reading log: greenpeace report

1 files changed, 57 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/reading-log.md b/reading-log.md
index 4c46e10..091a6cd 100644
--- a/reading-log.md
+++ b/reading-log.md
@@ -6,6 +6,63 @@ author: Joe Carstairs
 
 ## 2026-04-24
 
+### @{greenpeace-report}
+
+The Greenpeace report went like this: the scientists report their knowledge that
+human emissions will cause catastrophic global warming. If we don't change
+course, disaster will befall us, perhaps the collapse of civilisation. But 'we'
+can change course if governments reach international agreements to set and stick
+to targets, among other measures. This is the only sensible possibility in the
+current situation of crisis.
+
+I noticed a few echoes of nuclear rhetoric. Nuclear energy got a chapter,
+condemning nuclear energy as a failed 20th-century project not fit for the
+future. On page 1, the editor said, 'Even nuclear-weapons laboratories host
+conferences on the greenhouse effect these days.' Toronto 1990 declared the
+greenhouse threat to be 'second only to nuclear war.' Queen Beatrix was quoted
+saying in her 1988 Christmas address that 'The Earth is slowly dying, and the
+inconceivable -- the end of life itself -- is actually becoming conceivable. We
+human beings ourselves have become a threat to our planet.' The
+end-of-civilization rhetoric in several places also echoed nuclear rhetoric.
+
+I noticed that much of the exhortation was directed at nebulous 'we's and
+'countries'. 'Of course, developed countries should pay for it.' Sometimes, this
+stopped at scathing criticism of current practices, particularly the (excellent)
+chapter on economics attacking the policies of the IMF and World Bank.
+Sometimes, this came with concrete proposals for action, like the governments of
+OECD countries giving free stuff to countries in the Global South to not chop
+down rainforests or build renewable economies.
+
+Policy proposals included governments implementing (unspecified) policies to
+encourage alternatives to driving, banning highly emitting cars, governments in
+developed countries funding rainforest reforestation in developing countries,
+and other kinds of financial aid to developing countries funded by governments
+in developing countries.
+
+The Greenpeace response gave 7 proposals:
+
+1. Take action now, don't wait until there is more scientific certainty.
+2. 'The main routes to surviving the greenhouse threat' are energy efficiency,
+   renewables instead of fossil fuels and nuclear, ban the production of CFCs, produce less greenhouse gases in the process of making food, stopping deforestation, and scaling up reforestation.
+3. 'The world community' must consume no more than 12TW, distributed more
+   equally across the world than the current 10TW.
+4. 'Industrialized countries' should invest in energy efficiency and give free
+   stuff to developing countries to enable them to 'leap-frog' the polluting
+   route to industrialisation.
+5. All energy should be produced by renewables ASAP.
+6. Nuclear power should not be expanded or extended.
+7. The first steps are to immediately cut CO2 emissions, draw up a strategy for
+   phasing out fossil fuels in the early 21st century, make every effort to
+   arrest deforestation and halt the production of CFCs and HFCs.
+8. Climate action should be funded by cutting military expenditure.
+
+The report featured lots of scientific language throughout: figures, numbers,
+and references to scientific publications.
+
+I found the report alienating. I don't think it successfully identified the
+causes of global warming or the solutions. I don't think it generated hope or
+appropriate action.
+
 ### @{apocalyptic-imagination}
 
 Reviews suggest that this book was been very influential since it was first