|
|  |
|
|
|
| |
| Jan 18, 2010 3:54 pm |
|
re: The Reality of Climate Change |
Ken Hilving
| |
I am discouraged with COP15, and both the intentional and unintentional efforts by all sides of the discussion to use propaganda to discredit the other positions. What has been missed by this I think is the core point of contention - the unintentional consequences of large scale government intervention.
"The law of unintended consequences is what happens when a simple system tries to regulate a complex system."
This is the clearest definition I have found, and it is relevant to both climate change initiatives and the example of London's sewers.
Finding the link between sewage and disease was a very positive event. No argument that this understanding has led to disease avoidance on a grand scale, advanced other aspects of health, improved the quality of life for many, and saved the lives of millions.
Along the way, however, it has also enabled ever larger concentrations of humanity. These concentrations of humanity have become increasingly dependent on services from "officials" for sanitation and water. These concentrations of humanity moved food production from primarily an individual responsibility to a service industry. This dependance has grown to where a disruption of services leaves most of the population helpless to provide for their own survival. The catastrophic impacts of natural events on these population centers is an unintended consequence of advances in public sewer and water services.
A central agency for such services has an additional consequence. Centralized responsibility and authority acts to constrain innovation. Thanks to rules and regulations, the general direction of any new improvements are limited to the vision of a small group of "directors" motivated to retain a status quo. Independent approaches become illegal. The increasing population, ever more dependent and constrained, generates proportionally fewer ideas of how critical needs can be met.
_____
Which brings us back to what I see as the fundamental flaw in an international treaty and global authority to address climate change - the law of unintended consequences.
Global climate is far more complex that any combination of city services. Yet a global authority will be as simple as any of our current governments, with all the attended focuses on single solutions, common approaches, and codes, rules, and regulations controlled by those motivated to maintain status. Instead of the potential of 6 billion minds innovating solutions to 6 billion unique needs, we will have "approaches" limited to the vision, understanding, and creativity of less than a percent of this resource.
And that scares me more than the climate change.Private Reply to Ken Hilving (new win) |
|
| |
|
