The #EconObscene rules in Academia and publishing journals.
I bet, the biz economists hired by
@nature
got all trained at Harvard, and extortion and piracy is what they're taught as good business conduct.
It's obscene how amoral they act. Hope nobody reviews for them anymore. Ever.
source: https://bsky.app/profile/alexh.bsky.social/post/3mgwm4vneq22o
Prof Hugh Montgomery is not the only expert with that perspective regarding civilisation collapse scaring him for his own life – at the age of 63.
Rahmstorf also used to often say "If you're younger than 70 and want to have a peaceful last leg you should become a climate activist now."
Slashing emissions rapidly is paramount.
But in my opinion, so is a U-turn in national, regional and global social politics.
We need to keep all regions stable-ish until at least the world has accomplished geological CO2zero.
Stable-ish is impossible with current widespread politics of national and international sadism and egotism, with the Neoliberal obsessions with efficiency=cheap, the obsession with incrementalism, the obsession with lean state, and so on.
We're at the brink of civilisation collapse. Thanks to neoliberalism and the #EconObscene.
Avoiding collapse requires different concepts than the ones that got us here.
Wow. This is really harsh criticism👍 of integrated assessment modelers and engineers who hide everything that challenges their lifestyle in fairy tales about CCS and H2. Allwood shows how #paper, #steel, #cement, #aluminum, #plastic, and #glass can only become climate-neutral through degrowth.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s44286-025-00344-1
The best thing is his harsh language. He takes no prisoners, but shoots liars on sight.
No wonder. After all, it was their lies that always prevented greenhouse gas reductions from being implemented quickly enough to match the risk. Academia bears a huge share of the blame.
#CCS #ClimateChange #IAM #SharedEconomicPathways #Degrowth #EconObscene #Economics #ClimateEconomics
Fifty years after it was commercialized, global carbon capture and storage (CCS) capacity is equal to 0.09% of global emissions. Meanwhile, global emission-free electricity generation grows at a steady, linear rate. This Perspective argues that it is now too late for CCS or hydrogen to make a substantial contribution by 2050, so other solutions are required to decarbonize industry.
"Climate change must be treated as a potentially existential threat to the economy, rather than an issue which is suitably addressed by economic cost-benefit analysis."
"papers on the economics of climate damages were refereed by economists alone. Properly refereeing these papers required knowledge of the science of global warming that economists typically did not have. Consequently, economic referees approved the publication of papers that made claims about global warming that are seriously at odds with the scientific literature."
From 2023:
https://carbontracker.org/reports/loading-the-dice-against-pensions/
"Economists have claimed, in refereed economics papers, that 6°C of global warming will reduce future global GDP by less than 10%, compared to what GDP would have been in the complete absence of climate change.
In contrast, scientists have claimed, in refereed science papers, that 5°C of global warming implies damages that are “beyond catastrophic, including existential threats,” while even 1°C of warming—which we have already passed—could trigger dangerous climate tipping points.
This results in a huge disconnect between what scientists expect from global warming, and what pensioners/investors/financial systems are prepared for.
Consequently, a wealth-damaging correction or “#MinskyMoment” cannot be ruled out, and is virtually inevitable. (=sudden collapse of asset values)
Pension funds have a fiduciary duty to correct the erroneous predictions they have given their members.
Similarly, financial regulators, who have used the same erroneous and misleading economic damage predictions to stress test the exposure of financial institutions to climate change, must drastically revise their stress test studies.
This report calls on all stakeholders, from governments, regulators, investment professionals, all the way to civil society groups and individuals, to ensure that climate change policy is based upon the work of scientists.
Climate change must be treated as a potentially existential threat to the economy, rather than an issue which is suitably addressed by economic cost-benefit analysis."
Great report. They polled 500 climate (!) scientists on aspects of the #EconObscene, 60 responded.
Some useful things to learn from the in-depth discussion of polled Q and answers, and their proposals for improvement of damage functions and other assumptions in economic models.
Report: https://greenfuturessolutions.com/news/recalibrating-climate-risk/
Guardian article (not recommended bc of platitudes) https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/feb/05/flawed-economic-models-mean-climate-crisis-could-crash-global-economy-experts-warn
But. They attempt to formulate a "economy collapse function" and set an ill-informed threshold at 3-4°C based on the gut feeling of the 60 polled CliSci.
But I think, the network of complex global supply chains breaks far earlier bc factories within ±35 latitude lose their workforce in turmoil 💡
I noticed that the false idea dominates among clisci too that our economies in G-North continue to function despite losing manufacturing capacity in the (Sub-)Topics to climate-induced societal breakdown.
But we in G-North don't have the manpower to replace all the output of mio of workers and their supporting population 💡
How much do they produce?
Example German export and import from tropics and subtropics – in metric tons! :
1/4 of German imports come from countries in climate zones pummelled by weather extremes and ill-equipped to repair or adapt.
1/5 of German exports go to these countries. (data from 2019, the HS96 dataset here: https://www.cepii.fr/CEPII/fr/bdd_modele/bdd_modele_item.asp?id=37 )
Gradually or shock-wise eliminating this input and output from the German economy pulls the rug from beneath our feet. It's too much and in, I assume, a too short time span.
Even if we'd manage to replace some of their material output by building and manning new factories in our region,
our societal organisation is so disrupted from the loss of the rest that our economic activity eventually shrinks to bartering for food and water, like theirs.
Once supply chains are cut by Tropical turmoil, spare parts for energy, comms & transport are unavailable. That ends tech-civilisation.
Even if we'd manage to move "important" production to our region, our societies collapse from the job loss, price hikes & from the logic in our finance system; all caused by the Sub&Tropics in climate upheaval disrupting complex supply chains.
Note how my scenario ends our tech-civilisation without factoring in tipping points, war or mass migration to 🇪🇺🇺🇸
Simply by relentlessly pummelling the Sub-/Tropics ±35°N with climate extremes, we annihilate the global web for making things 🏭 = the foundation of our economic activity, our tax revenue, our jobs, our everything.
The Recalibrating Climate Risk report explains why economic models are increasingly understating climate risks as the world moves towards 2°C.
Greece. Another carbon sink one bites the dust. After Germany, Finland, and ...? Yet EU policy is still to use national carbon sinks to balance insufficient or absent sectoral CO2 reduction. Which is allowed practice according to the UNFCCC as well. Stupid, isn't it. It's called the pyrocene for a reason.
#Forest #BarkBeetle #WildFire #CarbonSink #Greece #Pyrocene #Anthropocene #EconObscene
7/end
My recipe against 3 degrees by 2050 is still:
15 years of wartime command economy. Put everyone on itemised rations like in a war. Start with an amount of items and mobility certs that equal 5t CO2 per person per year in mid latitude rich countries.
This is a) fit to immediately reduce emissions by 40 to 50% from today's level. Low meat rations –and methane emissions also decline. And b) it is a dignified living level according to German Constitutional Court – which had to do a ruling regarding the dignified amount of social welfare, and that amount of money today is worth about 4t CO2 per year per person. We'll just add 1t for mobility.
From this level of consumption and emissions, we concentrate all our economic and political effort on the energy and agricultural transformation.
Job loss due to company closures (looking at you, automotive, and you, cattle farmers) has to be dealt with in such a way that no one loses their (too big a ) roof over their heads.
Meanwhile we design, legislate and implement processes that enable us to live sustainably after the 15 year period. Whether that system resembles Levermann's Folding Faltung or a mix of other concepts is tbd. Important is to get to CO2zero first and fast.
The 15 years might appear daunting or even unbearable. ^^ But we get to keep our tech civilisation in return, including all that it needs for modern medicine, modern transport, modern entertainment, modern science.
And we get to invent all sorts of work arounds and new stuff when we are faced with hard boundaries within which to operate. Boundaries ignite inventions.
Collapse will ignite inventions too. But all that we know today will be lost once our generation dies out. Because the knowledge and skills can't be maintained after a collapse.
So let's end the #EconObscene and just deal with it 🖖🏽
#ThreeDegreesMore #climateChange #RCPcollapse #Rationing #CommandEconomy
I stopped reading the paper after the suggestion that "build back better" were a factor in climate cost calculations.
I stopped because I first wanted to take notes of my thoughts so far, before I would continue to read and add more thoughts.
But I ... feel sick to my stomach at the thought of continuing with the paper. The #EconObscene and economists' arrogant believe that their game of throwing dice had actual meaning makes me feel sick.
The paper received attention by a few journalists. But only in the form of "listen to economists, here's what they calculated".
Journalists never put economists' gaming into perspective. So their readers then also just trust economists.
And policy makers trust economists as well. Which is why we're in the EconObscene.
Economists are desperately trying to put a €-number on climate disasters to inform policy makers.
Here, it's the ECB, EU Central Bank, funding a paper from a Mannheim Univ economist.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S001429212500131X
"Going NUTS: The regional impact of extreme climate events over the medium term" by Sehrish Usman et al 2025.
or https://www.ecb.europa.eu//pub/pdf/scpwps/ecb.wp3002~a77b495fa8.en.pdf
Some thoughts.
"In high-income regions, [flood] is followed by more
investment...suggesting a reconstruction boom." But that boom is stolen from other activities that then don't occur – and non-occurrence isn't measured by economists:
*The 2021 flood damaged 600🇩🇪 railroad bridges. The repair raised GDP👏🏽 but stole resources like raw material, workforce and funds
from much needed maintenance (needed due to decade-long neglect in favour of car dependency)
and rail network extension.
(Book Flixbus-eq, guys!)
They then suggest
"build back better" as potential positive outcome of a destructive climate disaster [a factor economists also can't put a number on].
Dream on...
*Insurers involved in the 2021 flood demanded that home owners replace damaged gas boilers 1:1 and wouldn't pay for climate-friendly heatpumps.
*Rebuilding at risky site got permitted in all but 1 case.
In 2023, two thirds of Slovenia were flooded. That area in square km could have been the same as in the 2021 flood.
Below is the country of Slovenia overlaid over the 2021 flood area which also included east Belgium. https://thetruesize.com/#?borders=1~!MTQ0NzQ1MzM.MTMxMjM4NzA*MjEwMTAxNDE(MTc1NjA0MzQ~!CONTIGUOUS_US*MTAwMjQwNzU.MjUwMjM1MTc(MTc1)MQ~!IN*NTI2NDA1MQ.Nzg2MzQyMQ)Mg~!CN*OTkyMTY5Nw.NzMxNDcwNQ(MjI1)Mw~!SI*NzY2NzQ0.MTMzOTgwNzI)NA
Road and rail network in Slovenia might not have been as dense as in the 2021 area, so maybe only 200 rail bridges got damaged?
But what does this damage entail for the nation state of Slovenia?
How does the state budget cope with the unexpected expenses and what are the "costs" of delayed development projects?
The country also lies in the normal flight path of the summer jetstream that regularly hauls hot Mediterranean water and dumps it over cooler, elevated land.
Switzerland, Austria, Bavaria, Bulgaria, Romania, Croatia to name but a few EU states, all lie in that flight path.
Inundation of 2/3 of its infrastructure will become, or already is, who knows, a regular occurrence in Slovenia.
How long until the state is broke?
When will the young generation give up and [try to] flee to larger nation states?
How will policies change in those larger states due to influx of desperate climate refugees from EU countries?
#ExtremeWeather #flood #drought #heatwave #Economics #EconObscene #ClimateChange #ClimateEconomics
Weil alle Ökonomen und politischen Akteure wieder behaupten, Deutschland bräuchte Wachstum...
Meinen die vielleicht die Grenzen nach Norden, Osten oder Westen erweitern, damit Deutschland wächst? ^^
Nach Süden wäre nicht ratsam, weil Klimawandel dort zu teuer wird. Schon Südbayern sollten wir den Österreichern überlassen, weil das heißer werdende Mittelmeer nun ständig darüber ausgekippt wird.
Wachstums-bedingt heißeres Mittelmeer übrigens.
Wirtschaftswachstum geht einher mit Zerstörung unserer Lebensgrundlagen.
Und es ist völlig egal, ob es in 20 oder 30 Jahren mal theoretisch möglich wäre, eine nahezu rohstofffreie Dienstleistungswirtschaft implementiert zu haben. Weil das, was JETZT wächst, CO2 und andere THG emittiert und die Natur killt.
JETZT muss abgebremst werden. Und es wird auch abgebremst. Ihr wisst schon, by design oder by disaster. #ÖkonObszön #EconObscene #Degrowth #Postgrowth
anlomedad
anlomedad