For some weeks I have been wanting to write about a very specific idea.
It is some months since I have posted a blog. There are a number of reasons for this but one is that I have wanted to get to grips with the Review by Professor Sir Partha Dasgupta. (I can’t claim to have read the five hundred plus pages from cover to cover even so).
Nearly three months ago a report was issued that I have been wanting to write about ever since. I have been limited in my time and ability to work on blogs over this period and so it has had to wait longer than I would like.
I’ve not managed to write many pieces over the last few months, but that hasn’t stopped me thinking about various things I want to say! I have started working on pieces on three publications of the last few months. These are the report on the Economics of Biodiversity by Partha Dasgupta, Values by Mark Carney and Bill Gates’ How to Survive a Climate Disaster.
Over the last few months I have blogged on a number of occasions about ideas from Iain McGilchrist’s The Master and His Emissary. One of the main thoughts in this book is the benefit of having a clearer sense of the differing roles of the left and right hemispheres of the brain and seeing how they can work together and yet provide something different from each other.
Sometimes it seems as if everything aligns, as a series of ideas seem to cascade along a chain reaction, finishing somewhere that could not be foreseen at the beginning.
Three weeks ago I listened to an item on the radio which has stayed with me. It was on a news broadcast, the Today programme on Radio 4. One of the presenters interviewed a marine researcher, Michelle Forney, from the University of Cornell Centre for Conservation Acoustics. She talked about making underwater recordings of whales near Juno in the south-east part of Alaska.
In the last post I concentrated on the potential benefits of technology and questioned whether there can be sufficient benefits from this for reversing rises of temperature to make the required difference when it comes to climate change.
In the last post, when considering flying, I raised the issue of technological solutions which would enable us to continue and the same level of air travel or even expand this industry. We could continue to develop technologies which would reduce the carbon emissions from flying itself (like other industries there would still be related emissions e.g. in manufacturing planes).
I ended the last post with the point that although a vapour trail may obscure the sun, it is obvious in the sky. Sometimes, just because a way forward appears clear, it doesn’t necessarily mean it is the right way. I don’t know if you have had an experience of trying to follow a path on the ground where what has been clear initially turns out to be frustratingly unclear.