due to ignorance, complacency or delusion. Whatever the reason, we should be wary of claims that we are ‘On Track.’

The stated purpose of The Conference of The Parties is to ‘ …stabilise greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous human interference with the climate system’.  For the last 30 years, COP events have been attempting to stabilise concentrations of CO2. For the last 30 years, concentrations have increased. It is astonishing that the international community has not declared COP to be an ineffective, failed organisation. The economic consequences of the impending climate catastrophe were highlighted in a recent report by The Institute and Faculty of Actuaries, which stated that global GDP is projected to fall by 50% in the period 2070-2090 due to the effects of climate change. Until international leaders acknowledge that COP is utterly ineffective, we will continue to live with the delusion that COP is making acceptable progress. We must replace COP with an organisation that will secure economic growth, increase wealth and fulfil the ambitions of a capitalist society for a period that extends beyond the next twenty years. Honestly, what is COP playing at?   

This episode questions the concept of a ‘safe limit’. Is this safe for people living at subsistence levels in developing countries? Or is it safe for people living in the major, western cities. Is it safe for the next 5 years or is it safe for future of generations yet to be born? Is it safe for all ecosystems around the world, or maybe just for some of them? There is a risk that even minimal rises in global temperatures could trigger natural feedback loops that might take the climate to an irreversible tipping point. Do we know where the tipping point is, or are we hoping that it is still some way off? There is a risk that we might already be dangerously close to the tipping point without knowing it. The global response to the climate crisis should adopt the ‘precautionary principle’. (i.e. If there is a degree of uncertainty, we should err on the side of caution). However, this does not appear to be the case.

The goal of 'net zero' has been widely adopted by governments, the United Nations and many large corporate organisations. There seems to be broad consensus that achieving net zero will address the impending threat of global warming. At first sight, it seems logical that if we stop adding to the level of atmospheric CO2, then we will limit the rise in global temperatures. However, look a little closely, and the flaws in the strategy become apparent.  The first problem is that the mechanisms for achieving net zero (carbon capture technologies and carbon offsetting, e.g. planting trees) are incapable of capturing the 37 billion tonnes of CO2 that we currently produce each year.  The second and more fundamental problem is that achieving net zero by 2050 offers no assurance that global temperatures will be limited to a safe level.  The third problem is that ‘net zero’ is a theoretical calculation based on assumptions that carbon emissions are offset by actions such as planting trees. Similarly, there are assumptions that biofuels and biomass are ‘green’. The failure to understand the flaws in these ideas is at the heart of the problem. However, net zero does provide the illusion that governments are addressing the threat of climate change. The fact that we are unlikely to achieve the target and even if we did, global warming could have passed catastrophic levels, is conveniently glossed over. This is delusion on a grandiose scale.   NOTE: This episode refers to the following diagram.