In 2020: On the Circular Economy, Infrastructure, and Sustainability

 The two journal articles at the links below give great insights regarding present and future efforts toward a sustainable world.  [Again, sorry about the copy-and-paste-on-another-page links, but I have no control over that.  As far as I know, that's a Google-Blogger-Blogspot glitch.]

............................

1.  Title - "Circular Futures: What Will They Look Like?"

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092180091931972X

2.  Title - "Infrastructure Is Key to Make Cities Sustainable"

https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/20/8308/htm

...........................

I've noticed on Twitter and elsewhere online that some environmental activists don't understand what's taking so long in regard to a shift to sustainability.  They are a bit frustrated.  I'm guessing these are mostly young people.  No offense intended.  As an old man who has been in this and a couple of related fields for many years (starting in 1970), I offer the following.

First, along with many others, I fully recognize that time - relative to the socio-ecological-economic CRISIS we're in - is short.  The pace of research reflects that; the pace of implementation in most areas of the world does not.  There are many reasons as to why.  In my opinion, here are only two of those reasons, as follows.

1.  Changing Spaceship Earth to genuine sustainability requires a major shift in attitudes, ethics, lifestyle, production, and consumption.  Resistance abounds.  Ignorance abounds.  Propaganda abounds.  Overcoming all that requires patience, and most of all, persistence.

2.  One of the biggest obstacles (perhaps THE biggest) is the fact that mega money largely controls politics.  The overwhelming majority of national politicians are selected, groomed, and financed by the Super-Rich Upper Crust.  Surely by now this is common knowledge.  Unfortunately, most of the Super-Rich are faux "Green".  They've more or less been forced to talk the talk, but have little to no interest in anything ecological or sustainable.  They're short-term thinkers.  Until we get big money out of politics, little will change other than the Crisis getting worse and worse.

..................................

Not only my opinion.  Stay Well, & Persist

Preventing the Circular Economy (CE) Concept From Disintegrating

 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344917302835?dgcid=raven_sd_recommender_email

In the journal article at the link above, the authors maintain that the CE concept may be in danger of collapse due to a lack of agreement among scholars & practitioners as to exactly what it means.  As a result, they say, certain important elements (e.g., social equity, sustainable development) of CE are slighted in planning.  [Keep in mind, this article was published almost three years ago.]

 After a detailed description of the paper's research methods, the article then presents "the first comprehensive and systematic analysis of CE definitions...".  Essentially--- solicited, written, and qualitative definitions of 114 CE terms/elements were coded, analyzed, and quantified.

Section "4. Conclusion" reveals the important results, and should be read by those working with the CE concept.  A few examples of the results follow:

1.  a much needed definition of CE;

2.  the suggestion that some of the authors of the solicited definitions have no idea what CE is really about; and,

3.  some of those authors entirely equate CE with recycling.

.......................................

In my view, the article contributes to reducing the lack of coherence in the CE arena.  I still maintain, though, that CE appears to be solidly wedded to the concept of "unlimited economic growth".  As such, it ignores the role of entropy in the biophysical world, and the common sense observation that Spaceship Earth is finite.  Relying on Julian Simon's contention that human inventiveness and production efficiency will overcome any obstacles is not realistic.  Nevertheless, given current political climates around the world, CE may be a good FIRST STEP (& only that) toward a genuinely sustainable habitat.  But first, CE researchers, policy makers, and practitioners need to cohere on what constitutes the Circular Economy.  If they don't, the concept likely will dissolve, fade away, or become nothing more than circularity for the sake of circularity.

......................................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

The Social Dimension: "I" and "We"

 At the link below is a book review that is well worth the read.

https://www.sciencemagazinedigital.org/sciencemagazine/23_october_2020/MobilePagedArticle.action?articleId=1631113&app=false#articleId1631113

In terms of racism, for many Caucasian people I don't think it's skin color so much that causes them distaste and fear.  I think it's the (unwarranted) fear of losing their culture.  They don't seem to understand that any particular group culture can be preserved in a multicultural society.  Even within a single "Race" different ethnic groups have done so.  Here in the USA, the Germans, Italians, Jews, Irish, Russians, and others have all done it.

As a former Biology and Ecology teacher, the uproar over the concept of human "races" is odd to me.  In the taxonomy and phylogeny of the human, any subdivision [Kingdom-Phylum-Class-Order-Family-Genus- Species-Variety] below species is pretty much meaningless.  In other words, what matters is the species level; and all of us belong to Homo sapiens.  To any reasonable & rational person, physical differences (e.g., skin color) are of no significance; but often, cultural differences do matter in one way or another.

............................

Not only my opinion.  Stay Well

The Election Here in the USA

 This election is not about anything the Deceitful Don talks about. Instead, it's about democracy, decency, divisiveness, deceit, the bad side of tribalism, hate, & ignorance. Renowned reporter Risen nails it here---

https://theintercept.com/2020/10/21/trump-presidency-summary/

As a psychological gaslighter, almost everything Trump says is a lie... and a blatant lie.  Whatever he says (99% of the time), the exact opposite is true.  It's a genuine tragedy for us and the world.  What makes it comical as well is that his lies almost always are obvious.  Yet he persists in lying.  He appears to be about as psychologically developed as perhaps an eighth grader.  How can I say that with any authority?

A wise man once said:  you don't have to be a master carpenter to recognize a shack.  Trump is a psychological shack.  Anyone who isn't one of his cult members can see that.  Vote accordingly.

Reminder:  I'm not a Republican or a Democrat.  I don't care much for Biden, but he's orders of magnitude better for the world than is Trump.

.......................

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

"A Life on Our Planet"

 https://steadystate.org/a-life-on-our-planet-a-tentative-step-toward-mainstream-steady-statesmanship/

Attenborough, biodiversity, and the Steady State Economy - how they're all linked.  Even at 93 years of age, this man is a warrior for the ecosphere.  What a life well spent... and not done yet.

............................

Be Well

Breaking Monopolies, Reducing Rentier Power re Rent Extraction, and the Connections to Resource Use & "Growth"

 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800919304203

    Title - "The Threat of Rent Extraction in a Resource-constrained Future"

.............................

There are many different types of "rents".  Don't think only in terms of living space rent.  For example, there's the renting of your labor.  There's the renting of land for purposes other than residential housing, and there are a number of other types.

The author of the above journal article proposes that private rent extraction is "a barrier to the goal of transforming economic institutions so that society can flourish within planetary boundaries [limitations]".  She maintains that concentrations of private rentier power create an imperative for unlimited growth.

For the most part, I believe that's correct.  I also believe such thoughts would be rejected outright by many people here in the USA, but not as much in Europe and elsewhere.  Why?  People here rightly would view it as democratic socialism, and they seem to have a completely black/white view of socialism v. capitalism.  To them, any form of socialism is evil (so to speak).  They tend to ignore the fact that public roads, public water systems, public parks, the VA Health Care system, USPS, public art museums, and a plethora of other public institutions are all examples of democratic socialism in action.  In short, we have a mixed economy, as do most countries of the world.

Via Edward Bernays style molding of the public mind, private and public Oligarchs in the USA have convinced too many people that Monopoly-Casino-Crony Capitalism is the same as the capitalism of Adam Smith, their economic hero.  It's not even close.  Except in the realm of very small business, Smith's capitalism no longer exists.  He did not favor monopolies, mega biz, or any kind of Oligarchy.  Rather than praising so-called "Masters of the Universe", he viewed them unfavorably.  Today's Oligarchs claim the opposite; they're wrong.

People in the EU (& Norway and Iceland, which are not formally in the EU), tend to be much more open-minded regarding economic/political ideology.  [Example: in Europe there's a political/economic philosophy known as Libertarian Socialism.  In the USA, that would be considered an oxymoron.]  Even though all those countries have enclaves of narrow-mindedness in that regard, overall they're much more flexible than the USA.  Point being:  transforming society from neoliberalism to some form of ecological economics is a tough row to hoe, but especially so in the USA.

............................

The article cited above deserves sincere consideration in the effort to create a world more equitable, more ecological, and more in line with the needs of all people, instead of only the privileged few.

............................

Not only my opinion.  Stay Well

Various Considerations in Ecological Economics and Sustainability

 1.  Increased efficiency and curtailing the expansion of material stocks in the UK:

        https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344920302780#bib0035

    Title - "Stock-flow relations in the socio-economic metabolism of the United Kingdom 1800–2017".

Socio-economic metabolism refers to a society's use of biophysical resources (i.e., energy and materials), a key factor in the sustainability arena.

................................

2.  https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629615300827

    Title - "How long will it take? Conceptualizing the temporal dynamics of energy transitions".

When I last taught Ecology (at the college level, in the 1990's), the conventional wisdom was:  it takes about forty years for a society to change from one primary energy source to another.  That is being re-evaluated.

...............................

3.  The term, "economic growth", sounds really great, but is it?  When thinking about the topic, too many people have faulty assumptions and tend to ignore two of the main effects of econ growth:  income inequality, and gross pollution of our biosphere.

    

    https://steadystate.org/who-does-economic-growth-serve/

    The author, Brian F. Snyder, is an assistant professor of environmental science at Louisiana State University.

................................

Not only my opinion.  Stay Well