13-05-23: UK-MI5: Pro-Growth Bribery & National Security Threat by Tygae Aex

Radical Honoursty Culture Yshmael Guerrylla Law Party CommonSism: Common Sense Guerrylla Laws for a Sustainable Commons AEquilibriaex: balanced Eco/Anthropocentric law www.guerrylla -law.co.nr Director General Andrew Parker, MI5: Security Service 12 Millbank London SW1P 4QE, UK Tel: +44 20 7930 9000 Contact (via www.mi5.gov.uk) Commissioner - Mr Adrian Leppard National Fraud Intelligence Bureau City of London Police PO Box 36451 London EC2M 4WN Tel: 020 7601 2222 Email: postmaster@cityoflondon.police.uk

INTERPOL Environmental Crime INTERPOL. General Secretariat 200, quai Charles de Gaulle Lyon 69006. France Fax: +33 4 72 44 71 63. Email: cp@interpol.int; environmentalcrime@interpol.int CC: NATO & Global Military Advisory Council on Climate Change (GMACCC) CC: Global Security Experts: Climate Change is a Global Security Threat

Bribery & Threat to National Security: Corporate Pro-Growth Agenda Conspiracy to Profit from bribing the public to engage in Unsustainable Scarcity-Conflict Procreation, Consumption and Production behaviour; by ignoring the role of GDP/economic growth and energy consumption‟s aggravation of the Climate Change Scarcity-Conflict Death Spiral on Steroids National Security Threat. Roland Rudd: Chair: Business for New Europe; Dame Helen Alexander: Chair: UBM; Sir Win Bischoff: Chair: Lloyds Banking Group; Sir Richard Branson: Founder: Virgin Group; Sir Roger Carr: Chair: Centrica; Sir Andrew Cahn: Vice-Chair: Nomura; David Cruickshank: Chair: Deloitte LLP; Lord Davies of Abersoch: Vice-Chair: Corsair Capital; Guy Dawson: Dir: ASA International; Lord Kerr of Kinlochard: Dep.Chair: Scottish Power; Sir Adrian Montague: Chair: 3i; Nicolas Petrovic: CEO: Eurostar; Sir Michael Rake: Chair: BT; Anthony Salz: Vice-Chair: Rothschild; Sir Nicholas Scheele: Chair: Key Safety Systems Inc; Sir Nigel Sheinwald: Dir: Shell; Sir Martin Sorr elL: CEO: WPP; Malcolm Sweeting: Snr.Partner: Clifford Chance; Bill Winters: CEO Renshaw Bay. Independent: Editor: Chris Blackhurst & Grp Mng Ed: Doug Wills: Independent Print Ltd, 2 Derry Street, London W8 5HF. Re: Letters: The benefit of European Union membership outweighs the cost1. DailyMail: Editor: Paul Dacre, Mng Dir: Guy Zitter: Northcliffe House, 2 Derry Street, London, W8 5TT: Re: Every family would be up £3,500 worse off if Britain left the EU, business chiefs warn2. Telegraph: Editor: Andrew Gilligan: 111 Buckingham Palace Road, London, SW1W 0DT: Re: 'Economic case to stay in EU is overwhelming', say business leaders 3. http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/letters/letters-the-benefit-of-european-union-membership-outweighs-thecost-8622571.html 2 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2327401/Every-family-3-500-worse-Britain-left-EU-business-chiefswarn.html 1

PO Box 5042 * George East, 6539 * Cel: (071) 170 1954 * guerrylla-law.co.nr

Overview of Charges: Bribery & Threat to National Security Corporate Pro-Growth Agenda Conspiracy to Profit from bribing the public to engage in Unsustainable Scarcity-Conflict Procreation, Consumption and Production behaviour; by ignoring the role of GDP/economic growth and energy consumption‘s aggravation of the Climate Change ScarcityConflict Death Spiral on Steroids National Security Threat.

04-73

The Scarcity-Conflict Death Spiral: Difference between Sustainable Peaceful Procreation, Consumption and Production and Unsustainable Scarcity-Conflict Procreation, Consumption and Production.

04-36

Peak Resources: Every Nation and Planet Earth has a Finite amount of Non-Renewable Resources and Finite Level of Renewable Resources (Carrying Capacity).

06-07

Peak Resources Scarcity-Conflict Death Spiral: Direct and Indirect (Procreation, Production and Consumption Footprint) Conflict.

07-09

Scarcity: Humanity‘s Last Chapter: A Comprehensive Analysis of Non-renewable Natural Resource (NNR) Scarcity‘s Consequences.

09-22

Military Doctrine: Non-Renewable Scarcity and Conflict.

Resource

22-35

Military Appeals to American/World Citizens to ‗Walk their Talk‘ of ‗Supporting the Troops‘ and reducing Scarcity-Conflict threats to National Security; by massively reducing their energy consumption, by ―planting victory gardens, cutting down on fuel use, saving scrap metal and old rubber, sacrifices‖ and other examples of ―common sense and prudent lifestyle changes.‖

35-36

The Scarcity-Conflict Death Spiral on Steroids: Climate Change as Threat-Multiplier of Scarcity-Conflict Equation and possible near-term extinction threat in the absence of urgent immediate actions to eliminate carbon emissions.

37-47

Military Doctrine & Academic Theory: Climate Change and National Security: Climate Change acts as a Scarcity and Conflict Threat Multiplier of oil, water and food resource wars and mass migration.

37-41

Scientists: Climate Change is a Near-Term Extinction (NTE) Threat in absence of urgent immediate actions to massively reduce carbon emissions/end industrial civilization.

41-47

Anti-Growth Policies Required for National Security Imperative to Reduce Carbon Emissions aggravation of Scarcity – Conflict Climate Change National Security Threat and Near-Term Extinction.

47-59

Reduce Procreation to below Carrying Capacity: Every Child Increases a Parent‘s Carbon Footprint by a factor of 20: A parent can reduce his/her carbon footprint 19 times more by having one

47-48

and

Renewable

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10067402/Economic-case-to-stay-in-EU-is-overwhelming-saybusiness-leaders.html 3

fewer child than by all other energy efficiency actions the E.P.A. suggests combined. De-Industrialize: Reduce Consumption to Pre-Industrial levels: Only Civilization Collapse will prevent runaway global climate change: Industrial Civilization/Consumption Developmentism as Heat Engine Root cause of Scarcity-Conflict Climate ChangeNational Security Impending Near-term Extinction reality.

49-52

Relocalization, Decentralization, De-Industrialization

52-58

Primitivization: Mosuo: Primitive Ecocentric Gender-Balanced Sustainable Agrarian Culture with no murder, rape, jails, homeless or unemployment.

58-59

Citizen and Corporate Pro-Growth Actions and Policies Aggravating Climate Change Scarcity-Conflict Death Spiral on Steroids National Security Threat:

59-66

Natural Capital: Natural Capital is the source of all of life. The overexploitation, overproduction and overconsumption of natural capital above ecosystem carrying capacity levels, systematically reduces the ecosystem‘s carrying capacity, and activates the Scarcity-Conflict Death Spiral.

59-59

GDP/Economic Growth and energy consumption‘s aggravating/threat multiplier relationship to the national security threat of climate change (CO2 emissions).

59-64

GDP: Gross Domestic Product: Y = C + I + G + (X − M): speed of overexploitation of Natural Capital, by means of exploitative free market policies.

64-65

Post Peak-NNR Efforts to Increase GDP aggravates ScarcityConflict; driving Nation / Humanity faster to Scarcity-Conflict collision:

66-66

Media Pro-Growth Agenda and Censorship of Necessity of DeIndustrialization and Population Reduction Policies Required for National Security Imperative to Reduce Carbon Emissions aggravation of Scarcity – Conflict Climate Change National Security Threat and Near-Term Extinction.

66-

Corporate Media‘s Pro-Growth Agenda: Silence/Censorship/Noncoverage of Scientific study results advocating Sustainable Security (Walking the National Security – Scarcity & Conflict -- Talk to Support the Troops): ‗Procreate/Consume below carrying capacity‘

66-67

Corporate Media‘s Pro-Growth Scarcity-Conflict ‗If It bleeds, it leads‘ Agenda is the cause of Citizens Eco-Illiterate ignorance of how to contribute to Sustainable Security: Procreate and Consume below carrying capacity, to avoid scarcity induced resource war conflict; and elect Eco-Literate politicians to enact sustainable laws.

67-73

Affidavit of Lara Johnstone in Support of Charges of Bribery and Threat to National Security.

Affid. 01-12

Corporate Pro-Growth Agenda Conspiracy to Profit from bribing the public to engage in Unsustainable Scarcity-Conflict Procreation, Consumption and Production behaviour; by ignoring the role of GDP/economic growth and energy consumption‟s aggravation of the Climate Change Scarcity-Conflict Death Spiral on Steroids National Security Threat ―The economic case to stay in the EU is overwhelming. The creation of the Single Market was instigated by Britain, and is now the world‘s largest trading bloc, containing half a billion people with a GDP of £10 trillion. To Britain, membership is estimated to be worth between £31bn and £92bn per year in income gains, or between £1,200 to £3,500 for every household. What we should now be doing is fighting hard to deliver a more competitive Europe, to combat the criticism of those that champion our departure. We should push to strengthen and deepen the Single Market to include digital, energy, transport and telecoms, which could boost Britain‘s GDP by £110bn.‖ – Letters: The benefit of European Union membership outweighs the cost. ―How, then, does the universe of Capital relate to the form of Nation State in our era of global capitalism? Perhaps, this relationship is best designated as ‗auto-colonization‘: with the direct multinational functioning of Capital, we are no longer dealing with the standard opposition between metropolis and colonized countries; a global company as it were cuts its umbilical cord with its mother-nation and treats its country of origins as simply another territory to be colonized. This is what disturbs so much the patriotically oriented right-wing populists, from Le Pen to Buchanan: the fact that the new multinationals have towards the French or American local population exactly the same attitude as towards the population of Mexico, Brazil or Taiwan.‖ - Slavoj Zizek, Multiculturalism: The Cultural Logic of Multinational Capitalism4. ―For a long time the people who are on top of the social system have bought their way out of allot of the consequences of climate change, but that will change.‖ - Wesley Clark, Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, 1996-19995

The Scarcity-Conflict Death Spiral: Difference between Sustainable Peaceful Procreation, Consumption and Production and Unsustainable Scarcity-Conflict Procreation, Consumption and Production

Slavoj Žižek: Multiculturalism or the cultural logic of multinational capitalism, in: Razpol 10 - glasilo Freudovskega polja, Ljubljana 1997 http://www.soc.aau.dk/fileadmin/user_upload/kbm/VoF/ Kurser/2011/Multiculturalism/slavoj_zizek-multiculturalism-or-the-cultural-logic-of-multinationalcapitalism.pdf 4

General Clark: Climate Change will affect all levels of society http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkZKk8_d-t0

In Peace seekers have no plan for enduring peace6, Dr. Jack Alpert argues that Peaceniks failure to move society from conflict to peace, their establishment of never ending or honoured ―peace accords, moral codes, acts of economic justice, and environmental laws, are like traffic signals‖ which ―cause people to relinquish freedoms‖ but, ―do not stop (change) the behaviors that increase scarcity, conflict, and environmental destruction‖7: ―result from a faulty perception of what increases or decreases conflict. Where, peace seekers have acted as if conflict is caused by bad leadership maybe they should have acted as if trends in conflict are driven by trends in scarcity. Maybe they would have been more successful if they acted as if trends in scarcity are driven by the collective behaviors of 6 billion people. That while each individual acts benignly to achieve personal objectives the unintentional result is an increase in scarcity and conflict.‖ www.skil.org/position_papers_folder/Peaceniks_Wake_up.html Alpert, Jack (04/01/04): Footprint vs. Freedom: www.skil.org/position_papers_folder/Footprint_vs_freedom.html 6 7

Another reason for ignoring the above view of human conflict â&#x20AC;&#x201C; according to Dr. Alpert -- is that peace seekers, even when successful at restraining the police, military or mediating hostilities, do not change our course toward conflict. They only delay it. In the process, peace seekers consume the very energy required to change the things that would make societies head toward peace.

Peak Resources: Every Nation and Planet Earth has a Finite amount of Non-Renewable Resources and Finite Level of Renewable Resources (Carrying Capacity):

A nations non-renewable and renewable resources are a ‗commons‘ and increased population and/or consumption of resources can only occur up to the point of ‗carrying capacity‘ tipping points. Once ‗carrying capacity‘ laws of nature tipping points are breached -- Peak of Production, referred to as Peak Oil, or Peak NNR, etc -- resource scarcity occurs which – in the absence of equivalent voluntary population and consumption reduction - triggers resource war violence, which exponentially increases the problems of those tasked with ‗national security‘. There is a fundamental difference between the resource war violence – deaths (see black upside down bell curve – from temporary resource scarcity that results on the upward side of the Peak Oil/NNR resource curve (services per capita orange bell curve), and the resource war violence on the downslope of the curve. Notice how deaths increase subsequent to the peak of ‗services per capita‘.

Peak Resources Scarcity-Conflict Death Spiral: Direct and Indirect (Procreation, Production and Consumption Footprint) Conflict: In Human Predicament: Better Common Sense Required: The Future of Social Conflict8, Dr. Jack Alpert challenges us to answer two questions Corporate Oligarchs who profit from Unsustainable procreation (demand for more consumers), production and consumption, including its scarcity-conflict resource war consequences; do not want citizens, politicians, police, judges, prosecutors and those tasked with national security to ask themselves. Lets consider that Peace and conflict are defined not as descriptions of behaviour between nations, but as trends describing social conditions. Put differently: Conflict is not defined as the violence between neighbours and nations, but as the unwanted intrusion of one person‘s existence and consumption behaviour upon another person. There are two kinds of conflict: Direct: he took my car, he enslaved me, he beat me, he raped me, he killed me; and Indirect. Indirect intrusions are the by-product of other people's behaviour. Indirect: ‗All the trees on our island were consumed by our grandparents,‘ is an indirect intrusion of a past generation on a present one. ‗The rich people raised the price of gasoline and we can't afford it,‘ and ‗The government is offering people welfare to breed more children‘ are current economic and demographic intrusions by one present group on another present group. Free Trade enabling overexploitation, overproduction and overconsumption of a nation natural capital resources is an economic intrusion by one set of oligarchs upon another set of citizens whose lives depend on such natural capital. 8

youtu.be/sK8WxeGxkPk

System conflict is the sum of intrusions experienced by each constituent, summed over all the constituents. A measure of the existing global conflict is the sum of six billion sets of direct and indirect intrusions. A measure of the UK‘s conflict is the sum of 62 million sets of direct and indirect intrusions. Using this definition of conflict, any citizen, politician, policeman, judge or legislator sincerely concerned about finding out whether and how the United Kingdom‘s socio-economic and political system is moving towards peace or towards conflict; can do so, by determining the answers to the following questions: A.

Procreation Footprint: How many children per family leads to peace; or conversely how many children per family, contributes to greater resource scarcity, and exponential increase in conflict, i.e. an individuals‘ ‗breeding war combatant‘ status? [According to the research of Dr. Jack Alpert9, the global answer is one child per family leads to peace; two or more children leads to conflict]

Production/Carbon Footprint: How much exploitation and production of non-renewable and renewable natural resources relative to the nation‘s Natural Capital carrying capacity footprint leads to peace; or conversely how much of a nation‘s non-renewable and renewable natural resources can or should a corporation exploit into production of consumer goods, before such exploitation and production contributes to greater resource scarcity and exponential increase in conflict; i.e. a corporations ‗production combatant‘ status? [All utilization of nonrenewable natural resources— fossil fuels, metals, and minerals—at any level, contributes to scarcityconflict. Peaceful utilization of Aquatic, terrestrial, and atmospheric natural habitats requires that they be degraded only at levels less than or equal to the levels at which they are regenerated by Nature. Exploiting renewable resources above their capacity to regenerate is not sustainable and does not contribute to peaceful resource relations; i.e. contribute to scarcity-conflict10. See Carbon Footprint11]

Consumption/Carbon Footprint: How much consumption of nonrenewable and renewable natural resources relative to the nation‘s Natural Capital carrying capacity footprint leads to peace; or conversely

http://sqswans.weebly.com/human-predicament.html ―Sustainable natural resource utilization behavior involves the utilization of renewable natural resources— water, cropland, pastureland, forests, and wildlife—exclusively. Renewable natural resource reserves can be depleted only at levels less than or equal to the levels at which they are replenished by Nature. The utilization of nonrenewable natural resources—fossil fuels, metals, and minerals—at any level, is not sustainable. Aquatic, terrestrial, and atmospheric natural habitats can be degraded only at levels less than or equal to the levels at which they are regenerated by Nature. All other natural resource utilization behavior and all other natural habitat degradation are unsustainable—period.‖ (Sustainability Defined, by Chris Clugston, author: Scarcity) 11 http://www.carbonfootprint.com 9

how much consumption of non-renewable and renewable natural resources relative to the nation‘s Natural Capital carrying capacity footprint, contributes to greater resource scarcity, and exponential increase in conflict, i.e. an individuals ‗consumption combatant status‘? All consumption of nonrenewable natural resources—fossil fuels, metals, and minerals—at any level, contributes to scarcity-conflict. Peaceful consumption of Aquatic, terrestrial, and atmospheric natural habitats requires that they be degraded only at levels less than or equal to the levels at which they are regenerated by Nature. Exploiting renewable resources above their capacity to regenerate is not sustainable and does not contribute to peaceful resource relations; i.e. contribute to scarcityconflict12. [See Nation Footprint13; Finance Footprint14, Business Footprint15; Personal Footprint16] In the absence of the worlds political, economic and corporate leaders confronting and acknowledging the difference between sustainable peaceful consumption and procreation and unsustainable scarcity-conflict aggravating consumption and procreation; and implementing legislation and Jurisprudence in accordance thereto; Dr. Alpert provides proof how the global AnthroCorpocentric Jurisprudence Suicide Freight Train has as much chance of muddling through the coming ‗Falling Man Syndrome‘ Crisis of Conflict, as an individual sitting in an unbelted car crash. (Non-Linearity and Social Conflict17) Dr. Alpert compares humanity‘s refusal to confront the difference between sustainable peaceful and unsustainable scarcity-conflict driven consumption and procreation, by believing that ―in 200 years, our endorsement of the Inalienable Right to Breed and consume has resulted in the exponential consumption of over half of the Earth's resources, and nothing bad has happened yet‖; to a man who has fallen out of a 150 story building, passing the window of the 60 th story, calling out to a friend ―‗I‘ve fallen 90 stories in the past 5 seconds and nothing bad has happened yet‖.

Scarcity: Humanity‟s Last Chapter: A Comprehensive Analysis of Nonrenewable Natural Resource (NNR) Scarcity‟s Consequences:

Ibid: Sustainability Defined, by Chris Clugston, author: Scarcity http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/footprint_for_nations/ 14 http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/footprint_for_finance/ 15 http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/footprint_for_business/ 16 http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/personal_footprint/ and http://www.myfootprint.org/ 17 youtu.be/W5capqGod9A 12 13

AnthroCorpocentric18 Flat Earth Society19 Jurisprudence views the world from a firmly entrenched inaccurate Anthropocentric (human-centred) perspective, where there is always a brighter future, because the implicit assumption of our Anthropocentric political, economic and legal worldview is that there will always be ―enough‖ Non Renewable Natural Resources (NNR‗s) to enable a brighter future, and all politics and economics needs to concern itself with, is how to use these NNR‗s to provide ever improving material living standards for our ever-expanding global population20. From a broader Ecocentric21 Finite Resource Scarcity perspective, beyond Peak NNR22, there is no hope for a brighter future, the future is one of depletion, austerity, resource wars & socio-economic and political collapse;23 because the fundamental assumption of ever-increasing NNR‗s, underlying our limited AnthroCorpocentric jurisprudence perspective is inaccurate.24 Peak Oil is the end of cheap oil, it is the point where every barrel of oil is harder to find, more expensive to extract, and more valuable to whoever owns or controls it. As early as 2000, geological experts warned Peak Oil would occur sometime between 2000 and 200725. Cheap oil is the oxygen of the ―economic growth‖ 26 global economic system and industrial food production27. Scarcity: Overview:

Clugston (2012) (p.127): ―The AnthroCorpocentric perspective considers the philosophy, processes, and activities by which natural resource inputs to a society‗s economy are converted into goods and services outputs (wealth creation). It also considers the philosophy, processes, and activities by which goods and services (wealth) are allocated among a society‗s population. The fundamental assumption underlying the prevailing AnthroCorpocentric perspective is that notwithstanding periodic temporary shortfalls, natural resource inputs and natural habitat waste absorption capacities will remain sufficient to perpetuate global industrialism indefinitely.‗ – Scarcity, Clugston Chris (pg. 127) 19 Bartlett (1993) (1996/09) (1999/01) (2002); Hardin (1999); 20 Hardin (1985); Bartlett (2006/09); Guillebaud (2007); Leahy (2003) 21 ―The ecological perspective considers natural resource inputs and natural habitat waste absorption capacities as the ultimate limiting factors governing a society‗s economic/political processes and activities, its attainable economic output (GDP) level, and its attainable level of societal wellbeing—i.e., the material living standards enjoyed by the society‗s population.‖ – Scarcity, Clugston C (127) 22 Bartlett (2006/09); Clugston (2012): Peak NNR: ―NNRs are finite; and as their name implies, NNR reserves are not replenished on a time scale that is relevant to humans. More unfortunately, economically viable supplies associated with the vast majority of NNRs that enable our industrialized way of life are becoming increasingly scarce, both domestically (US) and globally. While there will always be ―plenty of NNR‘s in the ground, there will not always be ―plenty of economically viable NNR‘s in the ground. In fact, there are ―no longer enough economically viable NNR‘s in the ground to enable continuous improvement in human societal wellbeing at historical rates.‖ –Clugston, C: Scarcity 23 Scarcity (p.4) 24 Clugston Chris: Scarcity: Humanity‗s Final Chapter: The realities, choices and likely outcomes associated with ever-increasing non-renewable natural resource scarcity, page 4 25 On February 11, 2006 Deffeyes claimed world oil production peaked on December 16, 2005 26 Deffeyes (2006): "The economists all think that if you show up at the cashier's cage with enough currency, God will put more oil in ground." 27 Ruppert (2004): p.24: ―We eat oil. It is a little known fact that for every 1 calorie of food energy produced, 10 calories of hydrocarbons are consumed.‗ 18

Mr. Chris Clugston‘s28 Domestic (US) & Global NNR Scarcity Analysis is based upon his analysis of the criticality and scarcity associated with each of the 89 analyzed NNRs, using data from USGS, EIA, BEA, BLS, Fed, CBO, FBI, IEA, UN, World Bank, etc; and concludes in general that ―absent some combination of immediate and drastic reductions in our global NNR utilization levels, ... we will experience escalating international and intranational conflicts during the coming decades over increasingly scarce NNR‗s, which will devolve into global societal collapse, almost certainly by the year 2050.‖29 Scarcity‘s Global NNR Scarcity Analysis (pg.51-59) (pg 41-4930) summarizes global criticality and scarcity associated with each of the 89 analyzed NNR‘s: (a) An overwhelming majority, 63 of the 89 analyzed NNRs, were considered ―scarce‖ globally in 2008, immediately prior to the Great Recession; (b) A significant number, 28 of the 89 analyzed NNRs have peaked: are ―almost certain‖ to remain scarce permanently going forward; and a sizeable number, 16 of the 89 analyzed NNRs, will ―likely‖ remain scarce permanently; and (c) Global extraction/production levels associated with 39 of the 89 analyzed NNRs, are considered ―at risk‖. NNR‘s at risk – i.e. years to global exhaustion of reserves – are: (a) Antimony: 8 yrs (used for starter lights ignition batteries in cars and trucks; (b) Bauxite: 40 years (only economically viable feedstock for aluminium); (c) Bismuth: 17 years (non-toxic substitute for lead in solder and plumbing fixtures); (d) Cadmium: 25 years; (e) Chromium: 26 years (stainless steel, jet engines and gas turbines); (f) Coal: 40 years (electricity generation); (g) Cobalt: 26 years (gas turbine blades, jet aircraft engines, batteries); (h) Copper: 27 years; (i) Fluorspar: 23 years (feedstock for fluorine bearing chemicals, aluminium and uranium processing); (j) Graphite (Natural): 23 years; (k) Iron Ore: 15 years (only feedstock for iron and steel); (l) Lead: 17 years; (m) Lithium: 8 years (aircraft parts, mobile phones, batteries for electrical vehicles); (n) Manganese: 17 years (stainless steel, gasoline additive, dry cell batteries); (o) Molybdenum: 20 years (aircraft parts, electrical contacts, industrial motors, tool steels); (p) Natural Gas: 34 years; (q) Nickel: 30 years; (r) Niobium: 15 years (jet and rocket engines, turbines, superconducting magnets); (s) Oil: 39 years; (t) Rhenium: 22 years (petroleum refining, jet engines, gas turbine blades); (u) Silver: 11 years; (v) Thalium: 38 years; (w) Tin: 18 years; (x) Tungsten: 32 years; (y) Uranium: 34 years (primary energy source, weapons); (z) Zinc: 13 years; (aa) Zirconium: 19 years (nuclear power plants, jet engines, gas turbine blades).

Clugston, Chris: Scarcity: Humanity‗s Final Chapter: The realities, choices and likely outcomes associated with ever-increasing non-renewable natural resource scarcity (Booklocker.com Inc 2012). Scarcity is a comprehensive, multidisciplinary assessment of the realities, choices, and likely outcomes associated with everincreasing non-renewable natural resource (NNR) scarcity. NNRs are the fossil fuels, metals, and non-metallic minerals that enable our industrialized existence. 29 Clugston, C: Scarcity: Preface, pg. ix 30 issuu.com/js-ror/docs/clugston_scarcity_pg31-55 28

Scarcity concludes ―Our Next Normal is Catastrophe‖: Our AnthroCorpocentric worldview does not recognize that ―from a broader ecological perspective, all human economics and politics are irrelevant,‖ to ―paraphrase Thoreau, we are ‗thrashing at the economic and political branches of our predicament, rather than hacking at the ecological root.‘‖31 ―Because the underlying cause associated with our transition from prosperity to austerity is ecological (geological), not economic or political, our incessant barrage of economic and political ―fixes‖ are misguided and inconsequential. Our national economies are not ―broken‖; they are ―dying of slow starvation‖ for lack of sufficient economically viable NNR inputs. ―Our industrial lifestyle paradigm, which is enabled by enormous quantities of finite, non-replenishing, and increasingly scarce NNRs, is unsustainable, i.e. physically impossible – going forward.32 ―Global humanity‗s steadily deteriorating condition will culminate in self-inflicted global societal collapse, almost certainly by the year 2050. We will not accept gracefully our new normal of ever-increasing, geologically-imposed austerity; nor will we suffer voluntarily the horrifically painful population level reductions and material living standard degradation associated with our inevitable transition to a sustainable, pre-industrial lifestyle paradigm. ―All industrialized and industrializing nations, irrespective of their economic and political orientations, are unsustainable and will collapse in the not-too-distant future as a consequence of their dependence upon increasingly scarce NNRs. We can voluntarily reduce population and consumption, or NNR scarcity depletion will force it upon us, in our inevitable transition to a sustainable, pre-industrial lifestyle paradigm. Natural Resources and Human Evolution: During the past 2+ million years, humanity—Homo sapiens and our hominid predecessors—evolved through three major lifestyle paradigms: hunter-gatherer, agrarian, and industrial. Each of the three paradigms is readily distinguishable from the other two in terms of its worldview, natural resource utilization behavior, and resulting level of societal wellbeing—i.e., attainable population levels and material living standards. The Hunter-Gatherer Lifestyle Paradigm: The hunter-gatherer (HG) lifestyle paradigm spanned over 2 million years, from the time that our hominid ancestors first stood erect on the continent of Africa to 31 32

Clugston, C: Scarcity: Preface, pg. 103-104 Clugston, C: Scarcity: Preface, pg. 103-104

approximately 8,000 BC. HG societies consisted of small nomadic clans, typically numbering between 50 and 100 individuals, who subsisted primarily on naturally occurring vegetation and wildlife. The HG lifestyle can best be described as subsistence living for a relatively constant population that probably never exceeded 5 million globally. Hunter-gatherers produced few manmade goods beyond the necessities required for their immediate survival, and they generated no appreciable wealth surplus. The HG worldview revered Nature as the provider of life and subsistence, a perspective that fostered a passive lifestyle orientation through which huntergatherers sought to liveâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;albeit somewhat exploitativelyâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;within the environmental context defined by Nature. The HG resource mix consisted almost entirely of renewable natural resources such as water and naturally occurring edible plant life and wildlife.

The Agrarian Lifestyle Paradigm: The agrarian lifestyle paradigm commenced in approximately 8,000 BC and lasted until approximately 1700 AD, when England initiated what was to become the industrial revolution. Agrarian societies existed primarily by raising cultivated crops and domesticated livestock.

The agrarian worldview perceived Nature as something to be augmented through human effort, by domesticating naturally occurring plant and animal species. The agrarian lifestyle orientation was proactive in the sense that it sought to improve upon what Nature provided. While modest wealth surpluses were sometimes generated by agrarian populations, agrarian existence typically offered little more in the way of material living standards for the vast majority of agrarian populations than did the HG lifestyle— although the global agrarian population did increase significantly, reaching nearly 800 million by 1750 AD. The agrarian resource mix consisted primarily of RNRs, which were increasingly overexploited by ever-expanding, permanently-settled agrarian populations. As agrarian cultivation and grazing practices became increasingly intensive, renewable natural resource reserves were increasingly depleted and natural habitats were increasingly degraded as well. The Industrial Lifestyle Paradigm: The inception of the industrial lifestyle paradigm occurred with England‘s industrial revolution in the early 18th century, less than 300 years ago. Today, over 1.5 billion people—approximately 22% of the world‘s 6.9 billion total population—is considered ―industrialized‖; and nearly three times that many people actively aspire to an industrialized way of life. Our industrialized world is characterized by an incomprehensibly complex mosaic of interdependent yet independently operating human and non-human entities and infrastructure. These entities must function continuously, efficiently, and collectively at the local, regional, national, and global levels in order to convert natural resource inputs into the myriad goods and services that enable our modern industrial way of life. [Note that failures within the industrial mosaic can disrupt, temporarily or permanently, the flow of societal essentials—water, food, energy, shelter, and clothing—to broad segments of our global population.] Tremendous wealth surpluses are typically generated by industrialized societies; such wealth surpluses are actually required to enable the historically unprecedented material living standards enjoyed by increasingly large segments of ever-expanding industrialized populations. The industrialized worldview perceives Nature as something to be harnessed through industrial processes and infrastructure, in order to enhance the human condition. It is an exploitive worldview that seeks to use natural resources and habitats as the means to continuously improve human societal wellbeing—that is,

to provide continuously improving material living standards for ever-increasing numbers of ever-expanding human populations. The resource mix associated with today‘s industrialized societies is heavily skewed toward nonrenewable natural resources, which, in addition to renewable natural resources and natural habitats, have been increasingly overexploited since the dawn of the industrial revolution. It is precisely this persistent overexploitation of natural resources and natural habitats—especially NNRs—that has enabled the ―success‖ associated with the industrial lifestyle paradigm—success being defined here as continuous increases in both human population levels and human material living standards. Nonrenewable Natural Resources—the Enablers of Industrialization: Our industrial lifestyle paradigm is enabled by nonrenewable natural resources (NNRs)—energy resources, metals, and minerals. Both the support infrastructure within industrialized nations and the raw material inputs into industrialized economies consist almost entirely of NNRs; NNRs are the primary sources of the tremendous wealth surpluses required to perpetuate industrialized societies. As a case in point, the percentage of NNR inputs into the US economy increased from less than 10% in the year 1800, which corresponds roughly with the inception of the American industrial revolution, to approximately 95% today. Between 1800 and today, America‘s total annual NNR utilization level increased from approximately 4 million tons to nearly 7 billion tons—an increase of over 1700 times! In the absence of enormous and ever-increasing NNR supplies, the 1.2 billion people who currently enjoy an industrialized way of life will cease to do so; and the billions of people aspiring to an industrialized way of life will fail to realize their goal. NNR Scarcity: As their name implies, NNRs are finite—they are not replenished by Nature; and they are scarce—economically viable NNR deposits are rare. Persistent extraction (production) will therefore deplete recoverable NNR reserves to exhaustion. [Note: the terms NNR ―production‖ and NNR ―extraction‖ are used interchangeably throughout the paper. Although ―extraction‖ is the proper term—humans do not produce NNRs—the term ―production‖ has gained wide acceptance within the NNR extraction industries.] The typical NNR depletion cycle is characterized by: a period of ―continuously more and more‖, as the easily accessible, high quality, low cost resources are extracted; followed by a ―supply peak‖,8 or maximum attainable extraction level; followed by a

period of ―continuously less and less‖, as the less accessible, lower quality, higher cost resources are extracted. Since the inception of our industrial revolution, humanity has been the beneficiary of ―continuously more and more‖ with respect to available NNR supplies. Unfortunately, in the process of reaping the benefits associated with ―continuously more and more‖, we have been eliminating—persistently and systematically—the very natural resources upon which our industrialized way of life depends. Increasingly, global NNR supplies are transitioning from ―continuously more and more‖ to ―continuously less and less‖, as they peak and go into terminal decline. As a result, NNRs are becoming increasingly scarce—ever-tightening global NNR supplies are struggling to keep pace with ever-increasing global demand.

The Analysis: The following Global Nonrenewable Natural Resource Scarcity Assessment quantifies the magnitude associated with increasing global NNR scarcity and the probabilities associated with imminent and permanent global NNR supply shortfalls. The assessment consists of two analyses, both of which are based on US Geological Survey (USGS) and US Energy Information Administration (EIA) data. 16

The Global NNR Scarcity Analysis assesses the incidence of global scarcity associated with each of 57 NNRs during the period of global economic growth (20002008) prior to the Great Recession. The Global NNR Supply Shortfall Analysis assesses the probability of a permanent global supply shortfall associated with each of 26 NNRs between now and the year 2030. Global NNR Supply Shortfall Analysis Findings: Fifty (50) of the 57 NNRs (88%) analyzed in the Global NNR Scarcity Analysis experienced global scarcity—and therefore experienced temporary (at least) global supply shortfalls—during the 2000-2008 period. Twenty three (23) of the 26 NNRs (88%) analyzed in the Global NNR Supply Shortfall Analysis are likely to experience permanent global supply shortfalls by the year 2030. Each permanent NNR supply shortfall represents another crack in the foundation of our globalizing industrial lifestyle paradigm; at issue is which crack or combination of cracks will cause the structure to collapse? Permanent global supply shortfalls associated with a single critical NNR or with a very few secondary NNRs can be sufficient to cause significant lifestyle disruptions—population level reductions and/or material living standard degradation. A permanent shortfall in the global supply of oil, for example, would be sufficient to cause significant local, national, and/or global lifestyle disruptions, or outright global societal collapse; as would permanent global supply shortfalls associated with 2-3 critical NNRs such as potassium, phosphate rock, and (fixed) nitrogen; as would concurrent permanent global supply shortfalls associated with 4-5 secondary NNRs such as the alloys, catalysts, and reagents that enable the effective use of critical NNRs. Given our vulnerability to an ever-increasing number of imminent and permanent global NNR supply shortfalls, the likelihood that the mix and volume of shortfalls will reach their ―critical mass‖ is a question of ―when‖, not ―if‖. Implications of Increasing Global NNR Scarcity: Increasing NNR Scarcity: Available supplies associated with an overwhelming majority of NNRs—including bauxite, copper, iron ore, magnesium, manganese, nickel, phosphate rock, potash, rare earth metals, tin, and zinc—have reached their domestic US peak extraction levels, and are in terminal decline.16 Based on the evidence presented above, available supplies associated with a vast majority of NNRs are becoming increasingly scarce globally as well. 17

Because global NNR supplies are transitioning from ―continuously more and more‖ to ―continuously less and less‖, our global societal wellbeing levels— our economic activity levels, population levels, and material living standards—are transitioning from ―continuously more and more‖ to ―continuously less and less‖ as well. Sustainability is Inevitable: ―Business as usual‖ (industrialism), ―stasis‖ (no growth), ―downscaling‖ (reducing NNR utilization), and ―moving toward sustainability‖ (feel good initiatives) are not options; we will be sustainable… Unintended Consequences: It is difficult to argue that our incessant quest for global industrialization and the natural resource utilization behavior that enables our quest are inherently evil. We have simply applied our everexpanding knowledge and technology over the past several centuries toward dramatically improving our level of societal wellbeing, through our ever-increasing utilization of NNRs. However, despite our possibly justifiable naïveté during our meteoric rise to ―exceptionalism‖, and despite the fact that our predicament was undoubtedly an unintended consequence of our efforts to continuously improve the material living standards enjoyed by our ever-expanding global population; globally available, economically viable supplies associated with the NNRs required to perpetuate our industrial lifestyle paradigm will not be sufficient going forward.

Our Transition to Sustainability: Humanity‘s transition to a sustainable lifestyle paradigm, within which a drastically reduced human population will rely exclusively on renewable natural resources (RNRs)—water, soil (farmland), forests, and other naturally occurring biota—is therefore inevitable. Our choice is not whether we ―wish to be sustainable‖; our choice involves the process by which we ―will become sustainable‖. We can choose to alter fundamentally our existing unsustainable natural resource utilization behavior and transition voluntarily to a sustainable lifestyle paradigm over the next several decades. In the process, we would cooperate globally in utilizing remaining accessible NNRs to orchestrate a relatively gradual—but horrifically painful nonetheless—transition, thereby optimizing our population level and material living standards both during our transition and at sustainability. Or, we can refrain from taking preemptive action and allow Nature to orchestrate our transition to sustainability through societal collapse, thereby experiencing catastrophic reductions in our population level and material living standards. The Squeeze is On: It would be convenient if our unraveling were to occur in 1,000 years, or 500 years, or even 50 years. We could then dismiss it as a concern for future generations and go busily about improving our national and global societal wellbeing levels in the meantime. Unfortunately, this is not the case. The Great Recession was a tangible manifestation of our predicament—NNR scarcity was epidemic in 2008, both domestically (US) and globally. Our unraveling is in process. At present, however, only an extremely small minority of the global populace understands that NNR scarcity is the fundamental cause underlying our predicament and its derivative economic and political problems. When the general public becomes aware of this fact and of the fact that NNR scarcity is a permanent, ever-increasing, and unsolvable phenomenon, collapse will ensue in short order. Public Ignorance: Historically, globally available, economically viable supplies associated with most NNRs were generally sufficient; NNR scarcity, when it occurred, was a temporary phenomenon. Incremental economically viable NNR supplies were available to be brought online, thereby restoring economic output (GDP) and growth to ―expected‖ levels. Because episodes of NNR scarcity have occurred periodically since the dawn of our industrial revolution, they are considered temporary ―inconveniences‖ associated with the boom phases of ―normal‖ commodity boom/bust cycles. Today, despite the fact that NNR scarcity is becoming increasingly prevalent—as clearly demonstrated by the NNR Scarcity Analysis—and despite the fact that the

impact associated with NNR scarcity has certainly been felt—as an underlying cause of the Great Recession—the general public remains almost completely unaware. This is understandable, as it is obviously in nobody‘s interest to see humanity fail. Our opinion leaders—i.e., the political, economic, and other societal elites who have the greatest vested interest in preserving the status quo—continue to preach that historically robust levels of economic growth can be sustained forever. Some of our opinion leaders may still believe this to be true, although it is difficult to believe that many or most do. [There currently exists considerable speculation regarding the extent to which our opinion leaders actually understand our predicament and its consequences, and are merely conducting a charade in order to perpetuate ―business as usual‖, from which most of them benefit disproportionately, for as long as possible. At the end of the day, the awareness levels and motives associated with our opinion leaders are irrelevant; the outcome—societal collapse—remains unchanged.] The general public—given their cornucopian worldview and their almost complete lack of understanding regarding the enablers of their industrialized lifestyles— adheres steadfastly to the notion that ―every generation will have it better than the last‖. The vast majority of the general public undoubtedly still believes this to be true, despite stagnant or declining material living standards in much of the industrialized world. So long as myth supersedes reality and the general public remains ignorant regarding the nature of our predicament and of the fact that our predicament cannot be solved, complete societal collapse is unlikely. It is likely, however, that as our situation devolves, the general public will become increasingly frustrated, angry, and scared. ―We‖ will blame ―them‖—the government, corporations, foreigners, capitalists, communists, Christians, Muslims, the rich, the poor, anybody who is not ―us‖—for our continuously deteriorating circumstances. And we will become increasingly susceptible to the empty rhetoric of Hitleresque demagogues who promise—and fail—to restore ―normalcy‖, at the expense of our remaining freedoms. Through their ignorance, the general public will exacerbate our already deteriorating situation. Public Awareness: Within the next few years, however, NNR scarcity will become: 

―Noticeable‖—NNR supplies will become increasingly constrained and prices will rise continuously; then



―Inconvenient‖—periodic and temporary shortages and rationing associated with NNRs and derived goods and services will occur with increasing frequency; then



―Disruptive‖—shortages and rationing associated with ever-increasing numbers of NNRs and derived goods and services will become permanent; and finally,



―Debilitating‖—supplies associated with ever-increasing numbers of NNRs and derived goods and services will become permanently unavailable.

As this scenario unfolds, increasingly large segments of humanity will become aware of the fact that NNRs enable our industrialized way of life, and that everincreasing NNR scarcity is the fundamental cause underlying our continuously declining economic output (GDP) and societal wellbeing levels, both domestically (US) and, by that time, globally as well. Historically prevalent public attitudes of generosity and forbearance, which were made possible by abundant and cheap NNRs during our epoch of ―continuously more and more‖, will be displaced by public intolerance: 

Childbirth will be condemned rather than celebrated;



All immigration will be outlawed;



Traditionally unquestioned resource uses—from ―social entitlements‖ and universally accessible healthcare, to professional sports and cosmetics—will be considered ―unfair‖ or ―wasteful‖, and ultimately eliminated; and



―Excessive wealth‖ will be appropriated for ―the public good‖.

Ultimately, the general public will become aware of the fact that our predicament has no solution; and the following ―trigger‖ conditions for societal collapse will be met: NNR scarcity will become ―disruptive‖—the available mix and levels associated with economically viable NNRs and derived goods and services will become insufficient to enable ―tolerable‖ day-to-day existence; and sufficiently large segments of society will: 

Become aware of the fact that ever-increasing NNR scarcity is a permanent phenomenon; &



Acknowledge the fact that our predicament cannot be ―fixed‖; ―continuously less and less‖—continuously declining societal wellbeing—is our new reality.

Previously sporadic social unrest and resource wars will degenerate—seemingly instantaneously—into full fledged conflicts among nations, classes, and ultimately individuals for remaining natural resources and real wealth. It will become universally understood that the only way to ―stay even‖ within a continuously contracting operating environment—much less to improve one‘s lot—is to take from 21

somebody else. Life will become a ―negative sum game‖ within the ―shrinking pie‖ of ―continuously less and less‖. Social institutions will dissolve; law and order will cease to exist; and chaos will fill the void— nations will collapse. Given that half of the 89 analyzed NNRs are either likely or almost certain to remain scarce permanently at the global level; that no extraterrestrial source NNR imports exists for the world as a whole, and that the global industrialized / industrializing population has increased nearly 5 fold since 1975… …it is highly likely that the interval between global societal wellbeing ―divergence‖ in 2008 and global societal collapse will be 35 years or less. Humanity's Predicament: During the course of our unrelenting pursuit of global industrialization, and our consequent ever-increasing utilization of the earth‘s increasingly scarce NNRs, we have been eliminating— persistently and systematically—the very natural resources upon which our industrialized way of life and our very existence depend. Ironically, the natural resource utilization behavior that has enabled our historically unprecedented ―success‖—our industrial lifestyle paradigm—and that is essential to our continued success, is also pushing us toward our imminent demise. This is humanity‘s predicament. Humanity's Limited Perspective: To date, our distorted cornucopian worldview and limited anthropocentric perspective have rendered us incapable of understanding our predicament and its fundamental cause, which is ecological—ever-increasing NNR scarcity—not economic or political. The economic and political problems with which we concern ourselves are merely manifestations of our predicament—they are symptoms, not the disease. Because none of the economic and political expedients that we employ to solve these problems can create additional NNRs, our attempted economic and political ―solutions‖ are irrelevant. Metaphorically, the well is running dry, yet we insist on tinkering with the pump.

Military Doctrine: Non-Renewable and Renewable Resource Scarcity and Conflict: ―There is also a new and different threat to our national security emerging—the destruction of our environment. The defense establishment has a clear stake in this growing threat... one of our key national security objectives must be to reverse the

accelerating pace of environmental destruction.‖ - Senator Sam Nunn (D-GA), Senate, June 28, 1990 *** ―According to a growing body of literature, scarcity of freshwater to meet the many needs of Third World countries is rapidly escalating. Furthermore, many of the remaining exploitable sources of freshwater are in river basins shared by two or more sovereign states. These facts present the potential for violent conflict over water unless affected states can develop and use their common water resources in a cooperative, sustainable, and equitable manner. The United States, in its National Security Strategy and Foreign Affairs Policy, has called attention to the problem of resource scarcity as having important implications for American security.‖33 ***

―The effect of environmental problems on national security, now commonly referred to as "environmental security," is important to the US military. The concept first appeared in the 1991 National LTC Kurt F. Ubbelohde (10 April 2000): Freshwater Scarcity in the Nile River Basin, US Army War College http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA378148 33

Security Strategy (NSS), when President Bush recognized that the failure to competently manage natural resources could contribute to potential conflict.34 The 1993 National Security Strategy echoed this concern and included the environment as an element of economic power.35 When A National Security Strategy of Engagement and Enlargement was published in February 1996, it amplified the importance of the environment as a component of United States national security even further.36 The 1996 NSS recognizes that competition for natural resources "is already a very real risk to regional stability around the world."37 It also states that national and international environmental degradation poses a direct threat to economic growth and to global and national security.38 Thus, as one of the institutions charged with protecting our national security, the US military also should be concerned with all aspects of environmental security.â&#x20AC;&#x2013; 39

***

â&#x20AC;&#x2022;Environmental issues can adversely influence our national security in two important ways. One of these is potential or actual conflict between nations or groups that can arise as a result of disputes over natural resources or transnational National Security Strategy of the United States, Washington, DC, US Gov Printing Office, 1991. National Security Strategy of the United States, Washington, DC, US Gov Printing Office, 1993 36 A National Security Strategy of Engagement and Enlargement, Washington, DC, US Government Printing Office, February 1996. 37 Ibid., at 26. 38 Ibid., at 30. 39 Colonel Brian X. Bush (13 March 1997): Promoting Environmental Security during Contingency Operations; US Army War College http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA326869 34 35

environmental problems. A second way that environmental issues can directly affect national security is by destabilizing governments or institutions in a country afflicted with environmental degradation. Haiti is a good example. As early as 1978, the President's Council on Environmental Quality noted that deforestation in Haiti was almost complete and then predicted that social disruption and instability would soon follow.40 It took 16 more years and a military overthrow of duly elected President Aristide to spark renewed US military involvement in Haiti. However, it is clear that the environmental devastation of that country's forests, soil and water supplies created a cause and effect between environmental issues and Haiti's economic deprivation, massive migration and the basic instability of virtually every economic or governmental institution in the country.â&#x20AC;&#x2013;41

[2] 1974: NSSM 200: National Security Study Memorandum: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth For U.S. Security and Overseas Interests (The Kissinger Report)42: Rapid population growth adversely affects every aspect of economic and social progress in developing countries. It absorbs large amounts of resources needed for more productive investment in development. It requires greater expenditures for health, education and other social services, particularly in urban areas. It increases the dependency load per worker so that a high fraction of the output of the productive age group is needed to support dependents. It reduces family savings and domestic investment. It increases existing severe pressures on limited agricultural land in countries where the world's "poverty problem" is concentrated. It creates a need for use of large amounts of scarce foreign exchange for food imports (or the loss of food surpluses for export). Finally, it intensifies the already severe unemployment and underemployment problems of many developing countries where not enough productive jobs are created to absorb the annual increments to the labor force. Even in countries with good resource/population ratios, rapid population growth causes problems for several reasons: First, large capital investments generally are required to exploit unused resources. Second, some countries already have high and growing unemployment and lack the means to train new entrants to their labor force. Third, there are long delays between starting effective family planning programs and reducing fertility, and even longer delays between reductions in fertility and population stabilization. Hence there is substantial danger of vastly overshooting population targets if population growth is not moderated in the near future. [..] Moderation of population growth offers benefits in terms of resources saved for investment and/or higher per capita Environmental Quality. 1978 Annual Report on the Environment Washington: Council on Environmental Quality, Washington, DC, US Government Printing Office, 1978. 41 Colonel Brian X. Bush (13 March 1997): Promoting Environmental Security during Contingency Operations; US Army War College http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA326869 42 http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PCAAB500.pdf 40

consumption. If resource requirements to support fewer children are reduced and the funds now allocated for construction of schools, houses, hospitals and other essential facilities are invested in productive activities, the impact on the growth of GNP and per capita income may be significant. In addition, economic and social progress resulting from population control will further contribute to the decline in fertility rates. The relationship is reciprocal, and can take the form of either a vicious or a virtuous circle. Implications of Population Pressures for National Security It seems well understood that the impact of population factors on the subjects already considered -development, food requirements, resources, environment -- adversely affects the welfare and progress of countries in which we have a friendly interest and thus indirectly adversely affects broad U.S. interests as well. [..] A recent study* of forty-five local conflicts involving Third World countries examined the ways in which population factors affect the initiation and course of a conflict in different situations. The study reached two major conclusions: 1. ". . . population factors are indeed critical in, and often determinants of, violent conflict in developing areas. Segmental (religious, social, racial) differences, migration, rapid population growth, differential levels of knowledge and skills, rural/urban differences, population pressure and the special location of population in relation to resources -in this rough order of importance -all appear to be important contributions to conflict and violence... 2. Clearly, conflicts which are regarded in primarily political terms often have demographic roots: Recognition of these relationships appears crucial to any understanding or prevention of such hostilities." [..] Professor Philip Hauser of the University of Chicago has suggested the concept of "population complosion" to describe the situation in many developing countries when (a) more and more people are born into or move into and are compressed in the same living space under (b) conditions and irritations of different races, colours, religions, languages, or cultural backgrounds, often with differential rates of population growth among these groups, and (c) with the frustrations of failure to achieve their aspirations for better standards of living for themselves or their children. To these may be added pressures for and actual international migration. These population factors appear to have a multiplying effect on other factors involved in situations of incipient violence. These adverse conditions appear to contribute frequently to harmful developments of a political nature: Juvenile delinquency, thievery and other crimes, organized brigandry, kidnapping and terrorism, food riots, other outbreaks of violence; guerrilla warfare, communal violence, separatist movements, revolutionary movements and counter-revolutionary coupe. All of these bear upon the weakening or collapse of local, state, or national government functions.

Beyond national boundaries, population factors appear to have had operative roles in some past politically disturbing legal or illegal mass migrations, border incidents, and wars. If current increased population pressures continue they may have greater potential for future disruption in foreign relations. Perhaps most important, in the last decade population factors have impacted more severely than before on availabilities of agricultural land and resources, industrialization, pollution and the environment. All this is occurring at a time when international communications have created rising expectations which are being frustrated by slow development and inequalities of distribution. Population growth and inadequate resources. Where population size is greater than available resources, or is expanding more rapidly than the available resources, there is a tendency toward internal disorders and violence and, sometimes, disruptive international policies or violence. The higher the rate of growth, the more salient a factor population increase appears to be. A sense of increasing crowding, real or perceived, seems to generate such tendencies, especially if it seems to thwart obtaining desired personal or national goals. 2. Populations with a high proportion of growth. The young people, who are in much higher proportions in many LDCs, are likely to be more volatile, unstable, prone to extremes, alienation and violence than an older population. These young people can more readily be persuaded to attack the legal institutions of the government or real property of the "establishment," "imperialists," multinational corporations, or other ── often foreign ── influences blamed for their troubles. 3. Population factors with social cleavages. When adverse population factors of growth, movement, density, excess, or pressure coincide with racial, religious, color, linguistic, cultural, or other social cleavages, there will develop the most potentially explosive situations for internal disorder, perhaps with external effects. When such factors exist together with the reality or sense of relative deprivation among different groups within the same country or in relation to other countries or peoples, the probability of violence increases significantly.

[3] Butts, Kent (25 April 1994): Environmental Security: A DOD Partnership for Peace43; US Army War College: [Report on the Dept of Defense effort to create a Proactive Environmental Security Peace Strategy as part of the Fifth Senior Environmental Leadership Conference.] ―Environmental degradation imperils nations' most fundamental aspect of security by undermining the natural support systems on which all of human activity depends.‖ - Michael Renner, 198944

Butts, Kent Hughes (25 April 1994): Environmental Security: A DoD Partnership for Peace http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/PUB339.pdf 43

The DOD environmental security mission has its roots in the fact that environmental problems that lead to instability and contention are being ignored, and U.S. combat forces are becoming involved in the resulting conflict. In addition, DOD's environmental security mission supports the National Security Strategy (NSS) of the United States and must be understood in that context. As stated by the National Security Strategy, "The stress from environmental challenges is already contributing to political conflict." Recognizing the importance of environmental issues to U.S. national security interests, the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Environmental Security defined DOD's role in environmental security to include "mitigating the impacts of adverse environmental actions leading to international instability."45 Instability and conflict often result from the poverty created by the economic regression of resource depletion or scarcity. The abuse of power by the leaders of many developing countries has frequently manifested itself in exploitive resource management practices, a wasting away of the economic infrastructure, human suffering and ethnic-based competition for increasingly scarce resources, and, ultimately, to conflict. [..] The global population has grown geometrically and will double over the period from 1950 to 2000, bringing environmental issues to the fore. Rates of global population continue to increase, particularly in the vulnerable developing world, accelerating demand for food and a broad range of other natural resources. The global rates of consumption of natural resources are far greater than the ecosystem has previously endured.10 The world is rapidly moving beyond local shortages, which historically have created local conflict, to regional or transboundary resource shortages with the potential to escalate into far reaching hostilities involving U.S. forces. In numerous regions the ability of the earth to replenish its renewable resources, even with the human intervention of irrigation and fertilizer, has already been exceeded. Indeed, these very interventions often create unforeseen, adverse environmental consequences. Thus, the frequently ignored, long-lead-time environmental factors have reached their thresholds and are causing instability that security policy analysts cannot ignore. [..] The most notable environmental threats to U.S. security are: â&#x20AC;˘ Global: competition for or threatened denial of strategic resources; ozone depletion; global warming; loss of biodiversity; proliferation of weapons of mass destruction; effects of demilitarization of nuclear, chemical, biological and conventional weapons; space debris; and inability or

Michael Renner, National Security: The Economic and Environmental Dimensions, Washington, DC: Worldwatch Institute, May 1989. Another early and important effort to broaden the definition of national security to include environmental challenges was Jessica Tuchman Matthews, "Redefining Security," Foreign Affairs, Spring 1989, pp. 162-178. 45 Sherri Wasserman Goodman, Deputy Under Secretary of Defense, (Environmental Security), Statement Before the Subcommittee on Installation and Facilities, May 13, 1993. 44

unwillingness of countries to comply environmental agreements and standards.

with

international

• Regional: environmental terrorism, accident or disaster; vector-borne communicable diseases; regional conflicts caused by scarcity/denial of resources; cross border and global common contamination; and environmental factors affecting military access to land, air, and water. • State: environmental degradation of the resource base on which governmental legitimacy depends; risks to public health and the environment from DOD activities; increasing restrictions on military operations and access to air, land, and water; inefficient use of military resources; reduced weapons systems performance; demilitarization of nuclear, chemical, and conventional weapons systems; and erosion of public trust. Recommendations: • Appoint a special assistant to the National Security Advisor for International Environmental Security Affairs and create an interagency working group, chaired by the Special Assistant, to develop a Presidential Decision Document establishing U.S. environmental security policy. • Establish environmental security as a principal objective of the National Security Strategy and include environmental issues in National Security Council threat assessments and foreign policy planning. • Emphasize the linkage between environmental security objectives and the achievement of current, primary congressional and administration interests of democratic reform, economic development, and conflict resolution. • In conjunction with the United Nations, use DOD capabilities to enforce international treaties and agreements. • Create a DOD Environmental Crisis Monitoring Center to warn the policymaking community of chronic environmental issues before political positions have hardened and policy options have narrowed.

[4] Department of the Army, Field Manual 100-23, Peace Operations46. Washington, DC: Headquarters, Department of the Army, December 1994, p. 28. The seventh principle of humanitarian action in armed conflict47 says: ―Contextualization: Effective humanitarian action should encompass a comprehensive view of overall needs and of the impact of interventions. Encouraging respect for human rights and addressing the underlying causes of conﬂicts are essential elements. (own emphasis)

[5]

1995: White House: National Security Strategy48:

http://www.bits.de/NRANEU/others/amd-us-archive/fm100-23(94).pdf Humanitarian Actions in Times of War, by Larry Minear & Thomas Weiss 48 February 1995: A National Security Study of Engagement and Enlargement http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/nss/nss-95.pdf 46 47

â&#x20AC;&#x2022;Increasing competition for the dwindling reserves of uncontaminated air, arable land, fisheries and other food sources, and water, once considered 'free' goods, is already a very real risk to regional stability around the world. The range of risks serious enough to jeopardize international stability extends to massive population flight from man-made or natural catastrophes, such as Chernobyl or the East African drought, and to large-scale ecosystem damage caused by industrial pollution, deforestation, loss of biodiversity, ozone depletion, desertification, oceanic pollution and ultimately climate change.49

[6] April 1996: MAJ William E David, USA Military Intelligence: Environmental Scarcity as a Cause of Violent Conflict50, School of Advanced Military Studies; United States Army Command and General Staff College This monograph argues that the Army is unprepared for the implications of environmental scarcity as a cause of violent conflict. The proof follows in the next three chapters. Chapter Tow provides a conceptual model for examining the causal relationship between environmental scarcity and violent conflict. It shows causation by answering two questions. First, does scarcity cause specific social effects, such as population migration and poverty? Second, so the social effects that result from scarcity cause violent conflict? [..] [This chapter concludes that conflicts arising from environmental scarcity will occur more frequently in the future and threaten U.S. national security interests. Third, does doctrine address conflicts caused by environmental scarcities? The doctrinal review reveals that the Army does not recognize environmental scarcity as a cause of conflict. Chapter Four synthesizes the findings from the preceding chapters, showing that the Army is intellectually unprepared for conflicts caused by environmental scarcity. The monograph ends with two recommendations. First, the Army should recognize environmental causes of war in its doctrine. Second, the Army should adopt the Modified Conflict Causality Model as a doctrinal tool for predicting and evaluating future conflicts. [..] Humans adversely affect the environment. Contaminated water, deforestation, soil erosion, and the depletion of fisheries are but some of the outcomes. Although few people would disagree with the causation between human activities and environmental degradation, their reactions place them in one of two categories: cornucopians or neo-Malthusians. Cornucopians do not worry about protecting any single natural resource. They believe that human ingenuity will always allow the substitution of more abundant resources to produce the same products and services. Neo-Malthusians put less faith in ingenuity, arguing that "renewable resources' is a misleading term.

National Security Strategy of the United States. February 1995, Washington, D. C: Government Printing Office, 1995, p. 18 50 http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA314878 49

[..] The divergence between cornucopians and neo-Malthusians enters into the debate corcerning the causes of conflict. Corncopians remain prisoners of the industrial revolution. They assume that there are only social cuases for social and political changes, neglecting the role of nature. However, Robert Kaplan noted: "nature is coming back with a vengeance, tied to population growth. It will have incredible security implications"[1] Neo-Malthusians realize that humans cannot seperate themselves from nature. The following causality analysis adheres to the neo-Malthusian perspective. therefore, it takes a holistic approahc toward causality, combining conflict studies and the study of the physical environment. After providing a conflict causality model, this chapter uses six case studies to prove that violent conflicts can arise from environmental scarcities.

[7] 13 Mar 1997: Col BX Bush: Promoting Environmental Security during Contingency Operations51; US Army War College â&#x20AC;&#x2022;The effect of environmental problems on national security, now commonly referred to as "environmental security," is important to the US military. The concept first appeared in the 1991 National Security Strategy (NSS), when President Bush recognized that the failure to competently manage natural resources could contribute to potential conflict.[1] The 1993 National Security Strategy echoed this concern and included the environment as an element of economic power.[2] When A National Security Strategy of Engagement and Enlargement was published in February 1996, it amplified the importance of the environment as a component of United States national security even further.[3] The 1996 NSS recognizes that competition for natural resources "is already a very real risk to regional stability around the world."[4] It also states that national and international environmental degradation poses a direct threat to economic growth and to global and national security.[5] Thus, as one of the institutions charged with protecting our national security, the US military also should be concerned with all aspects of environmental security.â&#x20AC;&#x2013; â&#x20AC;&#x2022;Environmental issues can adversely influence our national security in two important ways. One of these is potential or actual conflict between nations or groups that can arise as a result of disputes over natural resources or transnational environmental problems. A second way that environmental issues can directly affect national security is by destabilizing governments or institutions in a country afflicted with environmental degradation. Haiti is a good example. As early as 1978, the President's Council on Environmental Quality noted that deforestation in Haiti was almost complete and then predicted that social disruption and instability would soon follow.[6] It took 16 more years and a military overthrow of duly elected President Aristide to spark renewed US military involvement in Haiti. However, it is clear that the environmental devastation of that country's forests, soil and water supplies created a cause and effect between environmental issues and Haiti's economic 51

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA326869

deprivation, massive migration and the basic instability of virtually every economic or governmental institution in the country.â&#x20AC;&#x2013;

[8] Spring 1997: Canadian Security Intelligence Service Archived: Commentary No. 71: Environmental Scarcity and Conflict52, by Peter Gizewski, Project on Environment Population and Security, Peace and Conflict Studies Program, University of Toronto The past decade has witnessed growing recognition of the importance of environmental factors for national and international security. In 1987, the UN World Commission on Environment and Development pointed to environmental stress as "a possible cause as well as a result of conflict". In 1992, the UN Security Council warned that sources of instability in the economic, social, humanitarian, and ecological fields included military and political "threats to peace and stability". Two years later, the Clinton Administration observed that "terrorism, narcotics trafficking, environmental degradation, rapid population growth and refugee flows ...have security implications for present and long-term American policy". A wealth of popular commentary in the past few years has asserted the existence of general links between environmental stress and violence and security concerns. But proponents of such linkages tend to sensationalise the issue, ignoring empirical research and exaggerating the importance of environmental pressures as a conflict-generating force. In fact, until recently, scholars and policy makers functioned with relatively limited understanding of the causal mechanisms by which environmental scarcity can lead to conflict. Recent work has yielded results which partially fill this gap. Employing a series of detailed examples in which environment exhibits a prima facie link to social instability, such case studies carefully trace a causal connection between scarcity and conflict, and advance a set of key propositions which describe these links and the conditions under which they apply. General Insights: Current work on linkages between environment and conflict emphasizes the conflict-generating potential of renewable resource scarcities (i.e. cropland, fresh water, fuel wood and fish). While the strategic significance of non-renewable resources (e.g. petroleum, minerals) has long been recognized, market forces which reduce their demand and stimulate substitution and technical innovation have served increasingly to mitigate their scarcity and conflict-generating potential. Such forces have been less effective in preventing scarcities of renewables-scarcities which, growing evidence shows, threaten the internal stability of a number of developing countries. According to the University of Toronto's Thomas Homer-Dixon, scarcities of agricultural land, forests, fresh water and fish are those which contribute the most to violence. These 52

http://www.csis-scrs.gc.ca/pblctns/cmmntr/cm71-eng.asp

deficiencies can be demand-induced, a function of population growth within a region; supply-induced, resulting from the degradation of resources within the region; or structural, the result of an unequal distribution of resources throughout the society. The three processes are not mutually exclusive and mayand often do-occur simultaneously, acting in tandem. The degradation and depletion of renewable resources can generate a range of social effects. It can work to encourage powerful groups within society to shift resource distribution in their favour. This process, known as "resource capture" generates profits for elites while intensifying the effects of scarcity among the poor or weak. A process of "ecological marginalization" often follows with poorer groups forced to seek the means of survival in more ecologically fragile regions such as steep upland slopes, areas at risk of desertification, tropical rain forests, and low quality public lands within urban areas. The high population densities in these regions, combined with a lack of capital to protect the local ecosystem, breeds severe environmental scarcity and chronic poverty. Other social effects can include decreased agricultural potential, regional economic decline, population displacement and a disruption of legitimized institutions and social relations. Most significantly, these scarcities can, either individually or in combination, generate forces and processes which contribute to violent conflict among groups within society. Such scarcities may act to strengthen group identities based on ethnic, class or religious differences, most notably by intensifying competition among groups for ever dwindling resources. At the same time, they can work to undermine the legitimacy of the state and its capacity to meet challenges. As the balance of power gradually shifts from the state to the challenging groups, the prospects for violence increase. Such violence tends to be subnational, diffuse and persistent. States may prove capable of avoiding suffering and social stress by adapting to scarcities. They can pursue programs and policies which encourage more sustainable resource use. Alternatively, a state may disengage itself from reliance on scarce resources by producing goods and services less dependent on such resources. The resulting products could then be traded for items which local scarcities preclude the state from producing. More often, however, countries lack the social and technical ingenuity needed to adapt successfully to the shortages they face.

[9] 10 Apr 2000: LTC Kurt F. Ubbelohde: Freshwater Scarcity in the Nile River Basin53, US Army War College â&#x20AC;&#x2022;According to a growing body of literature, scarcity of freshwater to meet the many needs of Third World countries is rapidly escalating. Furthermore, many of the remaining exploitable sources of freshwater are in river basins shared by two or more sovereign states. These facts present the potential for violent conflict over water unless affected states can 53

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA378148

develop and use their common water resources in a cooperative, sustainable, and equitable manner. The United States, in its National Security Strategy and Foreign Affairs Policy, has called attention to the problem of resource scarcity as having important implications for American security.‖

[10] Sep 2010: Bundeswehr: Peak Oil: Security Policy Implications of Scarce Resources54 Effects of Peak Oil on Armed Forces Severe impediments to mobility as a consequence of peak oil would have a considerable effect on all German security bodies, including the Bundeswehr. In the long run, not only all societies and economies worldwide but armed forces as well will be faced with the various and difficult challenges of transformation towards a ―post-fossil‖ age. Implications for Germany: A markedly reduced mobility of the German Armed Forces would have various consequences – not only for the available equipment and training, but also for their (global) power projection and intervention capabilities. Given the size and complexity of many transport and weapon systems as well as the high standards set for qualities like robustness in operation, alternative energy and drive propulsion systems would hardly be available to the necessary extent in the short term. One of the consequences to be initially expected would be further cutbacks in the use of large weapon systems for training purposes in all services, thus raising the need for more ―virtualised‖ training. However, effects on current and planned missions would most likely be even more severe. Deployment to the theatre of operations, the operation of bases and the mission itself are considerably more energy- and above all fuel-intensive than the mere upkeep of armed forces. [..] Peak oil, however, is unavoidable. This study shows the existence of a very serious risk that a global transformation of economic and social structures, triggered by a long-term shortage of important raw materials, will not take place without frictions regarding security policy. The disintegration of complex economic systems and their interdependent infrastructures has immediate and in some cases profound effects on many areas of life, particularly in industrialised countries.

[11]

2010: White House: National Security Strategy55: Challenges like climate change, pandemic disease, and resource scarcity demand new innovation. Meanwhile, the nation that leads the world in building a clean energy economy will enjoy a substantial economic and security advantage. That is why the Administration is investing heavily in research, improving education in science and math, promoting developments in energy, and expanding international cooperation. Transform our Energy

English: http://www.permaculture.org.au/files/Peak%20Oil_Study%20EN.pdf May 2010: National Security Strategy http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/national_security_strategy.pdf 54 55

Economy: As long as we are dependent on fossil fuels, we need to ensure the security and free flow of global energy resources. But without significant and timely adjustments, our energy dependence will continue to undermine our security and prosperity. This will leave us vulnerable to energy supply disruptions and manipulation and to changes in the environment on an unprecedented scale.

[12] 2012: January: Department of Defense: Sustaining U.S. Global Leadership: Priorities for the 21st Century Defense56: In this resource-constrained era, we will also work with NATO allies to develop a ―Smart Defense‖ approach to pool, share, and specialize capabilities as needed to meet 21st century challenges. [..] Whenever possible, we will develop innovative, low-cost, and small-footprint approaches to achieve our security objectives, relying on exercises, rotational presence, and advisory capabilities. [..] A reduction in resources will require innovative and creative solutions to maintain our support for allied and partner interoperability and building partner capacity. However, with reduced resources, thoughtful choices will need to be made regarding the location and frequency of these operations. [..] The balance between available resources and our security needs has never been more delicate.

[13] Dec 2012: U.S. Forest Service: Report Predicts a Strain on Natural Resources Due to Rapid Population Growth57. U.S. Forest Service report outlines how a growing population and increased urbanization in the next 50 years will drain the nation's natural resources including water supplies, open space, and forests. Agriculture Under Secretary Harris Sherman had this to say about the report: "We should all be concerned by the projected decline in our nation‘s forests and the corresponding loss of the many critical services they provide such as clean drinking water, wildlife habitat, carbon sequestration, wood products and outdoor recreation."

Military Appeals to American/World Citizens to „Walk their Talk‟ of „Supporting the Troops‟, and reducing Scarcity-Conflict threats to National Security; by massively reducing their energy consumption, by – for example - “planting victory gardens, cutting down on fuel use, saving scrap metal and old rubber, sacrifices, or maybe just examples of common sense and prudent lifestyle changes.” 

56 57

Center for Naval Analysis: Military Advisory Board: Powering America’s Defense: Energy and the Risks to National Security58: http://www.defense.gov/news/Defense_Strategic_Guidance.pdf http://www.fs.fed.us/news/2012/releases/12/report.shtml

―A yellow ribbon on a car or truck is a wonderful message of symbolic support for our troops. I‘d like to see the American people take it several steps further. If you say a yellow ribbon is the ‗talk,‘ then being energy efficient is the ‗walk‘. A yellow ribbon on a big, gas-guzzling SUV is a mixed message. We need to make better energy choices in our homes, businesses and transportation, as well as to support our leaders in making policies that change the way we develop and use energy. If we Americans truly embrace this idea, it is a triple win: it reduces our dependence on foreign oil, it reduces our impact on the climate and it makes our nation much more secure.‖ - Vice Admiral Dennis V. McGinn, USN (Ret); Former Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Warfare 59 Requirements and Programs

o General Charles F. ―Chuck‖ Wald, USAF (Ret.): Former Deputy Commander, Headquarters U.S. European Command (USEUCOM); Chairman, CNA Military Advisory Board o General Charles G. Boyd, USAF (Ret.): Former Deputy Commander in Chief of U.S. Forces in Europe o Lieutenant General Lawrence P. Farrell Jr., USAF (Ret.): Former Deputy Chief of Staff for Plans and Programs, Headquarters U.S. Air Force o General Paul J. Kern, USA (Ret.): Former Commanding General, U.S. Army Materiel Command o General Ronald E. Keys USAF (Ret.): Former Commander, Air Combat Command o Admiral T. Joseph Lopez, USN (Ret.): Former Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Naval Forces Europe and of Allied Forces, Southern Europe o Admiral T. Joseph Lopez, USN (Ret.): Former Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Naval Forces Europe and of Allied Forces, Southern Europe o Vice Admiral Dennis V. McGinn, USN (Ret.): Deputy Chief of Naval Operations, Warfare Requirements and Programs o Admiral John B. Nathman, USN (Ret.): Former Vice Chief of Naval Operations o Rear Admiral David R. Oliver, Jr., USN (Ret.): Former Principal Deputy to the Navy Acquisition Executive o General Gordon R. Sullivan, USA (Ret.): Former Chief of Staff, U.S. Army; Former Chairman, CNA Military Advisory Board

o Vice Admiral Richard H. Truly, USN (Ret.): Former NASA Administrator, Shuttle Astronaut and the first Commander of the Naval Space Command

58 59

http://www.cna.org/reports/energy http://www.cna.org/reports/energy

The Scarcity-Conflict Death Spiral on Steroids: Climate Change as Threat-Multiplier of Scarcity-Conflict Equation and possible nearterm extinction threat in absence of urgent immediate actions to eliminate carbon emissions. Military Doctrine & Academic Theory: Climate Change & National Security: Climate Change acts as a Scarcity and Conflict Threat Multiplier of oil, water and food resource wars and mass migration: Generals, Admirals and National Security Experts who consider Climate Change a National Security Threat, as a result of its aggravation of the Scarcity-Conflict equation, include: "If we don't take action now, every day, every year that goes by, the options for dealing with the effects of climate change and the effects of energy security become much much more expensive, and in fact some of the options completely go over the next ten to twenty years; if we don't start taking some prudent actions now." â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Vice Admiral Dennis McGinnis; Climate Patriots: A Military Perspective on Energy, Climate Change and National Security60

[1] General Wesley Clark, Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, 1996-1999, Climate Change is a Global Security Threat61. [2] MG Munirizzaman â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Climate Change and Global Security62; American Security Project: A.

Major General Muniruzzaman, former Senior Officer of the Bangladesh Army and President of the Bangladesh Institute of Peace and Security Studies (BIPSS); Chairman: Global Military Advisory Council on Climate Change (GMACCC)

Brigadier General Stephen Cheney, USMC (Ret.), CEO: American Security Project, Member Global Military Advisory Council on Climate Change (GMACCC)

[3] Rear Admiral Lionel Jarvis, Assistant Chief of Staff (Health) and Chief Naval Medical Officer, Royal Navy; Rear Admiral Lionel Jarvis - Climate Change and Military Security63; OneWorldTV. [4] Rear Admiral Neil Morisetti, Senior British Royal Navy officer, currently the United Kingdom's Climate and Energy Security Envoy; Rear Admiral Neil Morisetti on link between climate change, health and national security64; OneWorldTV [5] James Woolsey; Former CIA Director; Climate Change and National Security65 (2010), Climate State. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjS9pU0y_JU http://youtu.be/tz9vRxCMZUw 62 http://youtu.be/JEtP0I-wwhM 63 http://youtu.be/3neELnBCu5c 64 http://youtu.be/p4Af3AqUBVI 60 61

[6] Center for Naval Analysis: Military Advisory Board: National Security and the Threat of Climate Change66: A.

General Gordon R. Sullivan, USA (Ret.): Former Chief of Staff, U.S. Army, Chairman, Military Advisory Board

Admiral Frank ―Skip‖ Bowman, USN (Ret.): Former Director, Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program; Former Deputy Administrator-Naval Reactors, National Nuclear Security Administration

Lieutenant General Lawrence P. Farrell Jr., USAF (Ret.): Former Deputy Chief of Staff for Plans and Programs, Headquarters U.S. Air Force

Vice Admiral Paul G. Gaffney II, USN (Ret.): Former President, National Defense University; Former Chief of Naval Research and Commander, Navy Meteorology and Oceanography Command

General Paul J. Kern, USA (Ret.): Former Commanding General, U.S. Army Materiel Command

Admiral T. Joseph Lopez, USN (Ret.): Former Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Naval Forces Europe and of Allied Forces, Southern Europe

Admiral Donald L. ―Don‖ Pilling, USN (Ret.): Former Vice Chief of Naval Operations

Admiral Joseph W. Prueher, USN (Ret.): Former Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM) and Former U.S. Ambassador to China

Vice Admiral Richard H. Truly, USN (Ret.): Former NASA Administrator, Shuttle Astronaut and the first Commander of the Naval Space Command

General Charles F. ―Chuck‖ Wald, USAF (Ret.): Former Deputy Commander, Headquarters U.S. European Command (USEUCOM)

General Anthony C. ―Tony‖ Zinni, USMC (Ret.): Former Commander-in-Chief of U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM)

Ms. Sherri W. Goodman: General Counsel, CAN: Executive Director, Military Advisory Board; Former Deputy UnderSecretary of Defense (Environmental Security) (1993-2001).

[7] Climate Patriots: A Military Perspective on Energy, Climate Change and National Security67; Pew Climate Security:

[8]

Admiral John Natham, United States Navy (Ret)

John Warner, Secretary of the Navy, Secretary Senate Armed Services Committee

Former Captain James Morin, United States Army

A Conversation with Richard L. Engel68; Council on Foreign Relations

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfobHy0a9CU http://www.cna.org/reports/climate 67 http://youtu.be/kjS9pU0y_JU 65 66

A. [9] 69;

Rear Admiral David Titley, USN - Climate Change and National Security TEDxPentagon A.

[10]

Richard L. Engel, Director, Environment and Natural Resources Program, National Intelligence Council; Retired Major General, U.S. Air Force

Oceanographer for the U.S. Navy, RADM David Titley

Climate Security Report70; American Security Project A.

Lieutenant General Daniel Christman, US Army (Ret.);

Brigadier General Steven Anderson, US Army (Ret.);

Brigadier General Steve Cheney, USMC (Ret.), CEO of American Security Project;

[11] Adjusting to Climate Change: A National Security Dimension71; Herzliya Conference: A.

Efi Stenzler, Chairman of the Board of Directors of KKL-JNF; Former Company Commander in the Parachute Division (Major – Res).

Arnon Sofer, Dean of the Faculty for Social Sciences and Vice Chairman of the Center for National security research; University of Haifa.

[12] The Cost of Inaction on Climate Change Will be Staggering72; Partnership for a Secure America. The signatories to PSA‘s letter join the State Department, Defense Department, National Intelligence Council, and many other security voices in emphasizing the serious national security implications of climate change. Signatories including seventeen former Senators and Congress members, nine retired generals and admirals, both the Chair and Vice Chair of the 9/11 Commission, and Cabinet and Cabinet-level officials from the Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush (41), Clinton, and Bush (43) administrations. The initiative builds upon PSA‘s 2009 statement ―Climate Change Threatens All Americans‖ (www.psaonline.org/climate), which served to publicly identify climate change as an issue of bipartisan concern among national security experts. A.

Madeleine Albright, Secretary of State 1997-2001

Richard Armitage, Deputy Secretary of State 2001-05

Samuel Berger, National Security Advisor 1997-2001

Sherwood Boehlert, US Congressman (R-NY) 1983-2007

Carol Browner, Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency 1993-2001

http://youtu.be/uAAT2qQZUfM http://youtu.be/7udNMqRmqV8 70 http://youtu.be/k3gk-siSyus 71 http://youtu.be/CE4k0K06WBg 72 http://www.psaonline.org/article.php?id=976 and http://youtu.be/wf21Du67ls0 68 69

Michael Castle, US Congressman (R-DE) 1993-2011, Governor (R-DE) 198592

GEN Wesley Clark, USA (Ret.), Fmr. Supreme Allied Commander Europe of NATO

William Cohen, Secretary of Defense 1997-2001, US Senator (R-ME) 1979-97

Lt Gen Lawrence P. Farrell, Jr., USAF (Ret.), Fmr. Deputy Chief Of Staff for Plans and Programs, HQ USAF

BG Gerald E. Galloway, Jr., P.E., Ph.D., USA (Ret.), Fmr. Dean of the Academic Board, US Military Academy

Wayne Gilchrest, US Congressman (R-MD) 1991-2009

James Greenwood, US Congressman (R-PA) 1993-2005

VADM Lee F. Gunn, USN (Ret.), Fmr. Inspector General of the Department of the Navy

Lee Hamilton, US Congressman (D-IN) 1965-99, Co-Chair, PSA Advisory Board

Gary Hart, US Senator (D-CO) 1975-87

Rita E. Hauser, Chair, International Peace Institute

Carla Hills, US Trade Representative 1989-93

Thomas Kean, Governor (R-NJ) 1982-90, 9/11 Commission Chair

GEN Paul J. Kern, USA (Ret.), Fmr. Commanding General, US Army Materiel Command

Richard Leone, President, The Century Foundation 1989-2011

Joseph I. Lieberman, US Senator (I-CT) 1989-2013

Richard G. Lugar, US Senator (R-IN) 1977-2013

VADM Dennis V. McGinn, USN (Ret.), Fmr. Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Warfare Requirements and Programs

Donald McHenry, US Ambassador to the UN 1979-81

Constance Morella, US Congresswoman (R-MD) 1987-2003, US Ambassador to OECD 2003-07

Sam Nunn, US Senator (D-GA) 1972-96

AA.

John Porter, US Congressman (R-IL) 1980-2001

BB.

Tom Ridge, Secretary of Homeland Security 2003-05, Governor (R-PA) 19952001

CC.

ADM Gary Roughead, USN (Ret.), Fmr. Chief of Naval Operations

DD.

Warren Rudman, US Senator (R-NH) 1980-92, Fmr. Co-Chair, PSA Advisory Board

EE.

Christopher Shays, US Congressman (R-CT) 1987-2009

FF.

George Shultz, Secretary of State 1982-89

GG.

Olympia J. Snowe, US Senator (R-ME) 1995-2013

HH.

GEN Gordon R. Sullivan, USA (Ret.), Fmr. Chief of Staff, US Army, Chairman, CNA Military Advisory Board

II.

Timothy E. Wirth, US Senator (D-CO) 1987-93

JJ.

Frank Wisner, Undersecretary of State 1992-93

KK.

R. James Woolsey, Director of Central Intelligence 1993-95, Co-founder, US Energy Security Council

LL.

GEN Anthony Zinni, USMC (Ret.), Fmr. Commander in Chief, US Central Command

Scientists: Climate Change is a Near-Term Extinction (NTE) Threat in absence of urgent immediate actions to massively reduce carbon emissions/end industrial civilization: ―The rate of change is happening at 300 times faster than any other extinction time in earth history, except that of the Asteroidal impact. [On feedback loops] The distinction between just a feedback process and a runaway feedback process is very, very important indeed. You can have feedback that slowly increases, if you like, the risk and puts the temperature up a bit higher. Runaway feedback says the system responds so much to an increase in temperature that it becomes faster in the way it changes the climate with rising temperature. So the hotter it gets, the faster it gets hotter, and the hotter it gets, the faster it gets hotter faster, until you move into a process that‘s completely uncontrollable. And instead of coming up to a new equilibrium temperature that may be a bit high, it goes on going up faster and faster until something runs out—there‘s no more methane to release or we‘ve run out of forests to burn or something …―The danger of moving into a runaway climate change scenario is now clear and is beginning to be quantified in the last few months. It‘s probably the greatest threat that we face as a planet.‖ (from 11:15ff.) - Artic Methane: Why the Sea Ice Matters73

Large-scale assessments do not include consideration of (A) aggravating Tipping Points (Positive Feedback loops) or (B) mitigating Collapse of Industrial Civilization: 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (late 2007): 1 C by 2100



Hadley Centre for Meteorological Research (late 2008): 2 C by 2100



United Nations Environment Programme (mid 2009): 3.5 C by 2100



Hadley Centre for Meteorological Research (October 2009): 4 C by 2060

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSsPHytEnJM



Global Carbon Project, Copenhagen Diagnosis (November 2009): 6 C, 7 C by 2100



International Energy Agency (November 2010): 3.5 C by 2035



United Nations Environment Programme (December 2010): up to 5 C by 2050

Tipping Points / Positive Feedback Loops: Aaron Franklin (16 March 2013): Tipping Points74; Artic News: Now, Earths vulnerable Carbon stores are: Carbon in the Arctic: ESAS: 500 Gton C organic 1000 Gton C hydrate 700 Gton C free methane total: 2200 Gton C +other submarine permafrost:

arctic

2200/0.8=2750 Gton C +1700Gt in land permafrost= 4450 Gton C A large part of this is Vunerable to being lost rapidly into the Ocean/Atmosphere system if the Arctic defrosts, polar ocean warms, heavy rainfalls hit the Tundras. Carbon in soils and Living Biomass: Total organic C in soil and living biomass is approx: 1000 Gton C living + 1500 Gton soil. = 2500Gton C A large part of this is Vunerable to being lost rapidly into the Ocean/Atmosphere system if the Arctic defrosts, Global weather systems change, Rainforests 74

and/or

peat

deposits

burn,

http://arctic-news.blogspot.co.nz/2013/03/tipping-points.html

desertification and/or heavy rainfalls hit the Tropical, Temperate, Boreal forests. So thats the vunerable surface Carbon stores. Total about 7000 billion tons of carbon. There's never been this much in the history of planet earth, that we know of. Carbon in Deep sea Clathrates: Estimates range from 5000 Gton C to 78000 Gton C A large part of this is vulnerable to being lost into the Ocean/Atmosphere system if the oceans warm a few degrees, reaching the bottom in a few hundred to a few thousand years, causing the stability to be lost.

List of Tipping Points: 

Methane hydrates are bubbling out the Arctic Ocean (Science, March 2010)



Warm Atlantic water is defrosting the Arctic as it shoots through the Fram Strait (Science, January 2011). This breakdown of the thermohaline conveyor belt is happening in the Antarctic as well75.



Siberian methane vents have increased in size from less than a meter across in the summer of 2010 to about a kilometre across in 2011 (Tellus, February 2011)



Drought in the Amazon triggered the release of more carbon than the United States in 2010 (Science, February 2011)



Peat in the world‘s boreal forests is decomposing at an astonishing rate (Nature Communications, November 2011)



Methane is being released from the Antarctic, too (Nature, August 2012)



Russian forest and bog fires are growing (NASA, August 2012)



Cracking of glaciers accelerates in the presence of increased carbon dioxide76 (Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics, October 2012)



The Beauford Gyre apparently has reversed course77 (U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center78, October 2012)



Exposure to sunlight increases bacterial conversion of exposed soil carbon, thus accelerating thawing of the permafrost79 (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, February 2013)



Summer ice melt in Antarctica is at its highest level in a thousand years80: Summer ice in the Antarctic is melting 10 times quicker than it was 600 years

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/04/10/1200602/-The-Antarctic-Half-of-the-Global-ThermohalineCirculation-Is-Faltering 76 http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1112711923/glaciers-cracking-carbon-dioxide-101112/ 77 http://mtkass.blogspot.co.nz/2013/04/the-beauford-gyre.html 78 http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2012/10/ 79 http://phys.org/news/2013-02-sunlight-climate-warming-gas-arctic-permafrost.html 80 http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/04/15/us-antarctica-ice-idUKBRE93E08D20130415 75

ago, with the most rapid melt occurring in the last 50 years (Nature Geoscience81, April 2013) 

Arctic drilling82 was fast-tracked by the Obama administration during the summer of 2012

Scientists warning of Near-Term Extinction (NTE) in absence of inaction: 

James Hansen, Adjunct Professor of Earth and Environmental Sciences at Columbia University‘s Earth Institute: ―Imagine a giant asteroid on a direct collision course with Earth. That is the equivalent of what we face now [with climate change], yet we dither.‖ - Why I must speak out about climate change83 TED



Arctic Methane Emergency Group: Founding members Peter Wadhams, Professor of Ocean Physics, Cambridge; Stephen Salter, Emeritus Professor of Engineering Design, Edinburgh; and Brian Orr, former Principal Science Officer at the UK DoE. o Matter of Artic Methane Alert Survival Letter to World Leaders84 o Methane Outbreak Alert85: ―Over the past three decades, snow cover has been reduced by 17-18% per decade and sea ice is declining fast because of human-induced global warming. Consequently, the albedo effect is collapsing in the Arctic. Albedo is the reflection of Sun‘s radiation off the white ice and white snow surfaces. Unfortunately, when the albedo effect collapses, the dark sea and dark land mass absorb most of the Sun‘s radiation. A collapsing albedo effect is ominously apocalyptic for the Arctic, and for the world. And, disturbingly, Arctic albedo is already in the collapsing stage. This will inevitably lead to ever more methane emissions and a vicious cycle of feedbacks leading to an extinction event, probably unstoppable. .. o AMEG 2012 Policy Brief86: ―AMEG‘s conclusion is that there is now a planetary emergency. Only by grasping the nettle and intervening with great determination, as in a war effort, is there a chance of remedying the situation before it is too late. International collaboration to fight this common "enemy" of Arctic meltdown must bring all nations together, in the cause of our very survival.‖ o Malcolm Light (9 Feb 2012): ―This process of methane release will accelerate exponentially, release huge quantities of methane into the atmosphere and lead to the demise of all life on earth before the middle of this century.‖ - Global Extinction within one Human Lifetime as a Result

http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo1787.html http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/09/19/872121/arctic-death-spiral-new-local-shipping-and-drillingpollution-may-speed-up-polar-warming-and-ice-melting/ 83 http://www.ted.com/talks/james_hansen_why_i_must_speak_out_about_climate_change.html 84 http://www.ameg.me/index.php/letter-to-world-leaders 85 Dissident Voice, 27/04/2013 http://dissidentvoice.org/2013/04/methane-outbreak-alert/ 86 http://a-m-e-g.blogspot.com/2012/09/ameg-policy-brief.html 81 82

of a Spreading Atmospheric Arctic Methane Heat wave and Surface Firestorm87; Artic News 

T. Goreau, PhD: Global Coral Reef Alliance, former Senior Scientific Affairs Officer at the United Nations Centre for Science and Technology for Development, in charge of Global Climate Change and Biodiversity issues, where he contributed to the original draft of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change: ―The long-term sea level that corresponds to current CO2 concentration is about 23 meters above today‘s levels; and the temperatures will be 6 degrees C or more higher. These estimates are based on real long term climate records, not on models.‖ -- Briefing to the United Nations Conference of the Parties in Copenhagen (COP15): What is the Right Target for CO2?: 350 PPM is a death sentence for Coral Reefs and Low-Lying Islands: The Safe level of CO2 for SIDS is around 260 parts per million88 footnote.



Scientists call for war on climate change, but who on Earth is listening?89; David Spratt (8 Dec 2012); Climate Code Red o Dr Daniel Pauly; Professor and the project leader of the Sea Around Us Project at the Fisheries Centre at the University of British Columbia, Director of the Fisheries Centre (2003 – 2008), said it was time to prepare economy for a climate change 'war'90. o Josep Canadell: Global Carbon Project: CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research91 o World Bank said92 that 4 °Cs of warming will end the world as we know it. o United Nations Environment Programme Report on Tipping Point Policy Implications of Warming Permafrost93. o Professor Matthew England, University of NSW told the ABC's 7.30 Report that we need a global-scale effort94 akin to preparing for a war. o Prof. Corinne Le Quéré, director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research in Britain and professor at the University of East Anglia, says "We need a radical plan"95. o Professor Andrew Weaver of the University of Victoria, Canada: ―We are losing control of our ability to get a handle on the global warming problem"96 and ―The scientists have lost patience with our carefully

http://arctic-news.blogspot.co.nz/p/global-extinction-within-one-human.html http://www.globalcoral.org/AOSIS%20Briefing%202009.pdf and http://wrongkindofgreen.org/2012/12/10/themost-important-cop-briefing-that-no-one-ever-heard-truth-lies-racism-omnicide/ 89 http://climatechangepsychology.blogspot.com/2012/12/david-spratt-scientists-call-for-war-on.html 90 http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2012/s3646638.htm 91 http://theconversation.edu.au/the-widening-gap-between-present-emissions-and-the-two-degree-target-11101 92 http://climatechange.worldbank.org/content/climate-change-report-warns-dramatically-warmer-worldcentury 93 http://unep.org/pdf/permafrost.pdf 94 http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2012/s3646515.htm 95 http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/dec/03/co2-emissions-climate-change-certain 96 http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/12/03/1270911/as-global-co2-emissions-rise-scientists-warn-2-degreetarget-is-nearly-out-of-reach-we-need-a-radical-plan/ 87 88

constructed messages being lost in the political noise. And we are now prepared to stand up and say enough is enough‖97 and ―Put bluntly, climate change commitments are incompatible with short- to mediumterm economic growth (in other words, for 10–20 years). Moreover, work on adapting to climate change suggests that economic growth cannot be reconciled with the breadth and rate of impacts as the temperature rises towards 4 °C and beyond — a serious possibility if global apathy over stringent mitigation persists. Away from the microphone and despite claims of 'green growth', few if any scientists working on climate change would disagree with the broad thrust of this candid conclusion…. At the same time as climate change analyses are being subverted to reconcile them with the orthodoxy of economic growth, neoclassical economics has evidently failed to keep even its own house in order.‖98 ―The Arctic isn‘t Vegas — what happens in the Arctic doesn‘t stay in the Arctic — it‘s the planet‘s air conditioner. Whereas nearly 80 calories are required to melt a gram of ice at 0 C, adding 80 calories to the same gram of water at 0 C increases its temperature to 80 C. Anthropogenic greenhouse-gas emissions add more than 2.5 trillion calories to Earth‘s surface every hour (ca. 3 watts per square meter99, continuously). Ocean acidification associated with increased atmospheric carbon dioxide is proceeding at an unprecedented rate100 and could trigger mass extinction by itself101. Already, half the Great Barrier Reef has died during the last three decades102. And ocean acidification is hardly the only threat on the climate-change front. As one little-discussed example, atmospheric oxygen levels are dropping to levels considered dangerous for humans103. An increasing number of scientists agree that warming of 4 to 6 C causes a dead planet. And, they go on to say, we‘ll be there by 2060104. The ultra-conservative International Energy Agency, on the other hand, concludes that105, ―coal will nearly overtake oil as the dominant energy source by 2017 … without a major shift away from coal, average global temperatures could rise by 6 degrees Celsius by 2050, leading to devastating climate change.‖ At the 11:20 mark of this video, climate scientist Paul Beckwith indicates Earth could warm by 6 C within a decade106. If you think his view is extreme, consider the reconstruction of regional and global temperature for the past 11,300 years published in Science in March 2013107. One result is shown in the figure below.‖ http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/13/stern-attacks-politicians-climate-change http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v2/n9/full/nclimate1646.html?WT.ec_id=NCLIMATE-201209 99 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas 100 http://www.enn.com/climate/article/45006 101 ftp://ftp.gfdl.noaa.gov/pub/mbw/Ocean_Acidification_Papers/Veron_2008.pdf 102 http://www.livescience.com/23612-great-barrier-reef-steep-decline.html 103 http://survivalacres.com/blog/oxygen-levels-are-dropping/ 104 http://climatechangepsychology.blogspot.com/2012/12/david-spratt-scientists-call-for-war-on.html 105 http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/18/energy-coal-idUSL5E8NI4G620121218 106 http://youtu.be/zw1GEp8UBj4 107 https://tamino.wordpress.com/2013/03/22/global-temperature-change-the-big-picture/ 97 98

– Guy McPherson, [Near-term Extinction] Climate Change Summary and Update108



Guy McPherson, former Professor Emeritus of Natural Resources and Ecology & Evolutionary Biology: ―The evidence for human extinction by 2030 is overwhelming‖ -- The End: Walking Away from Apocalypse with Guy McPherson109, by Adam Engel / May 3rd, 2013; and (at 20:18, 26:00 & 27:40) Environmental Point of No Return: A Discussion with Dr. Guy McPherson 110.); [Near-term Extinction] Climate Change Summary and Update111.

Anti-Growth Policies Required for National Security Imperative to Reduce Carbon Emissions aggravation of Scarcity – Conflict Climate Change National Security Threat and Near-Term Extinction. [1] Reduce Procreation to below Carrying Capacity: Every Child Increases a Parent‟s Carbon Footprint by a factor of 20: A parent can reduce his/her carbon footprint 19 times more by having one fewer child than by all other energy efficiency actions the E.P.A. suggests combined: http://guymcpherson.com/2013/01/climate-change-summary-and-update/ http://dissidentvoice.org/2013/05/the-end-walking-away-from-apocalypse-with-guy-mcpherson/ 110 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odlReNpGQ7c 111 http://guymcpherson.com/2013/01/climate-change-summary-and-update/ 108 109

[1.1] Paul A. Murtaugh, Michael G. Schlax (2009): Reproduction and the carbon legacies of individuals [PDF112]; Global Environmental Change, 19 (2009) pp. 14-20 Summary: There are many ways that each of us can reduce our emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses. One important choice is how many children we choose to have. While it is obvious that each child, grandchild, and their descendants will be a producer of carbon dioxide in their lifetimes, it is not obvious what those emissions might be, and how those amounts compare with the reduced emissions that might come from driving a more fuel efficient car, using energy-efficient light bulbs and the like. The assumption is that a person is responsible for the carbon emissions of his or her descendants, weighted by their relatedness. That is, a parent is responsible for 1/2 the emissions of their children, 1/4 the emissions of their grandchildren and so on. Of course you can't know for certain how many children your grandchildren will have, and you can't know how much carbon dioxide they will emit, but the authors make some estimations based on expected trends in different countries. For 11 countries, they estimate the number of descendants using the high, median and low U.N. estimates of how birthrates will change in each country. They then use three levels of how carbon emissions may change in the future: a low (optimistic) estimate that they will drop to 1/2 of Africa's current level, a medium estimate that they will remain constant at today's levels, and a a high estimate that they will continue to increase as they are now until 2100. The comparison of carbon dioxide savings are striking. If you live in the U.S. you can reduce your carbon dioxide emissions 19 times more by having one fewer child than by all other actions the E.P.A. suggests combined.

[1.2]

Articles:

Oregon State University: Murtaugh Paul (07/31/2009): Family Planning: A major Environmental Emphasis113; Oregon State

Institute for Population Studies (17 July 2009): Reproduction and the Carbon Legacies of Individuals114

Oregonian (31 July 2009): Oregon State study says having fewer children is best way to reduce your carbon footprint115, by Eric Mortenson.

http://blog.oregonlive.com/environment_impact/2009/07/carbon%20legacy.pdf http://oregonstate.edu/ua/ncs/archives/2009/jul/family-planning-major-environmental-emphasis 114 http://www.howmany.org/News/2009-07-14_Carbon_Legacies_Of_Individuals.htm 112 113

[2] De-Industrialize: Reduce Consumption to Pre-Industrial levels: Only Civilization Collapse will prevent runaway global climate change: Industrial Civilization/Consumption Developmentism as Heat Engine Root cause of Scarcity-Conflict Climate Change-National Security Impending Near-term Extinction reality. [2.1] Dr. Guy McPherson; Former Professor Emeritus of Natural Resources and Ecology & Evolutionary Biology; University of Tucson, Arizona: Guy McPherson speaking in Middleville, Michigan, September 2011116 (at 08:08): ―An article in the refereed journal Climatic Change says that only Economic Collapse will prevent runaway global climate change. That was two years ago. This is among the most important papers I have ever seen and among the least cited in the scientific literature. I interviewed eight of the premier Post Doctoral in the world, last January, and of the eight, six said they were a climate scientist, that was their specialty. So I asked each of the six of them about this paper, and none of them had heard of it. These are the people who are at their best in terms of their knowledge of climate science, and none of them had heard of it. Only complete economic collapse will prevent runaway global climate change. .. It was rejected by several scientific journals first, because its just too dire, that can‘t happen here, but then the prestigious journal Climatic Change says ‗Yeah, its bullet proof. There is nothing wrong with his analysis at all‘.‖

[2.2] Timothy J. Garrett (Nov. 2009), Are there basic physical constraints on future anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide?117; Climatic Change [2.3] University of Utah (22 Nov 2009): Is Global Warming Unstoppable?: Theory also says Energy Conservation doesn't help118. University of Utah scientist argues that rising carbon dioxide emissions – the major cause of global warming – cannot be stabilized unless the world‘s economy collapses or society builds the equivalent of one new nuclear power plant each day. ―It looks unlikely that there will be any substantial near-term departure from recently observed acceleration in carbon dioxide emission rates,‖ says the new paper by Tim Garrett, an associate professor of atmospheric sciences. Garrett‘s study was panned by some economists and rejected by several journals before acceptance by Climatic Change, a journal edited by renowned Stanford University climate scientist Stephen Schneider. The study will be published online this week. http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2009/07/oregon_state_researchers_concl.html http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOq2A_SGTYA 117 http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10584-009-9717-9 118 http://unews.utah.edu/news_releases/is-global-warming-unstoppable/ 115 116

The study – which is based on the concept that physics can be used to characterize the evolution of civilization – indicates: Energy conservation or efficiency doesn‘t really save energy, but instead spurs economic growth and accelerated energy consumption. Throughout history, a simple physical ―constant‖ – an unchanging mathematical value – links global energy use to the world‘s accumulated economic productivity, adjusted for inflation. So it isn‘t necessary to consider population growth and standard of living in predicting society‘s future energy consumption and resulting carbon dioxide emissions. ―Stabilization of carbon dioxide emissions at current rates will require approximately 300 gigawatts of new non-carbon-dioxideemitting power production capacity annually – approximately one new nuclear power plant (or equivalent) per day,‖ Garrett says. ―Physically, there are no other options without killing the economy.‖ Getting Heat for Viewing Civilization as a “Heat Engine” Garrett says colleagues generally support his theory, while some economists are critical. One economist, who reviewed the study, wrote: ―I am afraid the author will need to study harder before he can contribute.‖ ―I‘m not an economist, and I am approaching the economy as a physics problem,‖ Garrett says. ―I end up with a global economic growth model different than they have.‖ Garrett treats civilization like a ―heat engine‖ that ―consumes energy and does ‗work‘ in the form of economic production, which then spurs it to consume more energy,‖ he says. ―If society consumed no energy, civilization would be worthless,‖ he adds. ―It is only by consuming energy that civilization is able to maintain the activities that give it economic value. This means that if we ever start to run out of energy, then the value of civilization is going to fall and even collapse absent discovery of new energy sources.‖ Garrett says his study‘s key finding ―is that accumulated economic production over the course of history has been tied to the rate of energy consumption at a global level through a constant factor.‖ That ―constant‖ is 9.7 (plus or minus 0.3) milliwatts per inflation-adjusted 1990 dollar. So if you look at economic and energy production at any specific time in history, ―each inflation-adjusted 1990 dollar would be supported by 9.7 milliwatts of primary energy consumption,‖ Garrett says. Garrett tested his theory and found this constant relationship between energy use and economic production at any given time by using United Nations statistics for global GDP (gross domestic product), U.S. Department of Energy data on global energy

consumption during1970-2005, and previous studies that estimated global economic production as long as 2,000 years ago. Then he investigated the implications for carbon dioxide emissions. ―Economists think you need population and standard of living estimate productivity,‖ he says. ―In my model, all you need know is how fast energy consumption is rising. The reason why because there is this link between the economy and rates energy consumption, and it‘s just a constant factor.‖

to to is of

Garrett adds: ―By finding this constant factor, the problem of [forecasting] global economic growth is dramatically simpler. There is no need to consider population growth and changes in standard of living because they are marching to the tune of the availability of energy supplies.‖ To Garrett, that means the acceleration of carbon dioxide emissions is unlikely to change soon because our energy use today is tied to society‘s past economic productivity. ―Viewed from this perspective, civilization evolves in a spontaneous feedback loop maintained only by energy consumption and incorporation of environmental matter,‖ Garrett says. It is like a child that ―grows by consuming food, and when the child grows, it is able to consume more food, which enables it to grow more.‖ Is Meaningful Energy Conservation Impossible? Perhaps the most provocative implication of Garrett‘s theory is that conserving energy doesn‘t reduce energy use, but spurs economic growth and more energy use. ―Making civilization more energy efficient simply allows it to grow faster and consume more energy,‖ says Garrett. He says the idea that resource conservation accelerates resource consumption – known as Jevons paradox – was proposed in the 1865 book ―The Coal Question‖ by William Stanley Jevons, who noted that coal prices fell and coal consumption soared after improvements in steam engine efficiency. So is Garrett arguing that conserving energy doesn‘t matter? ―I‘m just saying it‘s not really possible to conserve energy in a meaningful way because the current rate of energy consumption is determined by the unchangeable past of economic production. If it feels good to conserve energy, that is fine, but there shouldn‘t be any pretense that it will make a difference.‖ Yet, Garrett says his findings contradict his own previously held beliefs about conservation, and he continues to ride a bike or bus to work, line dry family clothing and use a push lawnmower. An Inevitable Future for Carbon Dioxide Emissions?

Garrett says often-discussed strategies for slowing carbon dioxide emissions and global warming include mention increased energy efficiency, reduced population growth and a switch to power sources that don‘t emit carbon dioxide, including nuclear, wind and solar energy and underground storage of carbon dioxide from fossil fuel burning. Another strategy is rarely mentioned: a decreased standard of living, which would occur if energy supplies ran short and the economy collapsed, he adds. ―Fundamentally, I believe the system is deterministic,‖ says Garrett. ―Changes in population and standard of living are only a function of the current energy efficiency. That leaves only switching to a non-carbon-dioxide-emitting power source as an available option.‖ ―The problem is that, in order to stabilize emissions, not even reduce them, we have to switch to non-carbonized energy sources at a rate about 2.1 percent per year. That comes out to almost one new nuclear power plant per day.‖

Relocalization, Decentralization, De-Industrialization and Primitivization: ―You can pay now, or you can pay a whole lot later. And by pay a whole lot later, it‘s not just about paying in dollars, its really about paying in American lives.‖ - Admiral John Natham, United States Navy (Ret); Climate Patriots: A Military Perspective on Energy, Climate Change and National Security119 ―In my piece, the last third of it is a joint planning session for an Energy policy for the United States between the ghost of John Muir and the ghost of George Patton. Muir is only worried about carbon and thinks terrorism is something the FBI can deal with if anybody needs to. Patton is only worried about terrorism and thinks global warming is something these birkenstock wearers cooked up somewhere between smoking tokes around the campfire or something. They don't agree at all on the problems they are trying to solve, but they keep finding that there is a very substantial degree of overlap in the things that they want to do. Because in so far as you move toward distributed generation of electricity, because you are worried about the security of the web, terrorist attacks on the web and the like, in so far as you are putting solar energy on your roof, you are also going green, because you can't put a coal fired power plant on your roof, thank goodness.‖ - James Woolsey, Former CIA Director & Former Undersecretary US Navy.

[1]

Economic Relocalisation? Relocalize Economic Power. ―Here are a few of my predictions: Many trends of the last century or more, made possible by cheap and abundant energy sources, are going to be reversed. These trends include

119

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjS9pU0y_JU

population growth, centralization of political and economic power, vastly increased quantity of global trade, and mass tourism. [..] Relocalization may be a new term, but conceptually it has long roots. Some related recent precursors include [Thoreau], E.F. Schumacher, Ted Trainer, Garrett Hardin, and Wendell Berry as well as what are called the ―anti-globalization‖ movement, the ―slow food‖ movement, the ―voluntary simplicity‖ movement, the ―back to the land‖ movement, ―new urbanism,‖ [the ―prepping‖ movement], and the ―environmental movement.‖ In general, common themes include decentralization of political and economic structures, less material consumption and pollution, a focus on the quality of relationships, culture and the environment as sources of fulfilment, and downscaling of infrastructural development.‖ - Jason Bradford, Ph.D, Economic Relocalization: A Strategic Response to Peak Oil and Climate Change120; The Oil Drum

Economic Relocalisation: A Strategic Response to Peak Oil and Climate Change; Jason Bradford, Ph.D, The Oil Drum:

[2] 120

Relocalization is based on a systems approach that doesn‘t solve one set of problems only to make another problem worse.

Relocalization is based on an ethic of protecting the Earth System--or Natural Capital-- knowing that despite our cleverness, human well-being is fundamentally derived from the ecological and geological richness of Earth.

Relocalization starts from the premise that the world is a finite place and that humanity is in a state of overshoot. Perpetual growth of the economy and the population is neither possible nor desirable. It is wise to start planning now for a world with less available energy, not more.

Relocalization advocates rebuilding more balanced local economies that emphasize securing basic needs. Local food, energy and water systems are perhaps the most critical to build.xxv In the absence of reliable trade partners, whether from peak oil, natural disaster or political instability, a local economy that at least produces its essential goods will have a true comparative advantage.

Relocalization takes a different perspective altogether. Instead of working to keep a system going that has no future, it calls us to develop means of livelihood that pollute as little as possible and that promote local and regional stability. Since much of our pollution results from the distances goods travel, we must shorten distances between production and consumption as much as we can.

Political Decentralization: Nullification, Secession, etc: http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2598

â&#x20AC;&#x2022;The need for relocalization of the economy in the wake of peak oil and climate change is forcing me to re-examine my views. I am of the belief, however, that should relocalization become a widespread adaptation strategy or simply be forced upon us, the locale where one lives in the United States will become of increasing importance. It is no surprise, then, that relocalization of economic activity implies relocalization of governmental power. In fact, a kind of precursor to secession, nullification, has already appeared in the form of city councils resolving not to cooperate with federal officials in enforcing the so-called Patriot Act. It has also manifested itself in cities and states proceeding with climate change initiatives when the federal government's official policy was that climate change was not a problem. [..] Instead, secession, recast as political decentralization, is a close cousin of economic relocalization the increasingly urgent need many of us to feel to create our own local currencies, grow more of our own food, harvest our own energy, and the like. [..] What is less apparent to most is the fact that the U.S. has become an Empire teetering on the edge, while it continues to enrich the few at the expense of the many. Nothing less than a complete structural re-tooling of our financial, commercial and economic life will bring about the significant kinds of transformations we'll need moving forward. It is not an appealing thought, that economic relocalization ultimately will not succeed without political decentralizationbut we believe it is an honest one.â&#x20AC;&#x2013; - Political Secession and Economic Relocalisation: Parallel Goals to deal with Climate Change & Peak Oil121; Vermont Commons

[2.1]

The New Nullification122 (Resource Insights, 05/06):

Recently, 132 mayors across America announced they were going ahead with policies to fight global warming123 despite the Bush administration's rejection of such measures. In doing so, they were adding to a series of acts by states and localities that when taken together add up to a new and growing nullification movement. Nullification is a long debated theory that says that states have the right to defy federal law or "nullify" it if they feel a particular law is unconstitutional. While the mayors were not exactly defying a federal law, they were openly snubbing an official federal policy of inaction on greenhouse gas emissions. Their action and many similar ones are beginning to call into question the ability of the federal government to impose its will on the individual states and localities.

Take the lawsuit by eight states and New York City against utilities 124 designed to force the utilities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The suit

http://www.vtcommons.org/blog/political-secession-and-economic-relocalization-are-parallel-goals http://resourceinsights.blogspot.com/2005/06/new-nullification.html 123 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1402961/posts 124 http://www.climateark.org/articles/reader.asp?linkid=33783 121 122

was filed because the EPA refused to take action125 to regulate carbon dioxide emissions, a move that prompted an earlier lawsuit against the agency. Both suits are direct confrontations with a federal government which currently wants to do nothing about greenhouse gas emissions. C.

In the area of genetically engineered crops, the Food and Drug Administration has long held that such crops are virtually identical to non-biotech crops and therefore require no testing or extraordinary regulation. But, two counties in California have already banned their planting126, and a third has a ban on the ballot this year. (Monsanto, the world's largest producer of genetically engineered crops, is fighting back by trying to pass state laws that pre-empt local control of biotech crops.127)

[..] But, perhaps the best-known acts of nullification are resolutions by states, cities and counties across the nation that call for refusing cooperation with federal authorities trying to enforce the so-called USA Patriot Act. To date some 386 resolutions have been passed128. The list of cities includes Albuquerque, Atlanta, Austin, Baltimore, Dallas, Des Moines, Detroit, Los Angeles, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, New York City, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Portland (ME), Portland (OR), Providence, Richmond (VA), St. Louis, St. Paul, San Francisco, Seattle, and Washington, D. C. itself! States include Alaska, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Maine, Montana, and Vermont.

[2.2] Pennsylvania Court Deals Blow to Secrecy-Obsessed Fracking Industry: Corporations Not The Same As Persons With Privacy Rights129 (Alternet; 11/04/2013); A.

―The ruling represents the first crack in the judicial armor that has been so meticulously welded together by major corporations,‖ said Thomas Linzey, executive director of the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund, which has helped 150 communities in eight states adopt Community Bill of Rights to limit corporate powers. ―It affirms what many communities already know, that change only occurs when people begin to openly question and challenge legal doctrines that have been treated as sacred by most lawyers and judges.‖

But where the ruling is likely to make the biggest waves is in the so-called corporate personhood debate. The Judge spent more than a third of her 32-page decision saying why corporations and business entities were not the same as people under Pennsylvania‘s constitution, and why, for the purposes of doing business in the state, that federal court rulings that blur the rights of people and businesses do not apply.

http://www.colorado.edu/Economics/morey/4545/global/7states.html http://www.organicconsumers.org/biod/sonoma010605.cfm 127 http://www.organicconsumers.org/monsanto/laws052005.cfm 128 http://www.bordc.org/list.php 129 http://www.alternet.org/fracking/pennsylvania-court-deals-blow-secrecy-obsessed-fracking-industrycorporations-not-same 125 126

―This court ruling is a significant development for the growing movement to restore democracy to the people,‖ said John Bonifaz, the co-founder and executive director of Free Speech For People, a national campaign launched on the day of the U.S. Supreme Court‘s decision in Citizens United v. FEC. ―The ruling is the newest example of dissent within the judiciary to the fabricated doctrine of corporate constitutional rights. It will be held up for years to come as a powerful defense of the promise of American self-government: of, by, and for the people.‖

[2.3] Appeals court upholds local fracking bans in NY130 (Tri-City Herald, 02/05/2013) A.

New York municipalities can use local zoning laws to ban the practice of hydraulic fracturing to drill for natural gas, a mid-level state appeals court said Thursday.

State mining and drilling law doesn't trump the authority of local governments to control land use, the four-judge appellate division panel ruled unanimously.

[2.4] A.

[3]

Hardwick, VT: Relocalized Full Employment Agrarian Economy131: The town of Hardwick, Vt., has been celebrated as the scene of a local food revival. In recent years, lots of small farms have started up nearby. Tom Stearns, president of a local organic seed company called High Mowing Seeds, says there are more organic farms per capita within 10 miles of Hardwick than anywhere else in the world. There's also a thriving local grocery co-op; a busy farmer's market; even a classy restaurant — Claire's — where almost anything you eat grew or grazed on land nearby. 132 [..] Hewitt saw what was happening in Hardwick, and it struck him as unusual, even odd. "Here's this town: Unemployment rate 40 percent higher than the Vermont state average; median income 25 percent lower; and then there was this thing happening around so-called sustainable ag and local food!" Hewitt says. So Hewitt wrote a book about Hardwick: The Town That Food Saved.

De-Industrialization: The End of National Power Grids:

All citizens must immediately begin preparing for the reality that on 22 April 2015, TYGAE is calling for all nations to simultaneously turn off all coal, nuclear and fossil fuel sources of energy to their National Electric Grid. All citizens have two years to make their relocalisation Prepping plans for de-industrialized local food and alternative energy production, including pre-industrial forms of transportation. ―Global climate change will pose serious threats to water supplies and agricultural production, leading to mass migration http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2013/05/02/2379781/appeals-court-upholds-local-fracking.html http://www.hardwickagriculture.org/ 132 http://www.npr.org/2011/07/15/137499585/vermont-towns-food-focus-still-a-growing-concept 130 131

in some cases. At the same time we will see an increasing demand for a dwindling supply of fossil fuels. These factors mean and intense competition for key and vital resources, around the globe and that leads to conflict. ―This report is different to many other reports, involving military leaders. That is because in it, we make a direct appeal to the American people. We talk in this report about the amazing sacrifices the American people made during World War II, planting victory gardens, cutting down on fuel use, saving scrap metal and old rubber, sacrifices, or maybe just examples of common sense and prudent lifestyle changes. Whatever you call them, the steps taken by the American people then, shortened the war and saved lives. And I believe the same can be said today about these challenges of energy security and climate security. There are individual steps that every American can take. Using less energy. Being more efficient with the energy that we do use. Supporting new policies to help our country take a new energy path. These are the steps that can help us avoid, or shorten wars in the future. Those wars over competition for vital resources. These are steps that can save lives. They may cost money yes, but if we don't spend the money now, we will still pay, and we will pay much more later. In fact, we'll pay in American lives lost. American civilians played an important role in World War II because they understood the stakes and because they were asked to do so. General Wald made the stakes clear, and our report makes the stakes clear. Our current energy posture poses a significant and urgent threat to our national security, militarily, economically and diplomatically. Hopefully more Americans will understand these stakes, and that these consequences will affect them. Hopefully more Americans will hear the very direct request from our Commander in Chief and from this small group of a dozen retired Admirals and Generals. The American people, all of us, through our energy choices can contribute directly to the security of our nation. It is a triple win. It makes us energy independent. It reduces our effect on the environment, and it makes our nation very much more secure.‖ – Vice Admiral Dennis McGinn; Energy, Climate Change, and the Military: Implications for National Security133; Woodrow Wilson Center ―Let‘s ignore the models for a moment and consider only the results of a single briefing to the United Nations Conference of the Parties in Copenhagen (COP15)134. Regulars in this space will recall COP15 as the climate-change meetings thrown under the bus by the Obama administration. A footnote on that long-forgotten http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1FMeVH2AgI http://wrongkindofgreen.org/2012/12/10/the-most-important-cop-briefing-that-no-one-ever-heard-truth-liesracism-omnicide/ 133 134

briefing contains this statement: ―THE LONG-TERM SEA LEVEL THAT CORRESPONDS TO CURRENT CO2 CONCENTRATION IS ABOUT 23 METERS ABOVE TODAY‘S LEVELS, AND THE TEMPERATURES WILL BE 6 DEGREES C OR MORE HIGHER. THESE ESTIMATES ARE BASED ON REAL LONG TERM CLIMATE RECORDS, NOT ON MODELS.‖ In other words, Obama and others in his administration knew nearterm extinction of humans was already guaranteed. Even before the dire feedbacks were reported by the scientific community, the Obama administration abandoned climate change as a significant issue because it knew we were done as early as 2009. Rather than shoulder the unenviable task of truth-teller, Obama did as his imperial higher-ups demanded: He lied about collapse, and he lied about climate change. And he still does.‖ – Guy McPherson, [Near-Term Extinction] Climate Change Summary and Update135

[4] Primitivism: Ultimate Goal: Voluntary Sustainability for Our Children and Humanity‟s Future Generations: Citizens are advised to (a) Learn primitive skills used prior to industrial revolution from indigenous cultures still living low/no tech sustainable lifestyles, (b) replace AnthroCorpocentric Compulsive Developmentism value system with Gender Balanced Agrarian and Primitivist value system. ―Over the past three decades, snow cover has been reduced by 1718% per decade and sea ice is declining fast because of humaninduced global warming. Consequently, the albedo effect is collapsing in the Arctic. Albedo is the reflection of Sun‘s radiation off the white ice and white snow surfaces. Unfortunately, when the albedo effect collapses, the dark sea and dark land mass absorb most of the Sun‘s radiation. A collapsing albedo effect is ominously apocalyptic for the Arctic, and for the world. And, disturbingly, Arctic albedo is already in the collapsing stage. This will inevitably lead to ever more methane emissions and a vicious cycle of feedbacks leading to an extinction event, probably unstoppable.‖ - Arctic Methane Emergency Group; Methane Outbreak Alert136

Mosuo: Primitive Ecocentric Gender-Balanced Sustainable Agrarian Culture with no murder, rape, jails, homeless or unemployment: The socio-political problem solving system of the Gender Balanced agrarian Mosuo culture in South West China is plausibly the most credible system of jurisprudence on planet earth. The people of Mosuo have no rape (not even a word in their

135 136

http://guymcpherson.com/2013/01/climate-change-summary-and-update/ Dissident Voice, 27/04/2013 http://dissidentvoice.org/2013/04/methane-outbreak-alert/

language for rape, because it does not exist), no murder, no suicide, no prisons, no mental illness, no mental institutions, no unemployment and no homelessness; as a result of abiding by (a) the laws of nature and tribal control of population and consumption, and (b) the laws of human nature, in terms of public problem solving, and a socio-political focus on root cause problem solving.137 In Mosuo culture, women are the head of the house, property is passed through the female line, and women tend to make the business decisions. Mosuo women carry on the family name and run the households, which are usually made up of several families, with one woman elected as the head. The head matriarchs of each village govern the region by committee. Political power, however, remains in the hands of males, creating a gender-balanced society. The traditional Mosuo religion worships nature, is called Daba, with Lugu Lake regarded as the Mother Goddess and the mountain overlooking it venerated as the Goddess of Love. Their focus is their close relationship to the land that supports them and with their neighbours, who also support them.

Citizen and Corporate Pro-Growth – „GDP‟, „Free Trade‟ & „single market‟ - Actions and Policies Aggravating Climate Change ScarcityConflict Death Spiral on Steroids: Natural Capital: Natural Capital is the source of all of life. The overexploitation, overproduction and overconsumption of natural capital above ecosystem carrying capacity levels, systematically reduces the ecosystem‟s carrying capacity, and activates the Scarcity-Conflict Death Spiral. Natural capital is the extension of the economic notion of capital (manufactured means of production) to environmental goods and services. A functional definition of capital in general is: "a stock that yields a flow of valuable goods or services into the future". Natural capital is thus the stock of natural ecosystems that yields a flow of valuable ecosystem goods or services into the future. For example, a stock of trees or fish provides a flow of new trees or fish, a flow which can be sustainable indefinitely. Natural capital may also provide services like recycling wastes or water catchment and erosion control. Since the flow of services from ecosystems requires that they function as whole systems, the structure and diversity of the system are important components of natural capital. (Encyclopedia of the Earth138) GDP/Economic Growth and energy consumption‟s aggravating/threat multiplier „heat engine‟ relationship to the national security threat of climate change (CO2 emissions).

Tami Blumenfield (May 2009): The Na of Southwest China: Debunking the Myths; Washington Univ http://web.pdx.edu/~tblu2/Na/myths.pdf 138 http://www.eoearth.org/article/Natural_capital 137

ARE economist David Roland-Holst‘s chart – which one of his student‘s calls his ‗demonic bubble bath‘ – shows the tight relationship between energy use and prosperity, a key climate change issue. Based on World Bank and International Energy Agency data, the vertical axis plots per capita energy use in terajoules/year; the horizontal is per capita income as measured by the GDP. Bubble sizes represent population.

Energy consumption is the foundation of industrial development; since energy use is equivalent to development. A country‘s development is a symptom of its energy consumption. The rate of energy consumption and increase in carbon dioxide emissions are virtually identical and have grown exponentially over the last 40 years. Increased efficiency leads to more energy use. Since the earth‘s non-renewable resources are finite, and its renewable resources can only be exploited on a finite level equivalent to carrying capacity regeneration; this trend cannot continue. [1] Adrian Bejan and Sylvie Lorente (5 April 2010): The constructal law of design and evolution in nature139 (PDF140); Royal Society. To summarize, all the high-temperature heating that comes from burning fuel (QH or the energy associated with QH and the high temperature of combustion; cf. Bejan 2006) is dissipated into the environment. The need for higher efficiencies in power generation (greater W/QH) is the same as the need to have more W, i.e. the need to move more weight over larger distances on the surface of the Earth, which is the natural phenomenon (tendency) summarized in the constructal law. At the end of the day, when all the fuel has been burned, and all the food has been eaten, this is what animate flow systems have 139

http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/365/1545/1335.full 140 http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/365/1545/1335.full.pdf

achieved. They have moved have â&#x20AC;&#x2014;mixedâ&#x20AC;&#x2DC; the Earthâ&#x20AC;&#x2DC;s animate flow systems. The to an engine connected to Bejan & Paynter (1976) and

mass on the surface of the Earth (they crust) more than in the absence of moving animal or vehicle is equivalent a brake (figure 4), first proposed by Bejan (1982, 2006).

The power generated by muscles and motors is ultimately and necessarily dissipated by rubbing against the environment. There is no taker for the W produced by the animal and vehicle. This is why the GNP of a country should be roughly proportional to the amount of fuel burned in that country. (Bejan 2009).

[2] P. F. Henshaw (10/17/09): Jevons' Effect and why improving technology efficiency multiplies energy consumption141. Energy efficiency improvements and energy use have both been increasing steadily growing rates. So improving economic efficiency apparently enables the creation of more new energy uses than energy savings. The net effect is to increase the rate of resource depletion. - (fig 1)

Consequently, efficiency improvement results in 2.5 times more energy uses than energy savings, consistent with the observations of Jevons in 1885. (fig 1) Equally surprising, CO2 is being produced at the same increasing rate as total energy use, so new clean energy sources are not

141

http://www.synapse9.com/pub/EffMultiplies.htm

replacing any fossil fuel use, only adding enough to keep the same proportion of clean energy in the mix as in 1971. (fig 1)

At Do Renewables decrease global CO2 emissions142, Prof Tadeusz (Tad) Patzek, Chairman of the Petroleum and Geosystems Engineering Department at The University of Texas at Austin; rescaled the slopes of the trends of Henshawâ&#x20AC;&#x2DC;s graph with the multipliers shown in the inset box, so that all trends more less overlay. His analysis:

The rate of energy use and carbon dioxide emissions are virtually identical and have grown exponentially over the last 40 years. The impact of large dams and nuclear power plants has been barely visible, and disappeared by 2007. The renewable energy sources, wind turbines, biomass cogeneration, and biofuels (photovoltaic panel area is too small to be relevant), are barely keeping up with the deforestation and general paving of the world. Increased efficiency leads to more energy use and the ratio of the slopes has remained constant (3.7) over the last 40 years. Thus, just as Stanley Javons predicted, higher efficiency leads to more energy use which leads to still higher efficiency. Since the Earth is finite, this trend cannot continue and the current global economy must break down. There is nothing we can do about it, unless we fundamentally change, and the approach to breakdown is exponential. I spoke more on this subject in Paper prepared for the 20th Round Table on Sustainable Development of 142

http://patzek-lifeitself.blogspot.com/2011/02/do-renewables-decrease-global-co2.html

Biofuels: Is the Cure Worse than the Disease?: How Can We Outlive Our Way of Life? (PDF143) For example, the expected period of doubling of global energy consumption is 34-37 years. Since this doubling is impossible, claims144 to the contrary by the IPCC notwithstanding, the global economy as we know it today will cease to exist within the next 10-20 years.

[3] Breakthrough Economy145.

(12

Jan

2019):

Carbon

Dioxide

and

the

Global

The relationship of carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossil fuels (with data from the U.S. Energy Information Agency) with global GDP (as measured in PPP terms and reported by Maddison). [4] Ross Garnaut (2011) The Garnaut Climate Change Review 2011: Australia in the Global Response to Climate Change146: Chapter 3: Emissions in the Platinum Age147. Figure 3.13 Global energy use and CO2 emissions, 1970 to 2007

http://www.oecd.org/sd-roundtable/papersandpublications/40225820.pdf http://gaia.pge.utexas.edu/papers/EnergyCoalPaperPublished.pdf 145 http://thebreakthrough.org/archive/carbon_dioxide_and_the_global 146 http://www.garnautreview.org.au/index.html 147 http://www.garnautreview.org.au/chp3.htm 143 144

Sources: Energy use from BP (2008); CO2 emissions from IEA (2007b) and Carbon Dioxide Information and Analysis Centre (2008).

GDP: Gross Domestic Product: Y = C + I + G + (X − M): speed of overexploitation of Natural Capital, by means of exploitative free market policies. ―GDP does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education, or the joy of their play.‖ - Robert Kennedy in a speech148 at the University of Kansas on 18 March 1968 ―GDP tells you nothing about sustainability‖ - Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz proposes149 alternatives to Gross Domestic Product as a measurement of national economic success, 2008 (publ. 2010) ―It's time we admitted that there's more to life than money, and it's time we focused not just on GDP but on GWB - general wellbeing‖ - David Cameron, British Prime Minister David Cameron at the Google Zeitgeist Europe conference in May 2006 (BBC150) ―No one would look just at a firm's revenues to assess how well it was doing. Far more relevant is the balance sheet, which shows assets and liability. That is alos true for a country. - Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz on GDP and learning from business, Foreign Affairs, 2005. ―Gross Domestic Product (GDP) might seem benign enough. After all, it‘s just a number. But it has emerged as the principal way the public evaluates a nation‘s status and whether times are good or bad. News organizations report rising GDP as a sign of recovery, and stagnant or declining GDP as a portent. But GDP mismeasures all things. It is about as indicative of human progress as a body count http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77IdKFqXbUY http://inflationvideo.com/joseph-stiglitz-problems-with-gdp-as-an-economic-barometer/ 150 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/5003314.stm 148 149

is of success in war; it‘s not only blunt, but also blind to the destruction behind the number. It denies that ―growth‖ makes us poorer in the long run and in the short run benefits only a few.‖ Stevel Stoll (Sep/Oct 2012): The Mismeasure of All Things: How GDP distorts economic reality151; Orion

GDP (Y) is a sum of Consumption (C), Investment (I), Government Spending (G) and Net Exports (X – M). GDP represents the speed at which a nation increased consumption or population growth, is overexploiting, overproducing and overconsuming its own natural capital, or other nation‘s natural capital, by means of exploitative free market policies. Put differently, planetary GDP represents the exponential planetary overexploitation of planetary natural capital. GDP represents how fast the industrial civilized death cult is speeding towards the Climate Change ScarcityConflict Death Spiral on Steroids. Consequently the accused editors and business leaders would like to increase Britain‘s contribution to the world‘s scarcity-conflict equation by at least £110bn. They want British citizens to increase their Consumption; Investment in new industrial projects, Government spending; and finally X-M: Exports minus Imports; all of which increases scarcity of non-renewable resources, and where renewable resources are exploited at levels above carrying capacity, they also contribute to scarcity and consequently conflict; which exponentially increases the problems of those tasked with ‗national security‘.

151

www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/articles/article/7008/

Post Peak-NNR Efforts to Increase GDP aggravates Scarcity-Conflict; driving Nation / Humanity faster to Scarcity-Conflict collision: Using the analogy of a car collision, as the resource war violence, on the upward curve, the car is not only travelling uphill, but it also has access to brakes (i.e. the ecosystem can import surplus resources from elsewhere), i.e. the ability to reduce the speed of the car, and hence to reduce, or even totally prevent, the level of violence resulting from the collision. However, on the Post Peak Resources downhill slope, the car is now freewheeling downhill, it has no brakes (the system cannot import resources from elsewhere, because resources are scarce everywhere), which aggravates resource scarcity similar to a foot on the car‘s gaspedal, driving it faster and faster to collision, the crisis of conflict. ―Nothing is more destructive than the gap between people's perceptions of their own day-to-day economic well-being and what politicians and statisticians are telling them about the economy.‖ - French president Nicolas Sarkozy at the unveiling of the Stiglitz Report in Paris on 14 September 2009 (Newsweek152)

Media Pro-Growth Agenda and Censorship of Necessity of DeIndustrialization and Population Control Policies Required for National Security Imperative to Reduce Carbon Emissions aggravation of Scarcity – Conflict Climate Change National Security Threat and NearTerm Extinction. Corporate Media‟s Pro-Growth Agenda: Silence/Censorship/Non-coverage of Scientific study results advocating Sustainable Security (Walking the National Security – Scarcity & Conflict -- Talk to Support the Troops): „Procreate/Consume below carrying capacity‟ [5] Media Non-Coverage of Study detailing how every Child Increases a Parent‟s Carbon Footprint by a factor of 20: [5.1] Paul A. Murtaugh, Michael G. Schlax (2009): Reproduction and the carbon legacies of individuals [PDF153]; Global Environmental Change, 19 (2009) pp. 14-20 A.

Google News Result: ―Your search - murtaugh, carbon, oregon - did not match any news results.‖

[6] Media Non-Coverage of study detailing that only Civilization Collapse will prevent runaway global climate change:

http://www.newsweek.com/blogs/wealth-of-nations/2009/09/15/sarkozy-and-stiglitz-a-new-way-togrow.print.html 153 http://blog.oregonlive.com/environment_impact/2009/07/carbon%20legacy.pdf 152

[6.1] Timothy J. Garrett (Nov. 2009), Are there basic physical constraints on future anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide?154; Climatic Change [6.2] University of Utah (22 Nov 2009): Is Global Warming Unstoppable?: Theory also says Energy Conservation doesn't help155. [6.3]

Google News Results:

―Your search - tim garrett, carbon, utah, anthropogenic - did not match any news results.‖

Your search - tim garrett, carbon, utah, "heat engine" - did not match any news results.

Your search - tim garrett, carbon, utah, civilization - did not match any news results.

Corporate Media‟s Pro-Growth Scarcity-Conflict „If It bleeds, it leads‟ Agenda is the cause of Citizens Eco-Illiterate ignorance of how to contribute to Sustainable Security: Procreate and Consume below carrying capacity, to avoid scarcity induced resource war conflict; and elect Eco-Literate politicians to enact sustainable laws. [1] Maher, Michael (1997/03): How and Why Journalists Avoid the PopulationEnvironment Connection156: University of South-western Louisiana, Population and Environment, Volume 18, Number 4, March 1977; Reprinted in 1997 by the Carrying Capacity Network, Focus, 18 (2), 21-37. Population researchers Paul and Anne Ehrlich opened their book, The Population Explosion, with a chapter titled, "Why Isn't Everyone as Scared as We Are?" They acknowledged, "The average person, even the average scientist, seldom makes the connection between [disparate environmental problems] and the population problem, and thus remains unworried" (1990, p. 21). But while they noted that the evening news almost never connects population growth to environmental problems, the Ehrlichs chiefly blamed social taboos fostered by the Catholic Church and "a colossal failure of education" (p. 32) for public indifference about population. Howell (1992) also minimized the role of the media in influencing public aptitude about science and the environment, and pointed instead to education: ―The obvious starting point for the individual is the public schools .... Education proceeds into undergraduate programs, which can play more than one major role in enhancing scientific literacy (p. 160).‖ http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10584-009-9717-9 http://unews.utah.edu/news_releases/is-global-warming-unstoppable/ 156 Maher, Michael (1997/03): How and Why Journalists Avoid the Population-Environment Connection ,: University of Southwestern Louisiana, Population and Environment, Volume 18, Number 4, March 1977; Reprinted in 1997 by the Carrying Capacity Network, Focus, 18 (2), 21-37. issuu.com/jsror/docs/mahertm_journo-env-pop-connection 154 155

The Ehrlichs and Howell seem to assume that education is the chief factor driving public opinion about environmental causality. But in Tradeoffs: Imperatives of Choice in a High-Tech World, Wenk (1986) offered a more media-centric view of how the public learns: "Whatever literacy in science and technology the general public has reached is not from formal education. Rather, it is from the mass media. That responsibility of the press has been almost completely ignored" (p. 162). This study will examine press responsibility for the public's indifference to population growth by exploring two questions: * To what extent do press reports about population-driven environmental problems link those problems to population growth? * What reasons do reporters give for ignoring population growth in stories about environmental problems? [..] Why Journalists Avoid Mentioning Population As we have seen, both land development economists and environmental experts acknowledge population growth as a key source of environmental change. But journalists frame environmental causality differently. Why? Communication theory offers several possibilities. First is the hegemony-theory interpretation: reports omit any implication that population growth might produce negative effects, in order to purvey the ideology of elites who make money from population growth. As Molotch and Lester (1974) put it, media content can be viewed as reflecting "the practices of those having the power to determine the experience of others" (p. 120). Since real estate, construction and banking interests directly support the media through advertising purchases, this interpretation seems plausible. A number of media critics (e.g., Gandy, 1982; Altschull, 1984; Bennett, 1988) have suggested that media messages reflect the values of powerful political and commercial interests. Burd (1972), Kaniss (1991) and others have pointed out that newspapers have traditionally promoted population growth in their cities through civic boosterism. Molotch (1976) even suggested that cities can best be understood as entities competing for population growth, with the city newspaper as chief cheerleader. Certainly most reporters would be incensed at the suggestion that they shade their reporting to placate commercial interests. But Breedâ&#x20AC;&#x2DC;s classic study of social control in the newsroom (1955) showed that news managersâ&#x20AC;&#x2DC; values are transmissible to journalists through a variety of pressures: salaries, story assignments, layout treatment, editing, and a variety of other

strategies that effectively shape news stories in ways acceptable to management. Another possible explanation for why journalists omit population growth from their story frame is simple ignorance of other explanations. Journalists who cover environmental issues may not be aware of any other possible ways to frame these stories, thus they derive their framing from other journalists. Journalists frequently read each other‘s work and take cues for coverage from other reporters, particularly from the elite media (Reese & Danielian, 1989). Perhaps the pervasive predictability of the story frames examined in the Part I is another example of intermedia influence. On the other hand, it seems difficult to believe that journalists could be ignorant of the role population growth plays in environmental issues, because media coverage frequently ties population growth to housing starts and business expansion. Furthermore, "Why" is one of the five "W‘s" taught in every Journalism 101 course. A public affairs reporting textbook, Interpreting Public Issues (Griffin, Molen, Schoenfeld, and Scotton, 1991), admonishes journalists: "A common journalistic mistake is simply to cover events —real or staged— and ignore underlying issues" (p.320). The book identified population trends as one of the "big trouble spots," and listed world population as the first of its "forefront issues in the ‘90s" (p. 320). Hence, we cannot say that reporting basic causality is beyond the role that journalists ascribe for themselves. Indeed, a panel at the 1994 Society of Environmental Journalists discussed "Covering Population as a Local Story" (Wheeler, 1994). But ignorance remains a possible reason, for not all reporters have training in environmental issues. A third possible explanation comes from the "Spiral of Silence" theory by German scholar Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann (1984): ―The fear of isolation seems to be the force that sets the spiral of silence in motion. To run with the pack is a relatively happy state of affairs; but if you can‘t, because you won‘t share publicly in what seems to be a universally acclaimed conviction, you can at least remain silent, as a second choice, so that others can put up with you. (p. 6)‖ [..] This study suggests that the working principles of journalistic storytelling create a vast causal dissociation when the news media report population-driven environmental problems. Local media can cover local environmental degradation, but cannot connect these problems to population growth because, in part,

reporters and their sources feel that population growth can only addressed at the national level. National media can address the population issue, but national reporters can‘t peg a story on population to local events that, from a national perspective, seem trivial. Why would Newsweek readers in Iowa or Oregon want to know about population-driven water rationing in a suburb of San Diego, or a protested land development north of Atlanta? And on the other hand, why would a borough of Boston want to address national population growth as an issue? From a systems theory perspective, the information feedback loop that connects the microcosm to the macrocosm is broken in the news we get. A spiral of silence also seems to affect journalists‘ framing of population-driven environmental problems. Most journalists interviewed in this study knew population growth affects the environment they cover, but they were reluctant to mention population either in their stories or in the interviews that formed the basis for this chapter. Reporters know the controversial nature of population growth, and would rather avoid the issue than mention it —even in questioning sources for their stories. This study suggests that, from an agenda-setting perspective, the narrative imperative of newswriting keeps issues like population off the agenda. Frequency of mention by the media is the chief means by which an issue asserts itself into the public consciousness (McCombs and Shaw, 1977). But even though population growth causes or exacerbates uncountably frequent events that lower the quality of most Americans‘ lives, reporters don‘t mention this. They can‘t connect event to ultimate cause in daily events reporting, and this effectively keeps the cause off the agenda and out of public consciousness. If, as one interviewed reporter suggested, reporters "cover fires" for six months, then write a single "trend story" that connects the events to causes, this pattern likely keeps population low on the agenda, because an isolated trend story is unlikely to have much effect on public consciousness. McCombs and Shaw (1977) note that the media serve a useful function by setting the agenda: ―Both by deliberate winnowing and by inadvertent agenda-setting the mass media help society achieve consensus on which concerns and interests should be translated into public issues and opinion. (pp. 151-152)‖ But the agenda-setting process seems useful only if we consider what the media do place on the agenda. This study shows that agenda-setting may have a dark side, when we consider what the media do not cover. To generalize from this study, it seems

likely the media have a blind spot regarding the basic layers of multilayered causality. The deep causes that drive daily events remain off the agenda. Certainly this is the case with population growth, but such causal dissociation may keep many other deepseated causes of social problems off the agenda. Although scholars have not satisfactorily tied the media agenda and public opinion to the policy agenda (Borquez, 1993), many scholars have agreed that the media are very important for determining what does not get on the policy agenda. Spitzer (1993) noted: "The scope of the conflict determines the outcome...more than any other single force in national politics, the media control the scope of politics." In a similar vein Kingdon (1973) said: "In addition to noting how important the media are in bringing subjects, facts, and interpretations to congressmen, it is also important to mention that the media also play some part in determining which pieces of information will not be brought to congressmen." And indeed, recent U.S. policy on population is pronatalist (Abernethy, 1993). Although in 1996 Congress took measures to reduce immigration, it did so primarily for economic and social reasons, rather than out of concern for the environment. That same Congress dramatically reduced U.S. funding for worldwide family planning programs. Many environmentalists are frustrated by the low salience Americans give the population issue. Deploring the "primitive stage" of U.S. public opinion on population, Grant (1992, p. 231) characterizes U.S. political discourse as "the kingdom of the deaf" (p. 239). Part I of this study shows that the American public is not deaf; but in the news they read Americans simply have little to hear that explains the environmental costs of population growth. Well-known population researcher Paul Ehrlich has written that a "conspiracy of silence" keeps humanity from taking action on population (1989). Part II of this study shows that journalists are engaged in no conspiracy; they are simply keeping within the storytelling bounds of their craft, framing their coverage of environmental issues narrowly with regard to space and time. Interviewed journalists feel that a limited newshole keeps them from connecting local environmental problems to global causes like population growth. They also know that reproductive matters are a hot button with some readers, and steer clear of the issue if they can. But population must become more salient if future generations are to enjoy the quality of life we now know. A number of scholars conversant with sustainable levels of agricultural and energy output recently estimated an optimum population for the United States (Pimentel and Pimentel, 1992; Costanza, 1992; Ehrlich and Ehrlich, 1992; Werbos, 1992). The highest estimates were below

current population levels; several low estimates were for a population of less than 100 million. Meanwhile the population of the United States is 265 million and is growing about 1 percent a year. Walter Lippmann (1922) distinguished news from truth: â&#x20AC;&#x2022;The function of news is to signalize an event, the function of truth is to bring to light the hidden facts, to set them into relation with each other, and make a picture of reality on which men can act (p. 226).â&#x20AC;&#x2013; This study shows how and why we are letting signalized events, rather than truth, set the agenda for our demographic and environmental future.

[1.1] A.

Articles: Wheeler Timothy (September 2003): Skirting the Population Issue: Why Journalists Need to Tackle Growth157; Environment Writer.

Why is it so hard for journalists covering the environment to address population? Do we lack the guts to tackle really tough, controversial issues? Or do we lack the smarts to sort out the complicated and oftenindirect role population growth plays in problems such as water shortages, declines in biodiversity and suburban sprawl? We've been talking for years about how population growth is one of the major under-reported stories on our beat. I remember sitting on a panel at a Society of Environmental Journalists conference in 1994, offering tips for "localizing" what many perceived then as a global issue. That wasn't the first, or last, how-to session. Yet we have succeeded as journalists so rarely in making the environment-population connection in print or on the air that it remains remarkable when someone does. Population was one of the environmental journalism "taboos" hashed over at SEJ's annual meeting last year in Baltimore. It's on SEJ's agenda again this year in New Orleans. [..] It doesn't help, either, that almost no environmental groups will talk about population growth. The Sierra Club engaged in a fierce debate in 1998 over immigration, but ultimately decided not to take a stand against it. No other major environmental group has touched it since. Recognizing how journalists crave facts that can give them a toehold on such slippery subjects, one population group, Numbers 157

http://www.environmentwriter.org/resources/articles/pop93a.htm

USA, has come out with a study that says only half the land gobbled up in the past decade can be blamed on sprawling development patterns. The rest of the land consumed went to house more people, contends Roy Beck, the group's executive director and another former environmental journalist. Many are uncomfortable with such calculations, and distinctly uncomfortable with some of the critics of the driving force in America's population growth these days. Beck and his group have been lumped in with "hate groups," after all, for advocating limits on immigration. I plead guilty to some of the same limitations facing other journalists: Last year, when I was editing The Baltimore Sun's environmental coverage, Tom Horton, our Chesapeake Bay columnist, told me he wanted to write a piece calling for limits on immigration because he believed population growth was a long-term threat to the Bay. "Do it while I'm on vacation," I grumbled. I didn‘t getting calls from readers accusing us of xenophobia.

relish

If he was really serious about writing such a column, I told him, I wanted to see evidence that immigrants are somehow more environmentally damaging to the Bay than those folks who are moving into the region from other parts of the United States. Like many other journalists, I'd missed the proverbial forest for the trees. And I'd shied away from a controversial topic because of the "baggage" it came with. So maybe it's time to quit lecturing others and start figuring out how to talk reasonably about population again.

[1.2] A.

Google News Search: Your search - michael maher, population, environment, journalists - did not match any news results.

Affidavit in Support of Charges of Bribery & Threat to National Security.

Conclusion: The longer the propagandists, legislators and profiteers of the ProGrowth Agenda, avoid being held accountable for how their Pro-Growth agenda of Unsustainable Scarcity-Conflict Procreation, Consumption and Production, GDP/economic growth and industrialized energy consumption is massively aggravating the Climate Change Scarcity-Conflict Death Spiral on Steroids National Security Threat; the greater the military necessity urgency and justifications for implementing Temporary De-Industrialization and Sustainable Security Constitution Coup d‘etat‘s.

Affidavit in Support of Charges of Bribery & Threat to National Security: Corporate Pro-Growth Agenda Conspiracy to Profit from bribing the public to engage in Unsustainable Scarcity-Conflict Procreation, Consumption and Production behaviour; by ignoring the role of GDP/economic growth and energy consumption’s aggravation of the Climate Change Scarcity-Conflict Death Spiral on Steroids National Security Threat. Accused: Roland Rudd: Chair: Business for New Europe; Dame Helen Alexander: Chair: UBM; Sir Win Bischoff: Chair: Lloyds Banking Group; Sir Richard Branson: Founder: Virgin Group; Sir Roger Carr: Chair: Centrica; Sir Andrew Cahn: Vice-Chair: Nomura; David Cruickshank: Chair: Deloitte LLP; Lord Davies of Abersoch: ViceChair: Corsair Capital; Guy Dawson: Dir: ASA International; Lord Kerr of Kinlochard: Dep.Chair: Scottish Power; Sir Adrian Montague: Chair: 3i; Nicolas Petrovic: CEO: Eurostar; Sir Michael Rake: Chair: BT; Anthony Salz: Vice-Chair: Rothschild; Sir Nicholas Scheele: Chair: Key Safety Systems Inc; Sir Nigel Sheinwald: Dir: Shell; Sir Martin Sorr elL: CEO: WPP; Malcolm Sweeting: Snr.Partner: Clifford Chance; Bill Winters: CEO Renshaw Bay. Independent: Editor: Chris Blackhurst & Grp Mng Ed: Doug Wills: Independent Print Ltd, 2 Derry Street, London W8 5HF. Re: Letters: The benefit of European Union membership outweighs the cost1. DailyMail: Editor: Paul Dacre, Mng Dir: Guy Zitter: Northcliffe House, 2 Derry Street, London, W8 5TT: Re: Every family would be up £3,500 worse off if Britain left the EU, business chiefs warn2. Telegraph: Editor: Andrew Gilligan: 111 Buckingham Palace Road, London, SW1W 0DT: Re: 'Economic case to stay in EU is overwhelming', say business leaders 3.

Declaration of Lara Johnstone I, Lara Johnstone, declare as follows: [1] I am an adult Radical Honoursty Ecofeminist Guerrylla Law Sustainable Security practicing paralegal EcoFeminist, member of Friend of Wikileaks (FoWL) and the Radical Honourty culture4; resident in George, Southern Cape, South Africa; where I run a small EcoFeminist pedal-powered wormery business. [2] I am married to African American prisoner Demian Emile Johnson, who has been incarcerated in the California Dept. of Corrections, on a sentence of 15-to-life for felony murder, since 1982. We met while I was working on providing educational information on rehabilitation issues to prisoners. (Sacramento County: http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/letters/letters-the-benefit-of-european-union-membership-outweighs-thecost-8622571.html 2 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2327401/Every-family-3-500-worse-Britain-left-EU-business-chiefswarn.html 3 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10067402/Economic-case-to-stay-in-EU-is-overwhelming-saybusiness-leaders.html 1

SA Constitutional Court ruling of 03 May 2012 in CCT 23-10, reads as follows: “Ms. Lara Johnstone, Member of Radical Honesty Culture and Religion, is admitted as an amicus curiae” 4

PO Box 5042 * George East, 6539 * Cel: (071) 170 1954 * guerrylla-law.co.nr

Licence & Certificate of Marriage: Demian Emile Johnson and Lara Johnstone (PDF5); 31 May 1998: Sunday Times: US convict wins love and support in SA town (PDF6); 24 Sep 1998: YOU: Volksrust Farmgirl Doomed for Love of Black Convict)(PDF7).

Radical Honoursty CommonSism Anarcho-Primitivist: [3] Radical Honoursty Culture: I am a member of the Radical Honoursty culture, based upon Radical Honesty8 dispute resolution principles, which is (a) a minority culture, (b) an Ecocentric culture, (c) practices Brutal Honesty Authentic Multiculturalism (Zizek: 'The one measure of true love is: you can insult the other'9) endorsing authentic diversity of cultures, and (d) does not endorse the homogenizing AnthroCorpocentric Egotist Consumptionism effects of Multinational Globalization of cultures (Multiculturalism: The Cultural Logic of Multinational Capitalism - Zizek10). The Radical Honoursty culture is anti „civilized patriarchy‟ Primitivist culture. [4]

CommonSism Anarcho-Primitivist:

[5] I am neither anthropocentrically liberal nor conservative, nor an endorser of AnthroCorpocentric Legislative or Juristic Jurisprudence which only grants Humans and Corporations legal personhood, while denying legal personhood to all other animal and plant species and ecological rights to nature. I identify as a CommonSism Primitivist. [6] CommonSism: I am the founder of CommonSism11 -- Common Sense Guerrylla Laws for a Sustainable Commons – which is inspired by among others: the Taker vs. Leaver ideas of the gorilla Ishmael, in Daniel Quinn's books: Ishmael and My Ishmael; Garrett Hardin‟s Tragedy of the Commons, and the Order of Melchizedek ideas of Yakov Rabinovich, as expressed in Stairway to Nowhere: Chapter 8: Melchizedek — Ecological War. [7] I am also the founder of the concept of Æquilibriæx Jurisprudence, which is Equal & balanced -- Eco/Anthropocentric – law, based upon: æquus (equal), lībra/æ (balance), libri (books), and lex (law). Equilibriæx Jurisprudence adheres to the laws of nature / ecology, which manifests as all species living in carry capacity harmony with another. Aquilibriæx Jurisprudence adheres to laws of human nature, which manifests as fully informed consent harmony between all human

http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/090922_hc-ifp http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/980513_stimes 7 http://issuu.com/js-ror/docs/980924_you 8 www.radicalhonesty.com 9 www.spiked-online.com/Articles/00000002D2C4.htm 10 Slavoj Žižek: Multiculturalism or the cultural logic of multinational capitalism, in: Razpol 10 - glasilo Freudovskega polja, Ljubljana 1997 http://www.soc.aau.dk/fileadmin/user_upload/kbm/VoF/ Kurser/2011/Multiculturalism/slavoj_zizek-multiculturalism-or-the-cultural-logic-of-multinational-capitalism.pdf 11 http://sqswans.weebly.com/guerrylla-law.html 5 6

members of society. Æquilibriæx Jurisprudence Anthropocentric and Ecocentric Jurisprudence.

equal

and

balanced

[8] TYGÆ: Tsedaqah Yshmael Guerrylla Æquilibriæx12: TYGÆ‟s Political Party‟s platform is based upon Æquilibriæx Jurisprudence, Guerrylla Law and CommonSism. [9] CommonSism‟s Guerrylla Laws – based upon Aquilibriæx Jurisprudence – regulate human procreation and resource utilization behaviour, by means of legally defining the procreation and consumption difference, and consequent related Sustainable Rights/Penalties, between a Leaver and a Taker, to ensure sustainability. [10] CommonSism asserts that a majority of society's problems - crime, violence, unemployment, poverty, inflation, food shortages, political instability, vanishing species, garbage and pollution urban sprawl, traffic jams, toxic waste, energy and non-renewable resources (NNR) depletion and scarcity are symptoms of Ecological Overshoot, resulting from the AnthroCorpoCentric Consumptionist Left and Right Wing's war against nature, and the absence of Ecocentric Jurisprudence combined with the failures of AnthroCorpocentric Jurisprudence. [10.1] Ecological Overshoot is a consequence of all other ideologies and their AnthroCorpocentric adherents failure to legally (a) define the difference between sustainable and unsustainable procreation and consumption behaviour; and (b) provide legal rights to sustainable practices, and legal penalties to unsustainable individuals, corporations and organisations. [10.2] Guerrylla Laws (A) simply and very specifically clarify the difference between the consumption and procreation behaviour of an Unsustainable Taker (Scarcity Combatant) vs a Sustainable Leaver (Eco-Innocent); and are (B) used in courts to (a) provide legal rights and socio-political rewards of recognition to Sustainable Leaver's for their Heroic lifestyle choices and practices; (b) confront Taker Scarcity Combatants of their Breeding / Consumption combatant behaviours aggravation of Scarcity induced socio-economic problems, by means of aggravated legal penalties, in accordance to their 'Taker Scarcity Combatant' status. [10.3] Guerrylla Laws define the Eco/Ego Footprint13 procreation and consumption behaviour of an individual as a Sustainable Leaver (aka Eco-Innocent) or Unsustainable Taker (aka Scarcity-Combatant), based upon a sustainable consumption bio-capacity of 1 global hectare (gha)14 (60 % of 1.8 gha)15 in http://tygae.weebly.com EcoFootprint: The difference between the biocapacity and Ecological Footprint of a region or country. A biocapacity deficit occurs when the Footprint of a population exceeds the biocapacity of the area available to that population. If there is a regional or national biocapacity deficit, it means that the region is importing biocapacity through trade or liquidating regional ecological assets. Global biocapacity deficit cannot be compensated through trade, and is overshoot. 14 Sustainable Footprint Biocapacity: A biocapacity of 1 gha assumes that 40% of land is set aside for other species. 1 gha is 60 % of 1.8 gha, therefore .8 hectares is set aside for other species. 15 International Biocapacity: In 2006, the average biologically productive area (biocapacity) per person worldwide was approximately 1.8 global hectares (gha) per capita. In 2008, there were ~ 12 billion hectares of biologically productive land and water on Earth. Dividing by the number of people alive in that year (6.7 billion) gives 1.79 global hectares per person. This assumes that no land is set aside for other species that consume the same biological material as 12 13

accordance with the proactive conservation policies of Bhutan16; multiplied by an individuals Breeding footprint factor of 20 per child. [(Each Child increases a parents footprint by factor of 2017)] A.

Sustainable Leaver / Eco-Innocent: 0 children, consumption < 20 gha (Intn'l Biocapacity (1 gha) x 20); or 1 child, consumption < 1 gha.

Unsustainable Taker / Scarcity-Combatant: 0 children, consumption > 20 gha; or 1 child, consumption > 1 gha.

For example: My Consumption Footprint18 using Sustainable Economy's Myfootprint.org quiz, is 12.75 global hectares (gha). South Africa's average consumption footprint is 38.59 gha. I have no children, consequently my procreation factor is 0 x 20* = 0. My Consumption (12.75) x Procreation (0) = Eco Footprint of 12.75/0 gha. If accurate, if everyone consumed and procreated like me, we would need 0.81 earths.19 Conversely, if everyone consumed and procreated like President Jacob Zuma, we would need 2090 earths20.

[10.4] TYGÆ’s Purpose: (A) Tsedaqah: ecological, political, gender, cultural and religious balance; (B) Yshmael creation of a Leaver society, by means of practice and legislation of CommonSism‟s Guerrylla Laws which regulate human procreation and resource utilization behaviour, by means of legally defining the procreation and consumption difference, and consequent related Sustainable Rights/Penalties, between a Leaver and a Taker, to ensure sustainability; (C) Guerryllæ warriors engage in Guerrylla Law practice and socio-political support for Leaver Ecological, Animal Rights, Indigenous Rights, Separatist Multiculturalism, Decentralization, Relocalization, De-Industrialization, Primitivization, Radical Honesty and Transparency Activism; against Taker Individuals and Corporations, working for a low/no tech relocalized and decentralized Agrarian or Primitivist separatist ethno/cultural homogenous tribal society; (D) Æquilibriæx Jurisprudence: recognizes all animal, plant and human species rights to legal personhood, and the importance of all decisions and actions being evaluated in humans. If for example, there were only 3.5 billion people alive that year, that would have provided everyone with 3.5 gha. If there were only 1 billion people, their would be 12gha biocapacity for each persons needs. 16 Bhutan Proactive Conservation: Bhutan is seen as a model for proactive conservation initiatives. The Kingdom has received international acclaim for its commitment to the maintenance of its biodiversity. This is reflected in the decision to maintain at least sixty percent of the land area under forest cover, to designate more than 40% of its territory as national parks, reserves and other protected areas, and most recently to identify a further nine percent of land area as biodiversity corridors linking the protected areas. Environmental conservation has been placed at the core of the nation's development strategy, the middle path. It is not treated as a sector but rather as a set of concerns that must be mainstreamed in Bhutan's overall approach to development planning and to be buttressed by the force of law. - "Parks of Bhutan". Bhutan Trust Fund for Environmental Conservation online. Bhutan Trust Fund. 17 Paul Murtaugh (7-31-09): Family Planning: A Major Environmental Emphasis, Oregon University http://sqswans.weebly.com/child--ecofootprint-x-20.html 18 http://myfootprint.org/en/your_results/?id=2559685 19 http://sqworms.weebly.com/lara-johnstone-eco-081.html 20 President Zuma‟s consumption footprint using Sustainable Economy's Myfootprint.org quiz, is 65.66 global hectares (gha). President Zuma‟s Procreation Factor is 500 [President Zuma has 25 children. His procreation footprint factor is 25 x 20* = 500. (Each Child increases a parents footprint by factor of 20)]. President Zuma‟s Net Consumption & Procreation Footprint is 33280 gha [Consumption (65.66) x Procreation (500) = Net Footprint of 33280 gha]. If accurate, if everyone consumed and procreated like President Zuma, we would need 2,090 earths. http://sqworms.weebly.com/jacob-zuma-ego-2090.html

terms of their contribution to Æquilibriæx balance; (E) Sustainable Security: There is no security without Sustainability. Sustainability is impossible without a return to a Leaver society. [11]

Anti ‘Civilized Patriarchy’ Anarcho-Primitivist:

[12]

‘Civilized’ Patriarchy (pa•tri•arch•y):

[12.1] A system of society or government, is Patriarchal to the extent that it regulates (a) the relations between humans, nature and other animals species and (b) the relations between humans amongst themselves, in terms of their gender, culture, ethnic, religious and ideological conflicts; for the (c) almost exclusive benefit of violent Anthropocentric humans and corporations. [12.2] Consequently a legal, political or social system is Patriarchal to the extent of its (a) failure to provide automatic equal legal personhood and rights to nature and animal and plant species; (b) disregard for the objective and scientific carrying capacity truth of the laws of nature/ecology; and (c) disregard for the laws of human nature; when they contradict the AnthroCorpocentric – breeding and consumption war – objectives of the holders of subjective AnthroCorpocentric Truth. [12.3] A society has violent Patriarchal breeding and consumption war objectives, to the extent that its socio-political status symbols involve breeding war, consumption war and violent warrior mythology: (a) breeding war procreation above carrying capacity: i.e. cultures that reward their male members with concepts of manhood virility status, which are based on the man breeding a family above carrying capacity levels; (b) consumption war consuming above carrying capacity; i.e. cultures that reward their male members with concepts of manhood intelligence/virility status, which are based upon the man consuming above carrying capacity levels, to demonstrate his „large consumption penis‟; (c) warrior mythology, where violent men are rewarded with „freedom fighter‟ or „soldier‟ sociopolitical status symbol medals and awards; particularly if the warrior mythology censors and ignores information to educate the culture‟s members, that scarcity induced resource war violence can be avoided by the culture‟s members choosing to breed and consume below carrying capacity levels. A culture which teaches a purely defensive warrior mythology; i.e. based purely on defense of its landbase and resources, i.e. which educate the members of the culture to avoid overpopulation and overconsumption scarcity inducing lifestyle‟s within its culture, would not be considered a patriarchal culture. [13]

Fully Informed Consenting Anarcho-Primitivist Culture:

[14] Any woman who wishes to join the Gender Balanced Radical Honoursty Primitivist culture, must make a fully informed consenting decision, detailing her agreement to the principles of living in a non-violent Anarcho-Primitivist culture: [14.1] A non-violent Anarcho-primitivist culture which has (a) no murder, no rape, no suicide, no homeless, no unemployment, no courts, no police, no prisons, no mental illness, no mental institutions (such as the Mosou in SW China); (b) has no

patriarchal objectification and sexualized concepts of „beauty‟; (c) where a woman‟s value is not based upon her „beauty‟, but her character, and (c) she does not have to trade her sexuality for physical or economic safety and security, but can choose to love any man, for his character and personality; (d) as long as she takes personal responsibility for sustaining the non-violent bountiful free society by refraining from contributing to scarcity induced violence resulting from procreating and consuming above carrying capacity. [14.2] She agrees to give up the values of violent „civilized‟ society which has (a) murder, rape, suicide, homeless, unemployment, courts, police, prisons, mental illness, mental institutions, (b) has patriarchal objectification and sexualized concepts of „beauty‟, which demean and vilify all women who do not meet those „beauty‟ requirements; (c) where her value is not based on her honesty, character and integrity, but upon how well she is able to market and trade her sexuality for physical and economic safety and security, (c) where she is coerced by the society‟s endemic scarcity induced violence to purchase safety and security by trading sexual favours to men, for physical and economic safety and security; and cannot truly make a choice to love any man, based purely on his personality, and (d) where she is expected to be her partners brood sow, and sexual socio-economic status symbol bimbo accessory, to breed/consume above carrying capacity, to thereby aggravate scarcity induced violence, particularly against other lower class women, which maintains the socio-political enslaved violent society which forces women to give up a moral spiritual identity, and to exchange sexual favours for safety and security.

Military Necessity of MILINT Earth Day Coup d'état; If Eco-Illiterate Voters fail to act for Sustainable Security future, by 22 April 2014 [15] I am the TYGAE Author of Military Necessity of MILINT Earth Day Coup d'état; If Eco-Illiterate Voters fail to act for Sustainable Security future, by 22 April 2014. [16] Overview of Military Necessity Justification for Temporary Sustainable Security Coup d‟état De-Industrialization: [16.1]

Implementing

Climate Change is a Global Security Threat - National Security Experts

[16.2] Climate Change is a Near-Term Extinction (NTE) Threat in absence of urgent immediate actions to massively reduce carbon emissions – Scientists [16.3] Currently available Political Options for Military Officials Concerned about National Security Imperative to Reduce Global Security Threat and possible Near Term Extinction (NTE) threat of Climate Change: A.

Military Appeal to American/World Citizens to „Walk their Talk‟ of „Supporting the Troops‟, by massively reducing their energy consumption, by “planting victory gardens, cutting down on fuel use, saving scrap metal

and old rubber, sacrifices, or maybe just examples of common sense and prudent lifestyle changes.” [16.4] Policies Required for National Security Imperative to Reduce Carbon Emissions aggravation of Scarcity – Conflict Climate Change National Security Threat and Near-Term Extinction; currently only available by invoking Military Necessity Coup d‟état‟s: [16.5] End Breeding War: Political Demographic policies required to give citizens incentives to reduce procreation to below carrying capacity to reduce their Scarcity – Conflict aggravation of Climate Change National Security Threat and Near-Term Extinction: A.

Scientist: Every Child Increases a Woman‟s Carbon Footprint by a factor of 20: A woman can reduce her carbon footprint 19 times more by having one fewer child than by all other energy efficiency actions the E.P.A. suggests combined.

[16.6] End Consumption War: Economic policies required to implement Relocalization, De-Industrialization and Primitivization: A.

Scientist: Only Civilization Collapse will prevent runaway global climate change: Industrial Civilization / Consumption Developmentism as Heat Engine Root cause of Scarcity-Conflict Climate Change-National Security Impending Near-term Extinction reality.

[16.7] Ending Multinational Capitalism‟s Pro-Growth Breeding and Consumption War National Security Policies are currently impossible to implement, except by invoking Military Necessity Coup d‟état ‟s because: [16.8] Corporate Media‟s Pro-Growth Agenda: Silence/Censorship/Non-coverage of Scientific study results advocating Sustainable Security (Walking the National Security – Scarcity & Conflict -- Talk to Support the Troops): „Procreate/Consume below carrying capacity‟ [16.9] Corporate Media‟s Pro-Growth Agenda is the cause of Citizens EcoIlliterate ignorance of how to contribute to Sustainable Security: Procreate and Consume below carrying capacity, to avoid scarcity induced resource war conflict; and elect Eco-Literate politicians to enact sustainable laws. [16.10] Tragedy of the Dunning-Kruger Democracy Commons: Eco-Illiterate Taker Cheater (conditional co-operators and free rider) citizens elect Eco-Illiterate Taker Cheater (conditional co-operators and free rider) Politicians. [16.11] Nash Equilibrium Game Theory: International Cooperation requires politicians who are issue specific unconditional co-operators - Leavers. Milgram: Obedience Study: 92% of citizens who are conditional co-operators and free riders (65%); which only leaves 8% who are capable of issue specific unconditional cooperation. Consequently, universal franchise One Man, One Vote means that conditional co-operators and free rider Taker citizens elect conditional co-operators and free rider Taker politicians. Electing Eco-Literate Unconditional Co-operators 7

politicians requires only licensing Ecoliterate „unconditional co-operators‟ with a license to vote. [17] Military Necessity Evaluation of Worst Case Scenario‟s: Implementing Coup d‟état De-Industrialization vs. Green Economy: [17.1] Implement Coup d‟état De-Industrialization and Sustainable Security Constitutions: we mitigate ecological collapse, and our children have a survivable sustainable security opportunity to manage the path towards a de-industrialized low/no tech, agrarian future. [17.2] Do nothing and allow Politicians to Implement Green Economy Industrial Revolution: we keep industrial civilization heat engine lights on for a bit longer, which fails to reduce carbon emissions; activating runaway global climate change and near term extinction. We send our children into a climate furnace involving ecological collapse and extinction for humanity and millions of species. [18] MILINT Earth Day Correspondence and News: Notice’s & Correspondence related to Military Necessity Justification for Implementing Temporary Sustainable Security Coup d’état DeIndustrialization: [19] Copies of all documents and various acknowledged receipts available at MILINT Earth Day21 (and navyjag-humint.co.nr). [19.1]

03 May: MILINT Earth Day Petition to White House (wh.gov/zjyC):

Avoid a Coup d’état, by implementing Sustainable Security Relocalization, De-Industrialization and Primitivization. We demand Sustainable Security Relocalization, Decentralization, De-Industrialization and Primitivization policies, by 22 April 2014 - 09:11 GMT; & turning off all coal, nuclear & fossil fuel sources to the National Grid on 22 April 2015. If we are too few or ignored; we call on the US Military to participate in worldwide simultaneous temporary Coup d'état's; to enact Sustainable Security Constitutions (a ‘SusSec Licence to Vote’ policy). If we fail, we confront the extermination of humanity, by 2100, due to runaway feedback confluence of ecological tipping points. Our failure to act by 2014/15; will aggravate the runaway feedback confluence, rendering it impossible & futile to act later. "We've got to act now.” – Gen. Wesley Clark, NATO '96-99

[19.2]

04 May: USA: Joint Chiefs of Staff: General Dempsey & WH. Pres. Obama:

General Martin Dempsey: Chairman: Joint Chiefs of Staff; c/o: Colonel Mark Lee USAEC; U.S. Army Environmental Command and President Barak Obama, c/o: 21

http://tygae.weebly.com/milint-earth-day.html

Ms. Virginia Palmer, Charge D'Affaires USA Embassy, c/o: Dir Nat. Intel: James Clapper: JCS Dempsey & WH Obama MILINT Necessity of Coup d'etat to implement Sustainable Security Policies.

[19.3]

05 May: Russia: Russian Army: Gen. Shoygu & President Putin:

President Putin and Sergey Kuzhugetovich Shoygu, General of the Russian Army; CC & c/o: Commanders of: Land Forces; Air Force; Navy; Strategic Missile Forces; Air and Space Defense; Airborne Troops; W. Military Dist. S. Military Dist.; E. Military Dist.; N. Fleet; Pacific Fleet; Baltic Fleet; Black Sea Fleet: Pres Putin & Gen Shoygu: MILINT Necessity of Coup d'etat to implement Sustainable Security Policies. [19.4]

05 May: Help from FBI-Miami:

Correspondence with FBI-Miami who responded to RE: JCS Dempsey & WH Obama: MILINT Necessity of Coup d'etat to implement Sustainable Security Policies; with “How can the FBI help you?” [19.5]

06 May: United Kingdom: Gen. Richards & PM Cameron:

Gen. Sir David Richards, Chief of the Defence Staff; Gen Nicholas Houghton: VC of Defence; Adm George Zamebellas: Chief Navy; Gen Peter Wall: Chief Gen. Staff; Marshall Stephen Dalton: Air Chief; Gen Richard Barrons: Joint Forces Command; Prime Minister David Cameron; c/o: Secretary of Def: Philip Hammond; Min Armed Forces: Andrew Robathan; Sec State: Defense Spokesman: Lord Astor of Hever; Secretary of Energy & Climate Change: Edward Davey. PM Cameron & Gen D.Richards: MILINT Necessity of Coup d'etat to implement Sustainable Security Policies [19.6]

07 May: Correspondence: UKIP: MEP: Roger Helmer:

Correspondence with UKIP MEP Roger Helmer: Primitive Feminist's MILINT Earth Day Coup d'etat Correspondence with UKIP Climate Change Skeptic MEP: Roger Helmer Re: 1. Obsessive: “excessive in degree or nature”; 2. Realistic view of the likely impact of my actions. [19.7]

08 May: News: Prince Charles: Urgency of Climate Change Action:

Speaking at a conference for scientists at St James‟ Palace in London, which included Owen Paterson, the Conservative Secretary of State for the Environment, Ed Davey, the Lib Dem secretary of state for energy and climate (both of whom received the MILINT Earth Day Notices on 06 May) and Lord Stern.

[19.8]

09 May: NATO: Mil. Comm: Bartels & Sec. Gen. Rasmussen:

NATO Member Chief of Defence: AL: Maj. Gen. Xhemal Gjunkshi; BE: Maj. Gen. Eddy Testelmans; BG: Gen. Simeon Simeonov; CA: Gen. Thomas Lawson; HR:

Gen. Drago Lovric; CZ: Lt. Gen. Petr Pavel; DK: Gen. Peter Bartram; EE: Maj. Gen. Riho Terras; FR: Gen. Bertrand Ract-Madoux; DE: Gen. Volker Wieker; GR: Gen. Michail Kostarakos; HU: Gen. Tibor Benko; IS: R.Adm. Georg Larusson; IT: Gen. Biagio Abrate; LV: Brig. Gen. Juris Zeibarts; LT: Lt. Gen. Arvydas Pocius; LU: Col. Mario Daubenfield; NL: Gen. Tom Middendorp; NO: Gen. Harald Sunde; PL: Gen. Mieczyslaw Cieniuch; PT: Gen. Luis Pinto; RO: Lt. Gen. Stefan Danila; SK: Gen. Peter Vojtek; SI: Brig. Dobran Bozic; Gen. Fernando Garcia Sanchez; TK: Gen. Necdet Ozel; UK: Gen. David Richards; JCS: Gen. Martin Dempsey; c/o & via: NATO Military Committee: Knud Bartels. NATO Member Commander in Chief: AL: Pres. Bujar Nishani; BE: PM: Elio Di Rupo; BG: Pres. Rosen Plevneliev; CA: PM. Stephen Harper; HR: Pres. Ivo Josipovic; CZ: Pres. Milos Zeman; DK: Queen Margrethe; EE: PM: Andrus Ansip; FR: Pres. Francois Hollande; DE: Chanc. Angela Merkel; GR: Pres. Karolos Papoulias; HU: Pres. Janos Ader; IS: Pres: Olafur Ragnar Grimsson; IT: Pres. Giorgio Napolitano; LV: Andris Berzins; LT: Pres. Dalia Grybauskaite; LU: PM: Jean-Claude Juncker; NL: King Willem-Alexander; NO: King Harald V; PL: Pres. Bronislaw Komorowski; PT: Pres. Anibal Cavaco Silva; RO: Pres. Traian Basescu; SK: Pres. Ivan Gasparovic; SI: Pres. Borut Pahor; ES: King Juan Carlos I; TR: Pres. Abdullah Gul; UK: Queen Elizabeth II; US: President Barack Obama; c/o: NATO Sec. Gen. Andres Foch Rasmussen.

[19.9]

10 May: Climate Change Global Military Advisory Council:

Copies of NATO MILINT Necessity of Coup d'etat to implement Sustainable Security Policies, sent to: Global Military Advisory Council on Climate Change (GMACCC): RNLMC Kees Homan; BIPSS: Maj.Gen. ANM Muniruzzaman; Maj. Piet Wit; Lt General Bala Nanda Sharma.

[19.10] 14 May: United Nations visit to MILINT Earth Day: Repeated visits by United Nation Official to Milint Earth Day website.

[19.11] 14 May: News: Pentagon Legal Coup d’etat Preparations: Legal Preparations for MILINT Necessity of Sustainable Security Coup d'etat to protect Constitution from Eco-Illiterate Voters & Politicians A defense official who declined to be named takes a different view of the rule, claiming, “The authorization has been around over 100 years; it‟s not a new authority. It‟s been there but it hasn‟t been exercised. This is a carryover of domestic policy.” ... Nevertheless, he says, “every person in the military swears an oath of allegiance to the Constitution of the United States to defend that Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.”

[19.12] 15 May: DECC: Min. Climate Change: Gregory Barker: Correspondence with DECC: Dept Energy & Climate Change & Minister of State for Climate Change: Rt. Hon. Gregory Barker Primitive Feminist's MILINT

Earth Day Coup d'état Correspondence with DECC: Minister of State for Climate Change. PS: Pentagon make Legal Preparations for MILINT Necessity of Coup d'etat to implement Sustainable Security Policies; and protect Constitution from Eco-Illiterate Voters and Politicians.

[19.13] 16 May: Pres. Obama: ‘Mutant’s Climate Change Suicide’ Tweet: Pres Obama's cryptic confirmation of Dr. Guy McPherson‟s allegations 22 that Obama and others in his administration have known since 2009, about climate change‟s near-term extinction consequences; by tweeting23 about Australian John Cook, an expert in climate change communication's study: "Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made and dangerous. Read more: http://OFA.BO/gJsdFp" Mutant Message Down Under is about an American woman who goes on a 4 month walkabout through the Outback, with nomadic Aboriginals, who call themselves the "Real People". She learns a new ecologically centred way of life, their methods of healing, decision to commit tribal suicide, and the wisdom of their 50,000-year-old culture; experiencing a dramatic personal transformation.

[19.14] 19 May: Notice to SCO: Shanghai Cooperation Org. & ASEAN: Assoc of S.E Asian Nations: SCO: Shanghai Cooperation Org.: Member Comm. In Chief: CN: General Chang Wanquan & Pres. Xi Jinping; KZ: Min. Adilbek Dzhaksybekov & Pres. Nursultan Nazarbayev; KG: Colonel General Alik Mamyrkulov & Pres. Almazbek Atambayev; RU: General Sergey Kuzhugetovich Shoygu & Pres. Vladimir Putin; TJ: Pres. Emomalii Rahmon; UZ: Pres. Islam Karimov; Observer Comm. in Chief: AF: Pres. Hamid Karzai; IN: Pres. Pranab Mukherjee & Air Chief Marshal N.A.K. Browne; IR: Supreme Leader: Ali Khamenei, Pres. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad & Lt General Ataollah Salehi; MN: Pres. Tsakhiagiin Elbegdorj, Min. Dashdembereliin Bat-Erdene & Lt. Gen. Tserendejidiin Byambajav; PK: Pres. Asif Ali Zardari & JCS: Chair: Gen. Khalid Shameem Wynne. ASEAN: Assoc of S.E Asian Nations: ID: Admiral Agus Suhartono and Pres. Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono; MY: Jeneral Tan Sri Dato' Seri Zulkifeli Mohd. Zin; Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak and King Abdul Halim; PH: Gen. Emmanuel T. Bautista and Pres. Benigno Aquino III; SG: Major-Gen. Ng Chee Meng and Pres. Tony Tan Keng Yam; TH: Gen. Thanasak Patimaprakorn, H.M. King Bhumibol Adulyadej & Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra; BN: Major Gen. Aminuddin Ihsan and HM Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah; MM: Senior General Min Aung Hlaing and President Thein Sein; KH: General Tea Banh, King Norodom Sihamoni and Prime Minister Hun

22 23

http://guymcpherson.com/2013/01/climate-change-summary-and-update/ https://twitter.com/BarackObama/statuses/335089477296988160

Sen; LA: President Choummaly Sayasone and Prime Minister Thongsing Thammavong; VN: President Trương Tấn Sang & Min. Tran Dai Quang [19.15] 21 May: News: China agrees to impose carbon targets by 2016: The battle against global warming has received a transformational boost after China, proposed to set a cap on its greenhouse gas emissions for the first time, putting a ceiling on emissions from 2016. It marks a dramatic change in China's approach to climate change .. The proposal to introduce the cap has been made by China's National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), agency responsible for planning the country's social and economic development. [19.16] 22 May: Corr: Dear Crackers: Chinks not Afraid of Dark: Let’s DeIndustrialize to Prevent Climate Change and Ecological Collapse: Military Necessity Evaluation of Worst Case Scenario‟s: (I) Coup d‟état DeIndustrialization and Sustainable Security Constitutions: mitigate ecological collapse, and our children have a survivable sustainable security opportunity to manage the path towards a de-industrialized low/no tech, agrarian future OR (II) Green Economy: activate runaway global climate change and near term extinction. Conclusion: The longer the propagandists, legislators and profiteers of the ProGrowth Agenda, avoid being held accountable for how their Pro-Growth agenda of Unsustainable Scarcity-Conflict Procreation, Consumption and Production, GDP/economic growth and industrialized energy consumption is massively aggravating the Climate Change Scarcity-Conflict Death Spiral on Steroids National Security Threat; the greater the military necessity urgency and justifications for implementing Temporary De-Industrialization and Sustainable Security Constitution Coup d‟etat‟s. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C § 1746, I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Executed this 23rd day of May, 2013. George, South Africa

Lara Johnstone PO Box 5042, George East, 6539 RSA Cel: (071) 170 1954. E: (jmcswan@mweb.co.za)