3 ms·

Going forward, the best solution is to implement Wilson’s "Half-Earth" biosphere reserve proposal, more popularly known in its current, reduced form as "30 by 3

Going forward, the best solution is to implement Wilson’s "Half-Earth" biosphere reserve proposal, more popularly known in its current, reduced form as "30 by 30", an agreement by 100 nations (currently) at the COP15 meeting of the Convention on Biological Diversity to conserve at least 30 percent of our land and water. If more people got behind this initiative, the number of new business and economic initiatives supporting this idea would be astronomical, and would form a new paradigm for thinking about the way we see our planet. Travel, hotel, and tourist opportunities would present unlimited growth opportunities, and the new scientific research coming out of it would benefit humanity in unique ways. My overarching point is we need to stop thinking about the problem of climate change remediation as the only issue, it’s deeply connected to how we see the planet and use our resources wisely.

thfuran 4y ago
>unlimited growth opportunities That's the antithesis of conservationism
- sammalloy 4y ago
  I’m referring to unlimited growth opportunities in the new paradigm of turning the planet into a protected biosphere. Not just green tourism and hospitality and all it entails such as education, but also new scientific research. Less than 10% of species are formally described and studied, and the amount of new knowledge that we can learn from studying instead of destroying nature is unfathomable. We talk a lot about how great space exploration is and how we need to travel to new planets in our Solar System to get the goods on the most pressing questions, but the reality is that we haven’t begun to study Earth in any measurable way, and we are losing species and ecosystems faster than we can learn from them. This is the unlimited growth potential.
Ancalagon 4y ago
Isn’t tourism itself a huge carbon source? Plane travel alone counts for like 11% of emissions globally iirc
- sammalloy 4y ago
  17% according to this report: https://wttc.org/Portals/0/Documents/Reports/2021/WTTC_Net_Zero_Roadmap.pdf https://wttc.org/Portals/0/Documents/Reports/2021/WTTC_Net_Z...
  - melling 4y ago
    2.5%. That’s something like 100,000 flights a day, every day of the year. https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-from-aviation https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-from-aviation Coal powerplants account for 20% of emissions. Those can be replaced immediately and no one would know the difference.
    - sammalloy 4y ago
      See p. 13 of above report: Aviation accounts for 17% of tourism-related GHG emissions (pre-pandemic)
      - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
        > Aviation accounts for 17% of tourism-related GHG emissions (pre-pandemic) 17% of tourism-related emissions, 2.5% of total emissions.
    - Ancalagon 4y ago
      Not nothing but far less than I recalled. I stand corrected, thank you for the citation.
brutusborn 4y ago
Why not 25%? Or 50… or 15? Interesting proposal but I can’t see how it would be politically possible, much less desirable.
- sammalloy 4y ago
  Wilson originally proposed 50% but it was recently reduced to 30% by interest groups. Wilson argues that his calculations support 50% because it allows 80% of species to stabilize, species that we rely upon for survival and planetary equilibrium.
mistrial9 4y ago
without evidence, the 30x30 initiative may in fact be a land grab by the militarily well-connected around the world. Public forests or public wetlands have never been "pure" conservationalist. It is too tempting once the doors close on the back room dealing.
- sammalloy 4y ago
  I would like to hear more about why you think this. Isn’t the opposite currently occurring? In other words, we have land grabs by private companies responsible for destroying entire ecosystems for mining, agriculture, livestock and seafood, as only a few examples. We have products like Brazilian beef and Indonesian palm oil that are destroying whole biospheres. And it’s exactly the kind of back room dealing that allows these exports to flood our markets knowing full well the damage they cause.
  - mistrial9 4y ago
    yes agree and, simple statements certainly do not portray complex systems. this topic calls for a substantive response. I will note quickly that the ability to measure and compare over vast areas, is increasing dramatically in the Information Age. There has to be a civilian, science-based and impartial component, along with the diligence and readyness of dot-mil participants, to steer away from the worst outcomes. No one should take political statements or partial information at face value -- critical thinking, checks and balances, trust and verify, are crucial IMHO.

thfuran 4y ago

>unlimited growth opportunities That's the antithesis of conservationism

sammalloy 4y ago
I’m referring to unlimited growth opportunities in the new paradigm of turning the planet into a protected biosphere. Not just green tourism and hospitality and all it entails such as education, but also new scientific research. Less than 10% of species are formally described and studied, and the amount of new knowledge that we can learn from studying instead of destroying nature is unfathomable. We talk a lot about how great space exploration is and how we need to travel to new planets in our Solar System to get the goods on the most pressing questions, but the reality is that we haven’t begun to study Earth in any measurable way, and we are losing species and ecosystems faster than we can learn from them. This is the unlimited growth potential.

Ancalagon 4y ago

Isn’t tourism itself a huge carbon source? Plane travel alone counts for like 11% of emissions globally iirc

sammalloy 4y ago
17% according to this report: https://wttc.org/Portals/0/Documents/Reports/2021/WTTC_Net_Zero_Roadmap.pdf https://wttc.org/Portals/0/Documents/Reports/2021/WTTC_Net_Z...
- melling 4y ago
  2.5%. That’s something like 100,000 flights a day, every day of the year. https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-from-aviation https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-from-aviation Coal powerplants account for 20% of emissions. Those can be replaced immediately and no one would know the difference.
  - sammalloy 4y ago
    See p. 13 of above report: Aviation accounts for 17% of tourism-related GHG emissions (pre-pandemic)
    - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
      > Aviation accounts for 17% of tourism-related GHG emissions (pre-pandemic) 17% of tourism-related emissions, 2.5% of total emissions.
  - Ancalagon 4y ago
    Not nothing but far less than I recalled. I stand corrected, thank you for the citation.

brutusborn 4y ago

Why not 25%? Or 50… or 15? Interesting proposal but I can’t see how it would be politically possible, much less desirable.

sammalloy 4y ago
Wilson originally proposed 50% but it was recently reduced to 30% by interest groups. Wilson argues that his calculations support 50% because it allows 80% of species to stabilize, species that we rely upon for survival and planetary equilibrium.

mistrial9 4y ago

without evidence, the 30x30 initiative may in fact be a land grab by the militarily well-connected around the world. Public forests or public wetlands have never been "pure" conservationalist. It is too tempting once the doors close on the back room dealing.

sammalloy 4y ago
I would like to hear more about why you think this. Isn’t the opposite currently occurring? In other words, we have land grabs by private companies responsible for destroying entire ecosystems for mining, agriculture, livestock and seafood, as only a few examples. We have products like Brazilian beef and Indonesian palm oil that are destroying whole biospheres. And it’s exactly the kind of back room dealing that allows these exports to flood our markets knowing full well the damage they cause.
- mistrial9 4y ago
  yes agree and, simple statements certainly do not portray complex systems. this topic calls for a substantive response. I will note quickly that the ability to measure and compare over vast areas, is increasing dramatically in the Information Age. There has to be a civilian, science-based and impartial component, along with the diligence and readyness of dot-mil participants, to steer away from the worst outcomes. No one should take political statements or partial information at face value -- critical thinking, checks and balances, trust and verify, are crucial IMHO.