Challenges – Fire

Do we remember the day “BOTH POLES WENT CRAZY”?

Yes, think back a year ago. Do you remember the day? It may be the most significant event to occur in our lifetimes. Yet, most of us don’t remember it. Is this a sign that we are genetically “programmed” to ignore a “fire” of this magnitude or that we are corporately programmed to focus on much more mundane and irrelevant (yet profitable) things?

The weekend of March 19-20, 2022, both Earth’s poles saw temperature variability on a scale unprecedented. Both the North Pole and the South Pole exceed their normal temperatures by over 50 degrees Fahrenheit! Yes, that is right! Read about it here: LINK. It got very little coverage by the media and it took several days for the information to be communicated, if it was shared at all.

The year anniversary of this extraordinary event occurs later this month. Do you think anyone will remember? How can we expect to make sufficient headway when something of this significance happens on the only planet we have to live on and we collectively barely blink?

What can you/we do? The list of the things we can all do is very long, just do a “google search” on “ways to reduce climate change’s risks”? They are all one “click” away but the vast majority of us won’t do this search and don’t think anything we can do matters. Let me suggest this: Go to your City Council meeting and ask them to demonstrate what they are doing to reduce the severe consequences that may come with unmitigated climate change. If they look at you with askance, give them some suggestions. I am the mayor in a U.S. city and such requests are not made (people are much more concerned with “goose poop” and “long grass”). And, believe it or not, some politicians actually will do what their constituents will them to do! So, why not “show up”?

Something else you might do? Well, remind people of this ominous event of March 2022. And, rather than leave them in fear, remind them that there are real options to avert the worse impacts of climate change. What are they? Most are rooted in expanding renewable energy resources (solar and wind) and displacing all fossil and nuclear fuels. Check out The Solution Project for a great resource on how this revolution might occur: thesolutionsproject.org. If you haven’t heard of this, or you doubt it can/will happen, ask yourself why? Perhaps a change in attitude is the first step for you, me and others.

A lot more needs to be done! This might be our chance.

People are focusing on containing this virus and reducing death and suffering (at least some are, see my last blog). This is all well and good and should be done. However, this “down time” was/is also a time to rethink how almost everything is done. Yes, I mean everything. What could I be talking about (have I lost my mind?)? Let’s find out.

First off, the most likely reason why this virus came about in the first place and spread to the human species so easily is because we have acted so irresponsibly regarding our production of food. Someone ate an infected bat or snake (which ate the bat). In 2020, humans shouldn’t be eating such food (nor other “more civilized” forms of food, more on this soon). Scientists had been predicting this for years (see ref 1 and ref 2) and yet almost nothing was done. In fact, we keep increasing our risk for additional pandemics because of how we raise food (see ref 3 and ref 4). But have you heard anything about changing the way we raise food during the past couple months? There are ecologically-grounded ways to raise food that would greatly reduce our risk of future pandemics, so we need to integrate them immediately. Unfortunately, nearly all institutions of “higher” learning promote the same, large scale, monoculturally-driven, dangerous methods of agriculture—ones destined to promote more infectious diseases.

Second, we need to overhaul nearly all mainstream media forms. Why? Well, a short list of demonstrable reasons includes: (1) they have failed to address the above issue/link regarding agriculture and disease; (2) they have held very, very few leaders accountable for lies and extreme blunders (if not, criminal acts); (3) they continue to rely almost entirely on the profits derived from advertising (one of the reasons why they are incapable of holding anyone associated with extreme wealth and power accountable for anything); and, (4) they focus almost no attention on what we, as an empowered citizenry working collectively, can do to stem the tide of wrongdoings or accelerate the positive changes that are possible and necessary. Rather, we are told daily that we must wait for a vaccine and for the weather to improve…and of course, wash our hands and wear our masks. Time to change, no?

Third, we need to remove money from the process of determining who our elected representatives are. This has long been known and yet those that are elected, they themselves products of a corrupted system that increasing relies on more and more $$, do little to nothing to correct it. (In fact, the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision in 2010 which gave corporations unlimited ability to fund political campaigns—a 5-4 decision mind you—suggests how money has contaminated nearly all levels of Federal government.)

Fourth, we need to reconsider what money is and how it functions in our society. The current crisis and, specifically, the ability for the federal government to send out trillions of dollars of money to companies and citizens, should send a message to all of us. Money is just “paper” or an “electronic” form of power. It is only as meaningful as the powerful in a society make it to be. Consider a diamond? What if you had a five-pound diamond in your possession. What would it be worth? Practically nothing, unless you could convince someone that it was worth something (to look at, wear, or use as a paper weight)? This is actually the same for money. Consider taking old Argentine bills (before its economic collapse) or even current Japanese yen to your local grocery store. The merchants there would laugh at you, even if you had a LOT of coinage. There are ways to conduct our economy that are outside the currently dominant monetary system (I will blog about this next). We need to really look at this carefully and do it soon.

There is more, a lot more (future blog? readers’ comments?) to be done. But these four things are among the four key ones. What do you think needs to be done? What are you willing to do to get these things done?

And finally, why now? This is another blog in itself, but suffice it to say that people are probably most aware that the systems protecting us and providing for us are broken at so many levels. They, hopefully, are more inclined to consider new ideas and maybe even try something different now.

You Really Want the Truth? Probably Not. Most Don’t.

The pandemic sweeping the world has brought a lot of things to light. Many, many people prefer to believe in something that isn’t true, if it makes them feel better about themselves and their immediate surroundings. Delusion is the word for this state of mind and it seems to be a perspective as contagious as the virus itself.

As someone following, researching, and reporting on the state of the environment for the past 20+ years, I have always felt that delusion was widespread but only now, as we all face this monumental challenge, did this mental contagion express itself so ubiquitously. But looking back, this disease was always present and visible, though less recognizable.

So many natural systems are extremely stressed out by human activities, yet, little effort is being made to reverse these trends. The vast majority of people don’t do much of anything to make things “right”. As I have written here previously, I fully understand that most who are economically-strapped and time-limited are not in a position to do much given the way our society is structured (i.e., they are dependent on a hyper-capitalist economy that exploits their labor and compels them to consume commercial products until they literally drop—by another well-known disease known as affluenza). However, if one is on a ship that is crashing, it makes sense to get off the ship or at least attempt (really hard) to redirect it.

Let’s briefly look at the current situation. Since the beginning of the outbreak, increasing numbers of people were calling for a return to “normalcy”. Primarily, their appeal was couched in economic terms. The argument goes something like this: we absolutely have to save the economy, even if it costs thousands, perhaps millions, of lives. Now, we find this has become the dominant attitude; bars have opened (or are soon opening) in many parts of country. Despite warnings from key epidemiologists and virologists, politicians are feeling the heat from swarms of constituents (some strangely brandishing high-powered weapons).

All of this is happening despite the reality that the United States has already witnessed the most deaths from this virulent, yet microscopic, virus. Thousands of first responders have lost their lives in order to save others. More will undoubtedly perish/suffer as well, especially as hordes of people flock to bars, parties, and shopping malls. These actions are being criticized by some but these responses are being overwhelmed by our collective compulsion to “shop” our way out of misery. And as with most ecologically harmful actions, the unwise decisions of the irresponsible and inconsiderate among us will make matters worse for all.

Yet, how many are asking key questions that deserve clear responses? Was this pandemic inevitable? (No, it wasn’t; I will likely write more on this later.) Why weren’t we prepared (and why does the U.S. appear to be among the least prepared of all)? Why are first responders’ lives being recklessly disregarded despite their exhibiting amazing bravery and compassion for an extended period of time. This extreme callousness by some leaders and residents alike is reminiscent of the way we treat our soldiers before, during and after combat. Absolutely despicable. Yet, the caskets keep getting filled and there is, yet, almost no accountability for the immoral acts of those in authority who have the power to mandate things like PPE for all responders, virus tests for all (not just the few and symptomatic), expanded resources to public health centers, and so many other consequential “life and death” programs and opportunities. Clearly, we need to really dig deeper and expose the lack of preparedness and other serious misgivings of our current government, media, and economic structures. Failure to do this serves to feed delusion and ensures that it maintains its hegemony in our collective psyche.

To be sure, I have one of the most serious cases of delusion. I claim to have dedicated my life to make things better for all. I have tried a lot of things and I continue to do so. However, I still go about my business like most others. I also don’t have the courage to be a “first responder” nor the wherewithal to put my neck out there too far to expose the system for all its shortcomings. A blog that twenty people read doesn’t count for much. Much more needs to be done. A lot, lot more (my next Blog). I realize this and I am still trying to figure out what is next for me and possibly for us. Yet, the more I think about it, the more delusion creeps in, particularly when the wave of delusion from so many others seems to be growing exponentially in force.

If others wiser and more insightful than I have ideas for what we can do to cure delusion, please let me know.

[I recognize that this blog is less optimistic than most that I write. It identifies a mental “disease” that might be more difficult to cure than the virus at hand. Any disease that is going to be eradicated must first be properly understood and deeply investigated. To begin that process is my goal here.]

Love is what we need in 2020

You may hear the pundits and “wise men” say that we need this person to run the U.S. or that company to fix the economy. As I waken to a new year, I am convinced that these are distractions to what we really need. We need more love in 2020. And unlike the other things that we “need”, and there are many, love is something that we all have to give and, magically, no one can prevent us from giving it either. Let’s explore why love is what we need this year.

Love is one of the most deeply rooted emotions. We know this. When we are loved, we wake up. When we aren’t, we either pretend we are or we shrink and stifle—both recipes for unpleasant outcomes. Research tells us that babies need love, preferably from their parents but, ultimately, from someone. This need continues as people grow (here is but one of millions of articles on this, link). Clearly, it is something we all need as it makes us more fully human and more fully our authentic selves as well.

Love conquers evil and hatred. We all know this too. How many times have we heard/seen/experienced what happens when someone responds to hatred with love? Most of the time, hatred is neutralized. People prefer love. This love may come in the form of listening. It may come in the form of an honest attempt to understand someone. It may come in the form of affection. No matter. Love has power. There is a lot of hatred and misunderstanding in our society. Love can do a ton to remedy these.

Love is something we can all do. It can start with a phone call or an email. It can start with a knock on a neighbor’s door. It can start with a “thank you.” Try these “small acts of kindness” and see where it leads. Try doing them intentionally, each day. See what happens. Start with smaller acts of love and build up to larger ones. See what happens. See what happens to the person/people you love and see what happens to you as well.

A lot of people I know are depressed right now. They are listening to the “pundits” too much. This leaves them feeling angry and hopeless (but wanting to buy more things to assuage their frustrations). (Ever wonder why this is? Might it be intentional/deliberate, a natural outcome of those that run the networks?) I hope these individuals try to love more (and turn off the TV more). I really do, they have so much love to give.

Love isn’t all we need (as John Lennon wrote) but it is what we need. There are many challenges that face us. Let us work on them. Let’s lead with love and see what happens. Here is to 2020, a year we all will remember!

Do people care?

I am often struck by the lack of concern people have regarding the future of humanity and the Earth’s biological systems. In general conversation, rarely do people mention such things as the plight of the insects or birds, climate change, or toxic pollution. Furthermore, it is the exception, not the rule, that one hears about people making much effort to confront these challenges. Thus, it is reasonable to conclude that people just don’t care about such things. Or is it?

Might the apparent silence and inaction on such critical matters represent something other than apathy? Might we be more focused on day-to-day matters (such as paying our bills, taking care of an aging relative or performing well for a team we are a part of)? Might the constructive actions of many be systematically ignored by major media outlets? Or, might our individual and collective fear of the future paralyze us so that we just avoid discussing or acting on these challenges? In other words, if “we are doomed,” what point is there to focus on such negative things?

I am no scholar of psychology and nor do I claim to have clairvoyance. Thus, I don’t know the answers to the above questions. But that doesn’t stop me from thinking a bit more about them. Let’s try a thought-experiment and see where it leads.

What might you do if you knew that large meteorite was going to hit Earth next year (causing the 7^th mass extinction)? Would you stop your daily activities and conversations? Would you start studying physics in hopes that you could figure out a way to deflect the meteorite away? Would you sell all your personal belongings and give it to the military in hopes that they could find a way to do it? (Forget the question of whom you would be selling it to; wouldn’t all humanity be in the same situation.) Seriously, what would you do?

Well, we are in a situation not so dissimilar from the above scenario. While the “meteor” (of climate change or toxic pollution) won’t hit next year (not for you at least; for an increasing numbers of humans and other life forms, however, the “meteor” has already hit), likely it will hit in the next several decades. Unfortunately, too many powerful influencers are deliberately ignoring or spreading misinformation about the impending “collision.” So, again I ask, what are you doing?

I don’t ask this accusatorily. I ask it honestly. I, personally, think about this every day. Some days I am motivated to do something about it, other days I feel helpless or preoccupied. I am sure I am not alone in this. We have groups set up to deal with/discuss alcoholism and cancer, but do we have groups set up to tackle humanity’s greatest challenge yet? Doesn’t it seem like we should set these groups up quickly, while we still have time?

Let me end on this note. One of the premises that I opened with stipulates that very little is being said or done on these critical matters. This is patently false, though I suspect most of us operate as if it were true (so, does that make it “true”)? Of the nearly 8 billion humans on this planet, millions of them are doing lots of amazing things to confront our environmental challenges. We just need to promote more of their work and join in to help. (I hope to write about some of them in an upcoming blog…if you don’t want to wait, you can begin to find such people/efforts by searching for the Goldman Prize recipients or Champions of the Earth awardees.) Perhaps we can all commit to do something along these lines in 2020.

Just Don’t Do It

Many conscientious people are busy figuring out what they can do to turn this “ship bound for a major iceberg” around. I commend them. There is so much to do and we need “all hands on deck.” However, this past week or so, I have heard two environmentally-minded people say the following, “We are doomed”–the “ultimate negative,” if there every was one. Statements like this are better not said. They serve no function other than furthering hopelessness. Furthermore, they indicate a serious degree of self-righteousness as well. In such cases, I recommend that people just “don’t do it”.

Let me try to explain why I find these sort of sentiments so problematic. First off, they are stated as fact. No person knows what will happen. No person knows what can happen. Even the bleakest of situations can sometimes be resolved or return to a better state (history repeatedly shows us this). Such statements definitely ignore the incredible potential that exists in each one of us as well as the gargantuan power that we harness collectively. Importantly, they also completely fail to recognize the enormous power and potential that exists within nature. Our current understanding of the natural world is still in its infancy, something the field of biomimicry has made clear over the past two decades.

Secondly, fatalism isn’t good for your/our health. We know from scientific research that animals/babies that aren’t loved don’t fair as well as those that are. Articulating the “ultimate negative” can’t be a good thing for our psyche or our physical well-being.

Thirdly, such negative thoughts don’t lead to action. They actually lead to inaction and paralysis. They may even lead to self-harm or, worse, harm done to others. I imagine some of the “suicide” acts we have observed in recent years are driven by people who have “no hope.”

Fourthly, negativism breeds negativism. People hear what you say and react to it. If you are so glum as to speak the “ultimate negative,” you should say it privately (and then seek support from others). Otherwise, if others hear you, they too will likely become more depressed and inactive.

Lastly, consider the sentiment a victory for those very powerful entities that have created the extreme injustice and cynicism in the general populace. As long as “we the sheeple” continue to behave as if “we are all doomed”, they continue to control us, our lives, our bodies, and our minds.

So, “just don’t do it”.

[After writing this, I heard an amazing couple that perform UPBEAT jazz–Pippi & Daniel…what a special duo they are!]

Imagination…plants remind me of it

[I want to thank Monica Gagliano, a biologist in Western, Australia, whose Bioneers 2018 talk (link) caused me to do some serious introspection this morning at the 8th Prairie Fire Bioneers Conference held at Knox College.]

I’ve recently fallen in love with plants. It has taken some time, it wasn’t something that happened overnight. Over the past ten or so years, I been surrounding myself with plants more and more. It started with me growing 13’ okra with my neighbor. This led me to help start a community farm that still exists in my small city. Then I started an educational farm on my college’s campus. Next came building a raised bed of plants in the front of my house (how you treat your front yard is a political statement) then installing a butterfly waystation (also in my front lawn). Currently, my freezer has seeds of many plants, my basement is full of aging seeds, pawpaw seeds are germinating in my living room, and houseplant propagation has become a regular activity. Last semester I even remember bringing spider plants to my class and saying, confidently, “this is the beginning of a major campaign. I plan to put plants in every classroom in the world!” So, as you can see, my love has become somewhat of an obsession.

Yet, despite all this effort, I never really understood what was driving me to do this. As of this morning, I may have an inkling. Plants have imaginations (if you are incredulous about this, please watch Gagliano’s video and check out her scientific articles and books). What does this have to do with me? Well, as most can attest, I have quite an imagination as well. As a child, relatives called me “Mr. non-sequitur.” As an aspiring local politician, I was described (in print), somewhat pejoratively, “a dreamer.”

Where does my imagination take me? I firmly believe that humans will resolve our current “insurmountable” challenges. I know we can do so. I live every day with this in mind and heart. I don’t know how, but I am “audacious” (to borrow a term used by Gagliano) enough to imagine a world where hunger, poverty, preventable disease, racism, misogyny and pollution don’t exist.

Plants imagine these things to. How do I know? Why wouldn’t they? Haven’t their ancestors lived in a world without these horrible things? This is why I think I’ve been surrounding myself with plants. They imagine this world and they live everyday to make it happen (again). We probably have a non-verbal, mutualistic, hopeful exchange daily. Sadly, many of the people I know can’t seem to imagine these things. And I think I have been becoming a bit more reclusive (to humans) in reaction to this.

I think this “state of mind” that I have is the ultimate privilege. I think our deeply racist, capitalist, misogynist, nationalistic, militaristic world has destroyed most people’s ability to imagine a different world. Fortunately, Bioneers has repeatedly reminded me that many humans are still able to imagine such things and are working every day to achieve them. I am glad to have this local Bioneers “shot” every year and I am also grateful to have plants around to remind me that another world is not only possible, it is imperative.

The insanity of our world: The Why (Part I)

Many people now realize that the world is largely insane. However, every day these “sane” people continue their lives as best they can. Since so many aspects of our dominant culture and society are ruled largely by insane principles, these “sane” people can’t help but support (and thereby preserve) the insanity as they go about with their lives. To give some examples of what I am talking about, I consider the following “every day activities” as critically contributing to the continuance of our cultural insanity: buying “normal” (non-local, non-organic, “free” trade) food; using electronics and communication systems which are ruthlessly toxic in so many ways; watching mind-numbing entertainment; following mainstream news (which focuses almost all of our attention on the insanities in our world, but does so in such uncritical ways that it only normalizes the insanity it covers); paying taxes (which we know largely supports subsidies for unsustainable and inhumane practices including the jumbo-sized military and prison system); putting our money in national/international banks, investing in blue-chip stocks, or using credit-cards (all which directly support the insanely unequal distribution of wealth that exists); and, promoting consumeristic values (by adorning ourselves with material goods containing subtle or in-your-face advertisements, such as, a “F-I-L-A” hat or CK jeans, or having “bling-bling” qualities, such as, a diamond ring, gold necklace, faux fur, or Rolex watch).

For many of us these activities appear very normal and even mundane. Some reading this may in fact be quite annoyed at the insinuation that these are “insane” activities. However, the harm that they do (by perpetuating a materialistic, profit-at-any-cost system) is immeasurable. Then, if they are so harmful, why do the vast majority of us continue to do them? And what might be done to make us stop? These questions cut to the core of whether our society will endure or collapse (through war, disease or climate catastrophe)? I don’t pretend to be an expert when it comes to answering these questions, and I am not sure such experts exist, given that so few of us seriously consider changing the way things are. In this vein, I offer some thoughts to stimulate discussion in these largely ignored areas.

First, why do so many of us continue to act in ways that are insane? Well, some of us do so because we don’t have any other choice. Poverty is at epidemic levels in the US (the “richest” country in the world—how insane is that?) and income inequality continues to grow. In my community, over 60% of children are granted “free and reduced” lunch (and breakfast) because the government recognizes how desperate things are (hungry children lead to very angry citizens). A recent national report documents that more than 1/5 of children nationally suffer from food insecurity during the year. As tragic as this is, the poverty that affects so many has a paralyzing effect. Living day-to-day (paying this or that bill, deciding between dinner, a car repair, or a bus ride home) makes it nearly impossible to act outside the norm. (Interestingly, when you hit rock bottom, such as homeless people, you often must do things outside the norm (such as dumpster diving) to survive. In this sense, these folks are one of the few that aren’t perpetuating the insanity.) Even middle-class folks in the US have limited options. Although they may have some money saved or invested, they recognize that they are often one life challenge from losing their home/apartment, their car, or their educational dreams. Thus, they too work tirelessly to stay one step ahead—the system tells us all that as long as we work hard enough, we’ll be alright, and this satisfies our anxiety enough to keep moving on the “treadmill”. Many are also told that “we could be the lucky ones,” and this belief leads to many low- and middle-class people buying lottery tickets with the little that they have; in my community, over $6 million a year (~$200 per head) is spent now in mini-slot machines that have begun dotting our cultural landscape over the past few years. Our insatiable thirst for entertainment (500 cable channels, social media, sports on “steroids”) represents an escape from the realities of the world—a relatively innocuous escape compared to the many destructive vices that many (people of all economic classes) engage in for the same effect. Also, just as most industrial farmers are trapped by huge unpaid loans (for their mega-machines) and rising annual seed and pesticide payments, middle class people are trapped by their rent/mortgage, health care, car payment, cell phone, and cable bill. Then, you have the upper classes and the rich and it is pretty obvious why they perpetuate the insanity. They benefit from it, at least relatively, so they have no motivation for changing it, though they have the most power to do so. It should be noted that some thoughtful “wealthy” people assuage their guilt or fear (from the horrors of “poisoned” food and chemical-laced pillows) by purchasing hybrid cars and organic briskets. Unfortunately, while these acts are more sensible than other options, their contributions are not yet significant enough to overwhelm the “insanity” that dominates other components of their lives (such as, their many flights & ginormous homes and lawns) and other’s lives.

There you have it. The system of insanity continues because a few benefit from it while the masses can’t really see any other way.

Okay, so what might compel us to stop acting insanely? Does it have to be this way? You can comment your thoughts on this (I hope) and/or you can wait for my next blog ?.

Math that matters (Part II–Atmospheric Changes)

Everyone now knows (or denies) that CO2 has been increasing in the atmosphere for the past couple hundred years and this increase is largely responsible for the climate changes that have occurred over that time. And 400 ppm (parts per million) is a number that more and more people are familiar with as well; it represents the average concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere (up from 280 ppm when the Industrial Revolution commenced, ~1750). Well, there are a few other very interesting/compelling numbers that we can determine based on this information alone, including:

(1) What is the average annual growth rate of the CO2 over this period (1750-2017)?
(2) What is 400 ppm in percentage terms?
(3) How many molecules of CO2 are there in a regular sized balloon?
(4) Considering CO2 changes alone, by what percentage has the composition of the atmosphere changed since Industrialization?

Let’s do some calculations:

(1) What is the average annual growth rate of the CO2 over this period (1750-2017)?

Atmospheric CO2 concentration has risen exponentially so we use an exponential growth equation to model it:

(a) Cf = Ci x e^(rt),
where, Cf = final concentration, Ci = initial concentration, e = 2.718 (Euler’s number), r = annual rate of growth, and t = duration of time (^ is used as an exponential symbol)

The variable we want is r (as we have all the other numbers). Solving for r requires using a little “Algebra II”:

First move Ci over by dividing both sides of (a) by Ci and flipping the equation around; this leaves:
e^rt = Cf/Ci

Now, if we take the log of both sides (here the natural log, ln) and use the fact that ln(e) = 1, we get:
ln(e^rt) = ln(Cf/Ci)  rt x ln(e) = ln(Cf/Ci)  rt = ln(Cf/Ci)

Now, if we divide both sides by t, we get an equation solved for r, the desired variable:
r = ln(Cf/Ci)/t

Inputting the values of the three known variables (Cf = 400 ppm, Ci = 280 ppm, and t = 2017-1750 = 267 years) yields the annual growth rate:
r = ln(400/280)/267 = 0.00134 (or 0.134% per year)

If we just look at the growth of CO2 concentration since 1950 (when industrialization became global; CO2’s concentration in 1950 was ~310 ppm), we can once again use the exponential equation above to determine the growth rate in more recent times:
r = ln(400/310)/67 = 0.0038 (or 0.38% per year)

In either case, notice that humans are increasing CO2’s concentration only very slightly each year. (Over the past 267 years, CO2’s concentration has gone up 43%.) However, what may appear “slight” is definitely not slight in terms of its current and future impacts.

(2) What is 400 ppm in percentage terms?

Answering this merely requires us to understand what ppm (parts per million) means. Unlike some words in English, ppm means literally what it says. If the atmospheric concentration of CO2 is 400 ppm then for every million parts (or molecules) of atmospheric gas, CO2 will be 400 of them. With this understanding we can compute a percentage by expressing the amount of CO2 (relative to everything in the atmosphere) as a ratio:
% of CO2 in atmosphere = ppm of CO2/1,000,000 parts of atm = 400/1,000,000 = 0.0004 (or 0.04%)

Again, this is a very, very small amount but as we know this small amount of CO2 is responsible for a significant amount (~30-40%) of the Natural Greenhouse Effect (NGE) and the bulk (~50-60%) of the Anthropogenic Greenhouse Effect (AGE), associated with “global warming” and “climate change.”

(3) How many molecules of CO2 are there in a regular sized balloon?

While (2) tells us what proportion of gases in the atmosphere are CO2 it doesn’t really tell us how much CO2 is a particular volume. If we take a typical balloon (1 foot in diameter; let’s assume it is a sphere), we can find the volume of the balloon using this formula:
V = 4/3 x pi x r^3,
where V = volume, pi = 3.14159, and r is the radius of the balloon. Plugging in the numbers leads to:

V = 4/3 x 3.14159 x (0.5)^3 = 0.52 cubic feet

Since 1 liter = 0.0353147 cubic feet, the volume of the balloon is:
V = 0.52 cubic feet x (1 liter/0.0353147 cubic feet) = 14.7 liters

This seems quite high when one considers a two liter bottle of soda but rest assured this is the correct value.

Now that we have the volume, we’ll need to determine how much CO2 is in such a volume. Here we have to use some chemistry laws; here the most well-known of them all, the Ideal Gas Law:

(c) PV = nRT, which can be rewritten as, n = PV/RT,
where P = pressure, V = volume, n = number of moles of gas, R = the Ideal Gas Constant = 0.082 L-atm/mole-K) and T = temperature in Kelvin degrees.

Assuming that we have a standard atmospheric pressure of 1 atmosphere and we are at room temperature of 27 deg Celsius (equivalent to 81 degrees Fahrenheit or 300 K), we can plug the numbers into equation (c):
n = (1 atm)(14.7 L)/((0.082 L-atm/mole-k)*(300 K)) = 0.60 moles

So what is a mole? Chemists define one mole as 6.02 x 10^23 molecules (or 602,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 molecules).

Notice that our use of the Ideal Gas Law was for all the molecules of gas, not just CO2.

Thus, if the 14.7 L (of a balloon) contains 0.60 moles of gas, we calculate the number of molecules of gas in the balloon as such:

# of molecules of gas (in balloon) = 0.60 moles x (6.02 x 10^23 molecules/mole) = 3.61×10^23 molecules

Now to determine how many of these molecules are CO2 we use the information determined in the previous question thusly:

# molecules of CO2 in a balloon = 3.61 x 10^23 molecules of gas x (0.0004) = 1.4 x 10^20 molecules of CO2

There we have it. There are 140,000,000,000,000,000,000 molecules of CO2 in every balloon (assuming it isn’t filled with helium ?).

Now, while this balloon’s gas is very light, it certainly is filled with a lot of molecules of CO2. This might lead one to wonder how much does all the CO2 in the atmosphere weigh. Well, this calculation is a bit trickier. According to web references, the entire atmosphere weighs approximately 1.1 x 10^19 pounds (or 5.5 quadrillion tons). We might want to just multiply this by the percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere in order to determine the total weight of CO2 in the atmosphere but we would be wrong to do so; though it wouldn’t be a terribly bad approximation (if we did so we get 4×10^15 pounds). The different molecules of gas have different weights. Thus, we would have to do a calculation that would include all of these different gases and their weights. This is a bit more complicated than I choose to get right now, so suffice it to say that all the CO2 in the atmosphere weighs approximately six thousand times more than all the humans on the Earth combined (which is approximately 7×10^11 pounds).

(4) Considering CO2 changes alone, by what percentage has the composition of the atmosphere changed since Industrialization?

Calculation (1) clarified how small CO2’s concentration is the larger scheme of things, while (2) and (3) suggested how much CO2 there is. Notice, it all depends on how we look at things, as do most things.

The question asked here aims to provide a sense of how much change has occurred in our atmosphere since industrialization.
We know that the atmosphere’s CO2 concentration has gone from 280 ppm to 400 ppm (a 43% increase). And we calculated that CO2 comprises 0.04% of the atmosphere. Thus, to determine how big a change in the atmospheric composition has been caused by Industrialization, we need only to multiply these two percentages together, as such:

Change in Atmospheric Composition since industrialization = % Change in CO2 concentration x % of atm. that is CO2.

Putting numbers in yields,

Change in Atmospheric Composition since industrialization = 43% x 0.04% = 0.017%

Since most don’t work with percentages this small, what does this amount of change mean. Well, if you had 5,814 molecules of atmospheric gas–represented by 5,812 red polka dots (each representing a molecule of gas other than CO2) and 2 blue polka dots (each representing a molecule of CO2)—over the 267 years of Industrialization, one more molecule of CO2 has been added to the atmosphere (or one more blue polka dot). Another way to look at it: If you had 5,814 fans sitting in a gymnasium, 267 years later, one more fan would join the fray. Would you notice a change of this amount? Most definitely not (unless of course the fan was decked out in the rival’s colors ?). But we can thank modern science for building equipment that can measure such small (yet powerful) changes in the atmosphere. Perhaps the most salient question is: have we built a political/social apparatus to respond to the future/predictions that this information clarifies?

Math that matters (Part I–Missing Women)

If we want kids/adults to learn math, we might as well make it relevant. Here are a few relevant calculations (that employ nothing more than algebra) which I find very relevant to our future. Imagine these calculations being taught to an 8th grade algebra class! Here is the first installment:

Missing women

Most people are not aware that females were systematically removed from the population during the 20th Century and it is a practice that continues today. How do we know? Well, as Nobel Prize winning economist, Amartya Sen, noted back in the 1990s, if we look at sex ratios of nations, we find several that have ratios that are far from 1:1. Pakistan and China have ratios of 0.94:1 and India has a ratio of 0.93:1 (in 2016) (these numbers are pretty much the same as they were in 1990, though Pakistan has improved slightly from 0.91:1). Given that women live longer than men, nations should have sex ratios above 1–most European nations are above 1.03:1. Given these “small” differences among nations, one might just dismiss the low ratios as “normal” variation. Unfortunately, this would be a huge mistake. Here is the math to determine what a ratio of 0.93:1 means, in comparison to a 1.03:1.

First, let’s define the variables needed:
F = number of females in a population
M= number of males in a population
T = total population = F + M
R = sex ratio = F/M

So the above two equations have 4 variables (F, M, T, & R)…if you know two (and you do, T and R, from Internet sources), you should be able to use simple algebra to compute the other two, F and M.

Again, the equations are: (1) T = F + M and (2) R = F/M

Here is how you solve these two equations:
Solving (2) for M yields (3) M = F/R, substituting (3) into (1) yields, F + F/R = T; this can be rewritten as: F(1+(1/R)) = T
which can be rewritten as
(4) F = T/(1 + 1/R)

So, you can determine how many females are in a population using this equation. This can be considered the Actual Females (Fact).

So, with a population of 1 billion (1,000,000,000; which is smaller than both India’s and China’s current population) and a sex ratio of R=0.94, we use equation (4) to solve for Fact as such:

Fact = 1,000,000,000/(1 + 1/0.94) = 485 million
So, Mact = 1 billion – 485 million = 515 million

Now to determine the Expected Females (Fexp) in a “healthy” society, with F/M = 1.03, we use equation (4) again with this new R value.
Fexp = 1,000,000,000/(1 + 1/1.03)) = 507 million
So, Mexp = 493 million

Now you can determine the “missing females” (Fmiss) using this simple formula:
Missing Females = Fmiss = Expected Females – Actual Females = Fexp – Fact

In our example above (the hypothetical nation of 1 billion people), we find:

Fmiss = 507 million – 485 million = 22 million

Is this a large number? Well, when one considers that between 50-60 million people died in World War II, I’d say it is! Also, this is only for one country (say China or India). If you were to add up all the nations in the world with “missing women,” it comes to close to 100 million! Now that is an abominable figure, isn’t it? Yet, how many of you have heard of this figure before? If you are wondering why women are missing, do some research. It isn’t a pretty story. (I wrote about this issue over 10 years ago and got it published in a local paper’s front page. Sadly, as I recall, it hardly drew any attention.)

Just to put these numbers in perspective it is sometimes valuable to imagine what a sex ratio looks like when you bring it down to a scale that we can see. Let’s say, if you had a party of 100 people and a sex ratio of 0.94, you would have 52 men and 48 women. This would hardly be noticeable, would it? Hence, now we see why we need to do the large-scale calculations to expose something very sinister.