Writing in Foreign Policy, Jamais Cascio writes that the geoengineering capabilities that might help the world fight climate change could also be turned into weapons.
The offensive use of geoengineering could take a variety of forms. Overproductive algae blooms can actually sterilize large stretches of ocean over time, effectively destroying fisheries and local ecosystems. Sulfur dioxide carries health risks when it cycles out of the stratosphere. One proposal would pull cooler water from the deep oceans to the surface in an explicit attempt to shift the trajectories of hurricanes. Some actors might even deploy counter-geoengineering projects to slow or alter the effects of other efforts.
Weaponized geoengineering, Cascio writes, might tempt nations by being both stealthy and fairly inexpensive.
The head of Royal Dutch Shell appears to be saying that peak oil — when demand for oil keeps rising while supply starts to fall — could come in only 7 years.
He reportedly wrote in an email that “Shell estimates that after 2015 supplies of easy-to-access oil and gas will no longer keep up with demand.”
The email also included two scenarios for the future of energy:
The first scenario, “Scramble”, envisages a mad dash by nations to secure resources. With policymakers viewing energy as “a zero-sum game,” use of domestic coal and biofuels accelerates. It is a world, said the Shell chief, where “policymakers pay little attention to energy consumption – until supplies run short.” The alternative scenario, “Blue-prints”, envisages a world of political cooperation between governments on efficiency standards and taxes, a convergence of policies on emissions trading and local initiatives to improve environmental performance of buildings.
Peak oil, or something close to it, would be a severe shock to the global economic and geopolitical system. It could drastically raise prices, including the price of food, and set off a desperate competition to secure energy supplies.
Benazir Bhutto’s assassination is straining ties between Pakistan’s ethnic groups, the Washington Post reports.
Comprised of four ethnicity-based provinces, Pakistan’s stability was already threatened by restiveness in Baluchistan and among the Pashtun of the North-West Frontier Province. Now Sindh, Bhutto’s homeland, may be added to the list, as Sindhis turn against the Punjabi-dominated military and the Punjabi elite.
Witte of the Post reports that mourners at Bhutto’s funeral chanted “We don’t need Pakistan!” and crowds of Sindhis have been shouting “Leave Sindh!” at soldiers. Some Sindhis are now threatening succession and war.
Still, Witte writes, “few believe the country is in imminent danger of fracturing,” and more people in Sindh and other provinces believe that substantial autonomy should devolve from the center to the four regions.
Others say that simply giving all groups a say might suffice: “Democracy is the way to keep Pakistan together,” says one NGO leader.
ChangeWaves last week noted that the landscape of the world economy has changed overnight.
With a recalculation by the World Bank, China’s and India’s economies are now much smaller, at least as measured by purchasing power.
This is how things used to look (click on the graphic to activate):
With the recalculation, the developing Asian economies are rather less imposing:
The upshot that the age of American (and Western) economic dominance may persist longer than people thought.