4 ms·

We are not going to get anywhere until those that benefit from any action pay. Those that will benefit from any action are mostly not even born yet. Imagine if

We are not going to get anywhere until those that benefit from any action pay. Those that will benefit from any action are mostly not even born yet. Imagine if the people of the future living in a trashed world could travel back in time and pay us to do something now. How much would they be willing to pay? Probably far more than it would cost to fix. All they would need to do is invent a time machine and they could come back to now, pay us to fix the problems, and they get to live in an intact world. Given we haven’t had too many visitors from the future flashing the Benjamins around, time machines are likely impossible. We do however have a magic way of allowing the future to pay for actions now as long as we act on their behalf. This magic is called long-term zero-coupon bonds [0]. The idea is we issue a whole lot of zero coupon bonds due in 50 years (or more), use the money to decarbonise the economy and pay off the owners of all the carbon, and the leave it to the future to pay the debt with an intact world. I gave a talk on this idea a bit over 10 years ago which I have up on my blog if anyone is interested [1]. 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-coupon_bond https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-coupon_bond 1. https://www.tillett.info/2015/12/13/preventing-global-climate-collapse/ https://www.tillett.info/2015/12/13/preventing-global-climat...

clay_the_ripper 8y ago
Interesting, but how is this different from just issuing treasury bonds? I guess my question is, how does it relate to climate specifically? Is the difference just that we issue a crap ton of them now and only use the money to pay for climate related things? I guess the bigger question too is what do we spend them on? Is anyone aware of a feasible, “go to market” plan that could actually “fix” climate change if we had, say, 1 trillion dollars to spend on it? (Or whatever the number is)
- provolone 8y ago
  Doomsaying is frequently accompanied by monetary schemes.
- danieltillett 8y ago
  I go into more detail on my blog about why zero-coupon bonds. What do we spend it on? The first place is buying up all the fossil fuel and preventing it from being burnt. Paying off the owners of the fossil fuel is the essential step to removing the political opposition to doing something about climate change. Once that is tackled then we just have to scale out the technology we already have to generate energy that doesn't emit greenhouse gases.
  - 2918273756663 8y ago
    This is seriously ridiculous. What you're suggesting is not only useless, but actively harmful. Your hubris and incapability to reason are astounding. I insistently suggest to you to think this through and issue a public retraction and apology of this craziness to help those less capable of critical thinking to understand that ideas like that are not a valid path towards a better future before they are accidentally implemented in naive good faith but to horrific results. Here's what will happen: - You and your buddies convince a bunch of speculators, corrupt politicians, and central bankers to convert public assets (namely confidence in an economic system with guns and logistics oil to back it up) into this massive zero-coupon bond, liquidating a huge fraction of that faith into runaway inflation as people realize whoever has the ability to start such a scheme is not someone you would trust for long-term survival. - Upon publication of the intent of this worldwide government entity (which doesn't actually exist as cohesive collective) to back such a plan, mineral rights holders are starstruck seeing dollar signs everywhere. You just started the next landgrab speculative bubble where everyone and their mother now begin a furious mania of transacting mineral deeds which skyrocket those prices across the board worldwide. - Next begins the phase of holdouts and regulatory capture of a world "war" in legislative, judicial, and executive battles where governments of all sizes and obscure claims to jurisdiction invent new laws, ruling precedents, and directives by force in their own self-interests to jam or lubricate the cogs of eminent domain while deed holders refuse to sell their reserves to prevent it from making it into the atmosphere, hoping for even greater payoff down the road. - Assuming your organization which (mis)manages this whole shitshow as the recipient of the bond funds is somehow able to buy up all fossil fuel reserves (which it won't), including deep currently unexplored and _currently_ unprofitable reserves of oil, natural gas, tar sands, shale, coal, you name it across a world of sovereign states that have no incentive to cooperate, then the next stage begins when prospectors edge further out into international waters for deep offshore drilling with essentially unlimited reserves that have never been surveyed due to the abundance of lower-hanging fruit. - So now you've paid off the people that caused the problem in the first place, gave an explicit promise of future bail outs to exacerbate the risk-seeking incentives of purveyors of hydrocarbon fuel, and set off a chain reaction of unlocking even more unlimited reserves of emissions, you pat yourself on the back that "wow, money sure is the answer to all the world's problem!" while unknownst to you an environmental "terrorist" group rightfully targets you for elimination.
2918273756663 8y ago
I just read your blog, and I am flabbergasted at just how incredulous people with money can become to rationalize their own behavior. You want us to put the future generations in literal _debt_ (and not just metaphoric as recipients of heroic selflessness and sacrifice) so that we can act as a more powerful _custodian_ today with insufficient insight and limited predictive capabilities of unintended consequences? Sorry, but the reason it got this way in the first place is due _completely_ to debt that was meant to be a stopgap against the unsustainable pressures of an economic system requiring a constant influx of new market reach, a fresh supply of minted debtors, and more resource reserves to be depleted to keep the scheme going. We don't need even more capital flooding the streets, bestowing unto the world a pestilence of fraud and short-sightedness on the backs of our descendants. An influx of more money is not going to solve any of this, and will surely exacerbate the greed and destruction.
forapurpose 8y ago
> We are not going to get anywhere until ... In most advanced countries, climate change is accepted and the problem and risks are being mitigated. AFAIK, the countries that refuse to act, such as the U.S., are the exceptions.
- danieltillett 8y ago
  I wish this was true, but even the USA alone is enough to destroy the world. We need a new approach.
- smolder 8y ago
  Even in the countries that have accepted it, the response is less than adequate. But yes, it's shameful where the US sits on this, and shameful that interests in the US seek to make climate change a partisan issue and spread misinformation.
  - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
    Where the US sits on this politically, or sits in practice? In practice, the US has cut emissions more than any signer of the Paris Accords. That's very much not shameful in my book.
    - forapurpose 8y ago
      > the US has cut emissions more than any signer of the Paris Accords Can you provide some basis for this claim? It's the first time I've heard it.
      - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
        Um... not immediately. I have heard it several times, but I can't cite a source. We'd need a graph of carbon emissions by nation, over time. I'm sure the data is out there, but I'm not sure where...
        8y ago
regularfry 8y ago
Either time machines are impossible, or there are no people left in the future to invent one.
- danieltillett 8y ago
  I hope the former and not later is true.
- shrikant 8y ago
  I prefer a third possibility -- that time machines are possible, but can only travel back in a non-recursive manner for a limited sliding window. And we haven't arrived at the boundary of that window yet.
  - thatfrenchguy 8y ago
    Or that it sends you to another dimension, or that the people who do time travel know that if they do anything, they'll change everything so that they won't exist ?
TheOtherHobbes 8y ago
Defining every single social transaction in terms of "Who pays?" is the problem. Setting fire to the planet is just one of many symptoms which suggests this moral basis has one or two rather large bugs.
- danieltillett 8y ago
  Well this may be so, but I would rather solve one large problem at a time than two.
- kamaal 8y ago
  A century worth of wars, proxy wars have been fought to put capitalism the supreme form global economics. And now people are supposed to magically think differently?
  - smolder 8y ago
    We need honest cooperation and rational leadership, but we don't have those things. Good leaders wouldn't be doing all this business as usual, they'd be working hard to make everyone realize that change is coming, our previous way of life can't survive, and preparing us to change before we don't have a chance. Anyone sane can understand this if coached, but to many it's just a blip in the stream of usual garbage. There needs to be confrontation. Capitalism, consumerism, whatever else --our way of life is not more important than life itself.
    - danieltillett 8y ago
      So you want to completely change human society and then solve climate change? History would suggest this might be more than a little difficult.
xg15 8y ago
So, to sum up: - Pollute the environment - Let yourself get paid in long-term bonds to stop polluting the environment - Wait 50 years - Profit!
- danieltillett 8y ago
  Not quite. Think of it as more those who get the benefit pay. Much better than ending up in a world you can't live in because your ancestors could not decide who should pay.
kldavis4 8y ago
This reminds me of Travelers, a sci-fi series (available on Netflix in US). An intelligent take on the time travel trope.

clay_the_ripper 8y ago

Interesting, but how is this different from just issuing treasury bonds? I guess my question is, how does it relate to climate specifically? Is the difference just that we issue a crap ton of them now and only use the money to pay for climate related things? I guess the bigger question too is what do we spend them on? Is anyone aware of a feasible, “go to market” plan that could actually “fix” climate change if we had, say, 1 trillion dollars to spend on it? (Or whatever the number is)

provolone 8y ago
Doomsaying is frequently accompanied by monetary schemes.
danieltillett 8y ago
I go into more detail on my blog about why zero-coupon bonds. What do we spend it on? The first place is buying up all the fossil fuel and preventing it from being burnt. Paying off the owners of the fossil fuel is the essential step to removing the political opposition to doing something about climate change. Once that is tackled then we just have to scale out the technology we already have to generate energy that doesn't emit greenhouse gases.
- 2918273756663 8y ago
  This is seriously ridiculous. What you're suggesting is not only useless, but actively harmful. Your hubris and incapability to reason are astounding. I insistently suggest to you to think this through and issue a public retraction and apology of this craziness to help those less capable of critical thinking to understand that ideas like that are not a valid path towards a better future before they are accidentally implemented in naive good faith but to horrific results. Here's what will happen: - You and your buddies convince a bunch of speculators, corrupt politicians, and central bankers to convert public assets (namely confidence in an economic system with guns and logistics oil to back it up) into this massive zero-coupon bond, liquidating a huge fraction of that faith into runaway inflation as people realize whoever has the ability to start such a scheme is not someone you would trust for long-term survival. - Upon publication of the intent of this worldwide government entity (which doesn't actually exist as cohesive collective) to back such a plan, mineral rights holders are starstruck seeing dollar signs everywhere. You just started the next landgrab speculative bubble where everyone and their mother now begin a furious mania of transacting mineral deeds which skyrocket those prices across the board worldwide. - Next begins the phase of holdouts and regulatory capture of a world "war" in legislative, judicial, and executive battles where governments of all sizes and obscure claims to jurisdiction invent new laws, ruling precedents, and directives by force in their own self-interests to jam or lubricate the cogs of eminent domain while deed holders refuse to sell their reserves to prevent it from making it into the atmosphere, hoping for even greater payoff down the road. - Assuming your organization which (mis)manages this whole shitshow as the recipient of the bond funds is somehow able to buy up all fossil fuel reserves (which it won't), including deep currently unexplored and _currently_ unprofitable reserves of oil, natural gas, tar sands, shale, coal, you name it across a world of sovereign states that have no incentive to cooperate, then the next stage begins when prospectors edge further out into international waters for deep offshore drilling with essentially unlimited reserves that have never been surveyed due to the abundance of lower-hanging fruit. - So now you've paid off the people that caused the problem in the first place, gave an explicit promise of future bail outs to exacerbate the risk-seeking incentives of purveyors of hydrocarbon fuel, and set off a chain reaction of unlocking even more unlimited reserves of emissions, you pat yourself on the back that "wow, money sure is the answer to all the world's problem!" while unknownst to you an environmental "terrorist" group rightfully targets you for elimination.

2918273756663 8y ago

I just read your blog, and I am flabbergasted at just how incredulous people with money can become to rationalize their own behavior. You want us to put the future generations in literal _debt_ (and not just metaphoric as recipients of heroic selflessness and sacrifice) so that we can act as a more powerful _custodian_ today with insufficient insight and limited predictive capabilities of unintended consequences? Sorry, but the reason it got this way in the first place is due _completely_ to debt that was meant to be a stopgap against the unsustainable pressures of an economic system requiring a constant influx of new market reach, a fresh supply of minted debtors, and more resource reserves to be depleted to keep the scheme going. We don't need even more capital flooding the streets, bestowing unto the world a pestilence of fraud and short-sightedness on the backs of our descendants. An influx of more money is not going to solve any of this, and will surely exacerbate the greed and destruction.

forapurpose 8y ago

> We are not going to get anywhere until ... In most advanced countries, climate change is accepted and the problem and risks are being mitigated. AFAIK, the countries that refuse to act, such as the U.S., are the exceptions.

danieltillett 8y ago
I wish this was true, but even the USA alone is enough to destroy the world. We need a new approach.
smolder 8y ago
Even in the countries that have accepted it, the response is less than adequate. But yes, it's shameful where the US sits on this, and shameful that interests in the US seek to make climate change a partisan issue and spread misinformation.
- AnimalMuppet 8y ago
  Where the US sits on this politically, or sits in practice? In practice, the US has cut emissions more than any signer of the Paris Accords. That's very much not shameful in my book.
  - forapurpose 8y ago
    > the US has cut emissions more than any signer of the Paris Accords Can you provide some basis for this claim? It's the first time I've heard it.
    - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
      Um... not immediately. I have heard it several times, but I can't cite a source. We'd need a graph of carbon emissions by nation, over time. I'm sure the data is out there, but I'm not sure where...
      - 8y ago

regularfry 8y ago

Either time machines are impossible, or there are no people left in the future to invent one.

danieltillett 8y ago
I hope the former and not later is true.
shrikant 8y ago
I prefer a third possibility -- that time machines are possible, but can only travel back in a non-recursive manner for a limited sliding window. And we haven't arrived at the boundary of that window yet.
- thatfrenchguy 8y ago
  Or that it sends you to another dimension, or that the people who do time travel know that if they do anything, they'll change everything so that they won't exist ?

TheOtherHobbes 8y ago

Defining every single social transaction in terms of "Who pays?" is the problem. Setting fire to the planet is just one of many symptoms which suggests this moral basis has one or two rather large bugs.

danieltillett 8y ago
Well this may be so, but I would rather solve one large problem at a time than two.
kamaal 8y ago
A century worth of wars, proxy wars have been fought to put capitalism the supreme form global economics. And now people are supposed to magically think differently?
- smolder 8y ago
  We need honest cooperation and rational leadership, but we don't have those things. Good leaders wouldn't be doing all this business as usual, they'd be working hard to make everyone realize that change is coming, our previous way of life can't survive, and preparing us to change before we don't have a chance. Anyone sane can understand this if coached, but to many it's just a blip in the stream of usual garbage. There needs to be confrontation. Capitalism, consumerism, whatever else --our way of life is not more important than life itself.
  - danieltillett 8y ago
    So you want to completely change human society and then solve climate change? History would suggest this might be more than a little difficult.

xg15 8y ago

So, to sum up: - Pollute the environment - Let yourself get paid in long-term bonds to stop polluting the environment - Wait 50 years - Profit!

danieltillett 8y ago
Not quite. Think of it as more those who get the benefit pay. Much better than ending up in a world you can't live in because your ancestors could not decide who should pay.

kldavis4 8y ago

This reminds me of Travelers, a sci-fi series (available on Netflix in US). An intelligent take on the time travel trope.