Skip navigation

Community Discussions

Proposed Activities in 2012

40comments
Share conversation: Share via:

Climate Colab

Mar 28, 2012
06:46

Member


1 |
Share via:
In 2012, the Climate CoLab will break down the challenge of climate change into a series of smaller sub-problems. This spring, the community will be invited to develop proposals that address key sub-problems. Later in the year, it will develop integrated proposals that combine proposals addressing sub-problems. Sub-problems will be defined by a taxonomy based on the following three dimensions: - What action will be taken to address climate change - Where that action will occur - Who will take the action (what social groups or individuals) A sub-problem can be defined by any combination of What-Where-Who. An example is Building Efficiency-United States-Individual citizens. The Who describes the primary social group or individuals who will be taking action to address climate change. But any member of the Climate CoLab community is welcome to develop ideas in response to any sub-problem--you do not have to be a member of the group of people defined by the Who dimension. For more see, What%2C+Where%2C+Who+taxonomy--Quick+view Plan for 2012 activities We invite you to comment below on the taxonomy and proposed 2012 activities. In addition, please submit ideas for sub-problems you would like to see highlighted in 2012, defined in terms of What-Where-Who. To add a comment, you must be signed in.

Giovanni Macchia

Mar 31, 2012
05:43

Member


2 |
Share via:
I would suggest to include, in the taxonomy, under the Reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (Mitigation) -- Increase the usage of the renewable energy (e.g. wind, solar, geothermic) That is an important point, that is missing from the taxonomy. I will try to provide some additional subproblem later Giovanni

Nishadh K.a.

Apr 1, 2012
09:29

Member


3 |
Share via:
It would good to have under sub section Adapt to climate change (Adaptation): a point on Adapt to socio economic problems arising due to climate change. I have question regarding this section why it is named 'adaptation' rather than 'resiliance'. The word resiliance is more apt because it instigate the holistic of sustenance in the eve of change.

Sidney Clouston

Apr 1, 2012
11:37

Member


4 |
Share via:
This is a communication to the Director at an Institute of Management in India ranked in the top 55 and to a UNESCO Exe. Director in Moscow along with a Director General in Nigeria for the Regional Sustainable Energ Center of Excellence (RSECE). I am the International Director for RSECE that has been developed for Regional facilitation of programs and projects in Sub Saharan Africa. I see a possible great potential for the CoLab by collaboration between us. We have the technical support by several Ministry level official letters of support to bring to the table. We have understanding of the indigenous people's needs. We support Top Down services meeting the Bottom Up activities in an inclusive relationship. We also support in most actions a Triple Bottom Line that benefits the Planet, People and Profit to expand with our sustainable actions. - Sidney Clouston >>>>>>>>>> . <<<<<<<<<<< I would like to research finance and collaborations for a strong team. I suggest that you consider joining this MIT activity with me and become the point of contact (POC) for any international programs and projects. I am the International Director for RSECE in Africa and I would like to find the budget for work with both of you. I hope that you both will communicate for solar power discussion with Dr. Igor Tyukhov at the Moscow State University and with Dr. Ravikesk Srivastava at the Institute of Management in India. Both of you have the Agriculture related understanding for Food Crop and Cash Crop developments. The question is how do we increase Global Trade and provide our customers a benefit of income for the purchase of goods and services one from the other? I have developed a few ideas which is how we can create the greatest good for the greatest number of people in our ethical position. An example is between the EU and Africa. Some of the activity is already existing but systems thinking is not complete. The Clean Development Mechanism is in question so too the value of carbon credits in the volunteer market if not the official market. What is certain is that renewable energy is needed for sustainable development and we need to apply that to the products in demand or products that will become more in demand. Biomass, Bioenergy and Biofuels as well as Biochemicals for several purposes are my focus. However, the feedstock growing is needing other inputs such as solar powered pumping with drip irrigation for efficiency improvement for water conservation. Employment is needed so people can demand more goods and services in a sustainable approach of a modest demand living within their means, but sufficiently so. There are many factors to coordinate. I look forward to suggestions or questions as we move forward. Best regards, Sidney Clouston

Giovanni Macchia

Apr 1, 2012
03:29

Member


5 |
Share via:
Vishal is right. It should be added to the taxonomy, under the adaptation (or resilience, it is up to you) something like the following Adapt the the finance to support a sustainable green economy Adapt the funding (the one proposed and agreed at the last summit)to support the emerging and poor economies in thier green economy growth. In my opinion, the problems of funding should have a dedicated subproblems like this WHAT Identify proper funding actions to the emerging and poor economies to support a sustainable econonomy WHERE Global Poor countries Emerging countries WHO Global organisations

Jonas Haller

Apr 2, 2012
10:30

Member


6 |
Share via:
As a response to GiovanniMacchias first point: Very good, let's categorize the Mitigation strategies into categories, to allow a better search. I don't know, what categorization would be used best, so I tried to create one. In brackets I put some [examples] taken from the top of the 2011 contest. - Direct Emission reductions - Electricity generation [Wind, Water and Sun] [Renewable solar energy for the world now] - Residential sector: Heating, Cooking, Electricity consumption [Solar thermal powered cooking] [Carbon-negative 'biochar economies'] - Transportation (Personal and Freight) [Sustainability through Import Tariffs] (-> less imports = less freight traffic) Indirect emission reductions - Diet change [Mitigate Climate Change by reducing short-lived warming gases [...] by advocating for less meat consumption] - Less transportation [Move by your own power] - Other consumption change [Fix the system - get a global 'circular economy'] [Zero Waste - A reusing society without discard] [RewirePlus: Behaviour change and value change for the emerging green economy] - Land use and land use change (LULUC), but not only in forestry - Agriculture [Grow crops with the Seawater Greenhouse concept] What do you think about this? Feel free to elaborate further! Jonas

John Bolduc

Apr 2, 2012
02:46

Member


7 |
Share via:
In terms of where the actions should occur, you might want to consider the variability of community structure. Solutions that work in one place, don't necessarily work in others. For example, in Cambridge our housing stock is primarily multi-family and mostly renters. Our commercial stock has a disproportionate amount of lab space. So we need somewhat different approaches given the building types compared to a suburban community. As a planner for the City of Cambridge, I would love for you to use Cambridge as a laboratory. We have some relationships and projects with MIT faculty and administrative staff, but we need more.

Lisa Jing

Apr 4, 2012
04:49

Member


8 |
Share via:
Hi all, I am a team member at the Climate CoLab and we want to thank you all so much for your contributions so far. They are being carefully read and considered as we evolve the taxonomy and our activities for this year. In terms of the comments about how to breakdown the "what" dimension, this is currently the expanded view of the taxonomy: https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/resources/-/wiki/Main/What%2C+Where%2C+Who+taxonomy--Full+view "What" is the most complicated of the three dimensions to taxonomize and we encourage more feedback on how to improve it. As important as the structure of the taxonomy is the What x Where x Who combinations that we will highlight in the upcoming contests and collaborations this year. Based on the comments, it appears that there is interest in a topic on financing the adaptive capacity of developing societies by global institutions. Can this topic be adapted to the structure of our What x Where x Who combination? This is an open question and may be a good litmus test for whether our taxonomy and the activity of combining its dimensions are working. How do we improve it? Thank you, Lisa from the Climate CoLab Team

Ali Liban

Apr 17, 2012
02:48

Member


9 |
Share via:
Hi everyone at Climate CoLab, Thanks for putting this major initiative together. The WHAT-WHERE-WHO approach sounds a suitable place to start to find solutions for climate change. I am a new member but have been working on climate change on a personal initiative for many years. I am from Somalia/Ethiopia arid region where people have relied on rainfall for their very survival for generations. I studied engineering in the UK during the 80's and then moved back to Africa to work on technology needs there. This turned into a personal challenge which has stayed with me for the past twenty years. The WHO part was easy to answer for me. It had to start with someone and it was me. But I had little access to lab facilities and had no idea WHERE to start and What to start with. These were more difficult to answer. However, direct exposure to the local problems in Africa has been useful for brainstorming and idea formation over the years. It took me some years to realize that natural concepts had solution for many technology problems. Concept and designs taken from natural systems have a major advantage. They are already in tune with the major problems such as climate change we are facing and hence are most like to offer solutions. There are familiar example concerning the success of this design approach. An example which come readily to mind is the design of air crafts which are based on bird flight. The simulation has been through many decades of R&D but it is still mechanical in many ways compared to actual bird flight . However, our mechanical simulations has transformed air travel and the aerospace industry. Similarly, it will take decades to fully simulate natural forces such as the power of the hurricane and vortex flow for energy generation and other technology adaptations . Like bird flight, the power in hurricane is there for us to observe and the proof of concept already exist. Much research has already been done on the subject but it seems we do not fully understand how the vortex flow or hurricane really operate. Its mechanical simulation has the potential to solve energy generation. Like the aircraft design we do not need to simulate the hurricane forces fully. But we have to first understand its method of operation and put this to the test. I believe the solutions we are looking for are already inbuilt into the natural design but it takes a long time to identify them even longer to implement them. But we have to start somewhere like the Climate CoLab Thanks again for this initiative and I would like to contribute to your effort and network with the members Ali Liban

Dennis Peterson

Apr 18, 2012
10:46

Member


10 |
Share via:
The taxonomy looks good, but I'll mention one wrinkle: making liquid fuels from ambient CO2 could fit under both mitigation (reducing net emissions from energy supply) or geoengineering (removing CO2 from the atmosphere). There are technologies that are more closely tied to one side or the other, but in cases where a technology simply produces concentrated CO2, it could be either sequestered or used as fuel feedstock. I don't think it's a big deal for this round, but it's giving me ideas about a different way of organizing things later...instead of a simply hierarchy of ideas, create a directed graph of material and energy flows. For another example, I was reading the other day about a new form of cement production, with less energy input and producing carbon monoxide, which could be fed into synfuel production. Put all these together in a graph, with elements at each node denoting financial cost, energy cost, maximum capacity, etc. Include an option for a carbon cost. Feed it all into an optimizer and see how it works out. But I'm just daydreaming for later, for now the taxonomy is a good start.

Dennis Peterson

Apr 18, 2012
12:02

Member


11 |
Share via:
Regarding comment #2: I think "Reduce emissions to produce same amount of energy (Decarbonization of energy supply)" is a fine category for renewables. It seems to me that the categories should goals, rather than ways of achieving goals. Ie., getting the same energy with less emissions is a goal. Solar power is a method to achieve that goal. The trouble with including methods as categories is that it biases the results in favor of those methods. For example, renewables and nuclear power are both methods to reduce emissions. If we're going to make a renewables category, then I'll argue we should also make a nuclear category. Then we risk getting into an argument about methods when we really intended to just set up the discussion. We also risk excluding creative options that neither of us has thought of.

Jerry Schneider

Apr 19, 2012
12:27

Member


12 |
Share via:
I think a focus on innovative ground transportation technologies that will greatly reduce emissions from gasoline powered vehicles should be included. There are lots of people around the world that are trying to develop such unconventional technologies that are have great difficulty finding the necessary funding to bring their systems to the marketplace. They are being held back by conventional systems and consultants who will not learn about them and include them to be candidates for transport investments at local, state and national levels. What is needed is financial assistance to these inventors, by both governments and private investors. Our major cities around the world are facing an impossible future as auto companies are intent on selling the maximum number of personal vehicles regardless of their collective negative effect on global warming and air quality problems. An international competition that would involve assessing and testing the most promising transport system options available is needed to deal with this matter. A listing of more than 100 of such systems can be seen by googling Innovative Transportation Technologies.

Maruf Sanni

Apr 20, 2012
03:41

Fellow


13 |
Share via:
Dear all, What: Actions to address global climate change Take actions that affect human systems (which in turn affect physical systems) Economic: Build human capacity to address job opportunities of tomorrow (i.e. create a global avenue/institution to develop green skills/jobs that will develop green economy of the future) Policy: Pass new legislation/regulations that leads to changes in curriculum/behaviour Where: Geographical scope of proposed actions to address climate change More emphasis should be put more on the Emerging economies and developing economies where the adaptive capacity is low. Who: Organizations and individuals that will take steps to address climate change International (UNFCCC, IPCC, IFC, AfDB etc) Governments National Provincial and state Municipal and local Business organizations

inagreenshade

Apr 20, 2012
10:10

Member


14 |
Share via:
The current taxonomy reflects the prevailing priorities in climate policy and like them, misses the main objective. Reducing the (net global) flow of emissions may slow the onset of climate change and be a necessary step towards a successful policy, but it won't prevent global warming. As it is the accumulated stock of GHGs which is the cause, only policies which reduce that stock, not just slow down its accumulation, will be sufficient. The failure to recognise this in virtually all climate policy discussions is astonishing - dumb, disingenuous or downright dishonest, take your pick - but also reflects the failure to come up with economic instruments/incentives to tackle the stock, inaddition to putting a price on carbon to reduce its flow to the atmosphere. A second, possibly more controversial point would be to challenge whether efficiency measures can be counted as mitigation ones at all, since the history of industrial development can be sketched as the progressively more efficient use of inputs accompanied by an expansion in their consumption as the costs of those inputs decline. There's a common theme of course: focusing on reducing flows and increasing efficiency are consoling but self-deluding measures that fail to get to grips with what's needed.

Sidney Clouston

Apr 20, 2012
10:47

Member


15 |
Share via:
From the conference on energy efficiency with the World Energy Council,held in Abuja, Nigeria the establishment of the Regional Sustainable Energy Center of Excellence for actions in Sub- Sahara Africa was established. Our membership can offer indigenous perspectives and highly scientific technical services. The invitation has been served here at CoLab and I accept as the International Director for RSECE. We support many pilot projects for real proof of concept. We do have other facilitation in progress and collaboration on proposals existing and expected to expand. All of the Millennium Development Goals are important. Poverty and Hunger Relief often is listed first and economics is one of the Triple Bottom Lines that I like to promote. The profit margin is in that sector also. The REDD+ forestry activity is of great interest for us. What is a renewable asset and can provide electrical energy and transportation fuel as well as chemical feedstock for products in Global Trade. Efficiency in processing is desired. The two meanings for efficience is the same work for less energy and more work for the same energy input. Energy efficiency and Renewable Energy are important factors in development.

Dennis Peterson

Apr 21, 2012
02:29

Member


16 |
Share via:
@14: There's a taxonomy item for "Remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere."

Viv Null

Apr 21, 2012
03:18

Member


17 |
Share via:
Re comment #14...This is a very good comment and gets to the issue. All of the planning and innovation which comes from new green energy sources will have only very limited effect if we are unable to significantly reduce the current accumulation of GHG's in atmosphere. And the truth is even if we went carbon neutral today the past accumulation would still be warming the planet for hundreds of years. That is why i think we need to reduce the shorter lived climate forcers such as black carbon, methane and ground level ozone asap to buy us the time to reduce C02 which stays in the atmosphere for hundreds of years. There has been some good news on that front lately with the announcement that the US will lead a coalition to curb 'short lived' climate pollution http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/feb2012/2012-02-17-01.html This has to be done and is quite important in many ways but they missed the elephant in the room and that is meat production and agriculture. How willing the US is to assign improvement to other nations but yet refuse to see their part in mitigating climate change(I am US citizen) But acknowledging the science is a huge step forward. Again re comment #14 I also challenge whether efficiency measures can be considered mitigation. Of course, We need to be working on all at once. But if we don't succeed with mitigation I think adaptation will have to just be a response to what ever nature decides to throw at us. I cannot imagine adapting to 4-6C increase in temperature and that is where we are heading on current trajectory.

Yuejiao Ha

Apr 24, 2012
10:18

Member


18 |
Share via:
Dear all, I am a graduate student from China, majoring in environmental policy, and glad to communicate with you all here in Colab. From my personal perspective, public activities are also quite an important aspect when talking about climate change, especially in China because of the great population. So when it comes to “Reduction”, the emission reduction from daily lives should also be considered, such as the management of waste paper, waste oil, and the conversion from private vehicles to public traffic. In addition, I think another item should be added to the list of “Adaption”. Recently, the problem of PM2.5 is receiving more and more attention in the major cities of China, and the public are more aware of this problem because it is related to everyone’s health. So “Adaption to the change of air quality around us” should also be an important part of “Adaption”. About the “Who” section, I hope that the voices from the people who are in emerging economies and the people who are in poverty both in developed and developing economies will be listened more. According to the principle of equality, they may be the ones that suffer more from climate change in the world. Thanks a lot! Best regards, Yolanda

Nishadh K.a.

Apr 28, 2012
09:16

Member


19 |
Share via:
Hi, In " What section" there has to be a topic for actions to improve better understanding of highly dynamic, complex and uncertain nature of global climate change problem. Since it directly affecting our social ecological system it is imperative to know holistically about it to make positive output of interventions. Past experiences (hunger, vector born diseases... some examples) has clearly showed us the futility of interventions without that kind of basic understandings.

Nishadh K.a.

Apr 28, 2012
09:30

Member


20 |
Share via:
In response to comment 8 More over with financing the adaptive capacity of developing societies by global institutions. It can be for the derivation of science and technology for adaptive strategy.

Zak Accuardi

May 8, 2012
07:52

Fellow


21 |
Share via:
I echo the sentiments of support for the general framing of the taxonomy, and will offer a few suggestions. [ed: apologies for what spiraled into a rather lengthy few suggestions] Under "Who" - It might be worthwhile to explicitly include an industry/sector-level distinction in the taxonomy, as many policy changes will apply to such a division. Further, there are significant opportunities that could come from something as simple (theoretically) as standardization of data across the industry, cf. the Green Button Initiative. Under "What": - There is generally a lot of room to expand on the human systems (economic/social/policy aspects) opportunities, which in my mind are more important to the CoLab than the physical systems opportunities. An independent contributor is much more likely to have a brilliant idea for a good policy, or identify a new way of approaching an economic issue, than to have an epiphany that leads to the next great geoengineering scheme. In fact, at the risk of adding a layer of complication to the taxonomy, it may make sense to separate the policy/human systems impact piece from the physical systems piece -- because at the root of any human systems idea is the desire to change our physical system. Further, any idea to change a physical system will in turn affect human systems and inevitably necessitate some sort of policy/economic component. So it is not a choice between physical and human systems, but rather always a combination. Perhaps the result could be "What" parts A & B. - Many of the current physical systems opportunities are specific enough to be a project of their own merits, rather than a general category. - Example categories: communicating/educating (creating informed [public/legislature/other specific group]), coalition building/negotiating strategies (int'l + public-private sector, ...), - Under 'Adaptation': it would be interesting to see a "public health" category, and open up the possibility of strategies to address the adverse health impacts of both global climate change and localized health impacts. There might also be an opportunity to leverage health risks (of coal plant development, for example) as a policy tool to discourage certain climate-change-driving mechanisms. - A couple earlier commenters have expressed skepticism regarding whether energy efficiency is a reasonable 'Adaptation' measure, given what has come to be known as the rebound effect. While this skepticism is certainly merited, I don't think I have ever heard anyone say that energy efficiency is actually a net negative - though this is of course notoriously difficult to study/prove. Energy efficiency should stay on as a policy measure, as I would assert that it is at least a net improvement over business-as-usual. However, the rebound effect itself might merit a separate category, as it is a phenomenally interesting, oft-discussed, and very difficult problem. Any potential measures to reduce its impact on varying scales (or even just measure it accurately) should be encouraged! Zak

James Greyson

May 9, 2012
07:05

Member


22 |
Share via:
Thanks Zak! Yes, the climate taxonomy could be further segmented. However this can also make it denser and create more overlaps. Since the purpose of the taxonomy is as a supportive structure to hang proposals from, we could also handle questions of sub-segments by making proposals within them. For example initiatives for standardisation, communication or health risks could be great proposal themes. What do you think? Regarding the distinction between physical and human systems, another way to visualise the taxonomy is as a tapestry of opportunities where physical and technical strands run one way and the policy (cultural, economic, laws, communication etc) to engage the physical strands runs the other way. All proposals would involve a human system change designed to implement a physical system change. A change to waste management for example would require people to do something different (eg new price signals), which would be the human system change. However this tapestry image might not work for everyone - it's just something to consider if it seems to make it more manageable. James

Cristian Gatica

May 9, 2012
12:18

Member


23 |
Share via:
Good afternoon. Have been addressed very important issues mislabeled sub - themes. I think that all perspectives are important to make a difference. In my personal experience, I am from a country in process of development such as Argentina. I think there are topics that should work in depth as are the political issues. Policies should be implemented long-term policies to end short-term solutions rarely work in the background. I see important issues such as emissions decrease by individuals and adaptation to climate change, from my point of view. All we are constantly adapting to environmental changes. But we should look at that scale is investigated. Can be generalized to all people the results? Each person is different, each country has its own culture and politics. This is a topic certainly fumdamental. With respect to the use of renewable energy from these countries in the Third World, is seen as something unattainable. There are issues that the eyes deviate policies such as poverty, malnutrition, infant mortality. The use of renewable energy has great economic costs and often is unable to access this without the cooperation of large entities such as the World Bank and so on. The downside of these credits is significantly affecting the sustainability of the third world countries. And which contributed heavily in debt and economic deficits. But without a doubt is a very good tool to bring about change. All countries should compreter to this cause to generate a big change. Since the policies from the economy, from the social and of course from the ecological. Sorry, I do not speak much English. Greetings from Argentina Cristian Gatica Thesis Environmental Management

John Wood

May 19, 2012
09:43

Member


24 |
Share via:
While it is realistic to harness specialist concerns, my own view is that the western framework of (disconnected) thought is part of the current global problem. Without seeking to divert, or discourage any of the very positive suggestions and comments by our contributors I believe that a collective search for a 'synergy-of-synergies' would yield better results than from addressing each of the issues (e.g. 'biodiversity losses / climate change / economic wellbeing, etc.) separately. http://metadesigners.org/tiki/Synergy-Glossary We also have a number of downloadable articles that discuss synergy: http://metadesigners.org/tiki/Downloadable-articles James is doing a wonderful job and I hope we can work together more closely on our (already connected) ideas.

James Greyson

May 22, 2012
08:50

Member


25 |
Share via:
Many thanks John - my input is the smallest piece of the CoLab team's efforts but it would be brilliant to collaborate with you here. The search for synergies is built into 2012 CoLab activities as a later stage from December where compatible proposals would be combined into meta-proposals. It should be possible at this stage to look for synergies that reach beyond the separate issues and proposals. Or would it help to be thinking already now about cross-issue synergies and the scope for proposals that create synergies where they're currently missing and blocking action on climate? https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/resources/-/wiki/Main/Plan%20for%202012%20activities

John Wood

May 22, 2012
09:18

Member


26 |
Share via:
Excellent, James. One possible approach is to set up a number of 'creative quartets' (4 matched contributors). Each participant would be invited to bring their interest& expertise in a different concern/stakeholder level/problem...and who would be willing to think beyond their familiar territory and to work creatively with each of the other 3. They would look for synergies deriving from each combination/creative meeting. Numerically, this means there can be 6 new synergies that reflect (/transcend?) the knowledge of the individuals. They might bring problems (deemed) into solutions (novel?) by combining them and re-languaging them. The (<) 6 outcomes can then be the basis for a new set of meetings, each of which could culminate in a new, second-order set of (<) 15 synergies. The synergy-seeking approach is intended to cheer people up by giving them a discourse that sidesteps the usual, parsimonious, resource-based thinking.

Millie Begovic Radojevic

May 29, 2012
06:33

Member


27 |
Share via:
James, I've wanted to jump into the discussion with a question that may not be the most relevant but it has been one that we've been considering in Montenegro for some time now. How do we design solutions for multiple problems in the society- how do we get one intervention to deal with several problems in the society. In Montenegro we have a huge issue with illegal households (if distributed evenly, every other household lives in an illegal home- illegality comes from various reasons, none important for the point im trying to make here), so we came up with a way to incentives communities to legalize their homes using savings from energy efficiency measures they would implement- a sort of a revenue neutral solution to both issues of legalization and mitigation of GHG emissions (quick overview of the proposal in a form of an infographic: http://bit.ly/IihMoM). I wonder if ther have been similar efforts going on elsewhere that we could consider and maybe copy some smart ideas? :) We are about to start a prototype in a community with about 10 households- so we'll also have some things to share in the coming months. But as we start this, i wonder whether some of participants in this forum are already doing similar initiatives where a particular incentive system addresses multiple development problems related to climate change?

Rob Laubacher

May 29, 2012
12:52

Staff


28 |
Share via:
In response to elami5 at post #27: a proposal that outlines the program you are running in Montenegro would be very appropriate for our building efficiency contest https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/9. Robert Laubacher For the Climate CoLab team

Millie Begovic Radojevic

May 29, 2012
02:54

Member


29 |
Share via:
In response to Laubacher- thanks so much for your reply! :) I looked at the contest and we'll definitely submit our proposal and see how it goes!! Really, thanks so much! Best, Millie

James Greyson

May 29, 2012
06:34

Member


30 |
Share via:
Thanks John, this synergy seeking could be a super tool for the planned integration of proposals. https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/resources/-/wiki/Main/Plan%20for%202012%20activities "Identification of dependencies may be done informally, using text in the proposal or they may be highlighted in a more structured way, using visual representations and tools to elicit dependencies more explicitly and to make them more visible." Thank you Millie for this great case study of seeking synergies across multiple problems. It would be interesting to hear how this works out and as Rob suggests, ideal as a building efficiency proposal. Much appreciate your input! James

Ed Revill

Jun 18, 2012
06:38

Member


31 |
Share via:
Hi, thank you for the oportunity to mention my work and ideas on these issues. I grow vegetables on a small market garden. My main strategy is to stabilise carbon in soil in order to maintain soil fertility. The two forms of stabilised carbon I use are biochar and glomalin. I spend my spare time designing and building biochar producing domestic heating systems. Inspired by the cook stoves which are empowering and revolutionising growing and cooking in the majority world, I have designed front loading stoves for indoor use with heaters in the minority world. I have also built effective all in one oven, griddle, water and room heaters in order to efficiently capture the heat produced by these stoves. These stoves are very efficient, clean burning, do not require logs (which require tree felling), require very little fuel (necessary in a fossil fuel free world), can improve soil when biochar is incorporated, sequester CO2 and generate an income for the user (biochar is worth a lot more than wood chip). Domestic scale biochar production is slower than large scale because it is far more efficient, enabling better heat capture. Domestic scale empowers individuals by reducing dependency on mainstream food and energy systems. WHO- These tools to enable anybody to change their heating and cooking system to one which is very efficient and which produces biochar. WHERE- In kitchens, living rooms, gardens, allotments and market gardens WHAT- Domestic energy and food produced in a way which stabilises and sequesters CO2, improves soil fertility and can empower the user to become a symbiot with the Earth. The change to harmony has to happen on all levels. Right now I have come to purely bottom up empowerment of individuals with information and tools regarding the challenges of trying to support 7bn humans without non renewable resources. Thank you to those who are trying to instigate the necessary changes on the many other levels.

Tamra Engelhorn Raven

Jun 22, 2012
10:44

Member


32 |
Share via:
I received your twitter. I propose a new global metric: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QI0XTbT7hM0&feature=youtube_gdata_player I also have a web site. I wish this GSTM to be ISO. PUBLISHED: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYOzsqkZ1Ho&feature=youtube_gdata_player Also Dr Thomas Goreau. Coral Reef Alliance to ASPRS (ISO) on my website www.eco-gstm.org/tamraraven/ I cannot write algorithms. I need help. I first tweeted this week. Did voice over YouTube in iMovie with generous help of Apple One to One teachers. Tamra born 1945 San Diego. Ecology student of Harold A. Mooney, Stanford. Goreau and I have worked on agroecology on SIDS, Marshall Islands. Google Tamra Engelhorn Raven. 10km3x2 CSD GSTM Geocoded Spatial Transparent Metric. I need guidance and collaboration.

Sanni Tajudeen Olamilekan

Jul 17, 2012
11:27

Member


33 |
Share via:
This is a good move that all positive attention must be forward to.

Alan Yelsey

Jul 22, 2012
09:13

Member


34 |
Share via:
We would like to talk with James and members of the team about how the taxonomy approach can evolve into dynamic visual models that move away from linear branchings and lists and toward interactive scaled systemic models that can be universally adopted. This is a great endeavor and we would enjoy being a contributor. I will be in Boston in mid to late August and would enjoy meeting with the team if available. Alan Yelsey YWorlds alan@kvsstudio.com 612.616.5430 cell

James Greyson

Jul 24, 2012
04:26

Member


35 |
Share via:
Hi Alan, many thanks for the follow for @ClimateCoLab and for making contact here. I'm just one of the team (based in Southern England) but I'm sure others in Boston would be keen to meet with you. The taxonomy is presented as branchings since this is a convenient metaphor for giving structure to the complexity. It offers many useful distinctions, for example between actions that directly cut emissions and policy-type actions that support the direct emissions-cutting actions. However the branchings are, as you helpfully suggest, not mutually exclusive or disconnected from each other. Biochar (charcoal from surplus biomass, added to topsoil) for example would fit in mitigation, adaptation and geoengineering branches. The team previously discussed possible visual metaphors for presenting the taxonomy. This could be an exciting way to present the opportunities for people to engage with the scope of solutions and with the site. However it could also be technically more tricky to design into a website. "Dynamic visual models" sounds very appealing. How would you suggest implementing "interactive scaled systemic models that can be universally adopted"? What would it look like? Any contributions are warmly welcomed! With thanks James

Alan Yelsey

Jul 24, 2012
01:02

Member


36 |
Share via:
Hi James and ClimateCoLab Team: One of the challenges of dealing with anything comprehensive and complex is that words and pages and organized taxonomies can only take one so far. And so far, no one has come up with a better way to address such multivariate subjects as climate or body or mind or economics. What we do today is very helpful but its very form and architecture make it less sustainable and effective as, for example, an imagined video game where: you have worlds to visit that include a variables world organized according to various perspectives, a systems world where one can see and process the expanse of systemic exchanges across time and space, driven by cause and effect associations and assumptions, or a human centric world where in one comprehensive high level view there are the individual, group and large scale decisions and actions that are occurring, can occur, must occur. If we are driven by our objectives, what do we want to know? I want to know at the highest level all of the factors involved in understanding climate - in one comprehensive view. I want to see, visualize, recognize the roles and relationships of those factors from nano to macro, I want to know where the problems are, who the culprits are, where there is relative certainty about data/knowledge and where there are assumptions, where more research and association building needs to occur, where changes are occurring, where major cause/effect exchanges are occurring, what macro strategies are imaginable and what could they accomplish, what the molecular view is, can higgs bosom be an active player, who is doing what, who needs to do what, who are the decision makers, who holds the power and intent to make improvements, how can we manage the change we wish to see, etc. The answer to how to best achieve an understand of complexity is in universal 2 dimensional cellular models filled with patterns that carry meaning. This need not be technically challenging. One can use 8 colored pencils and accomplish a lot. We can however do better by using real time browser based visualization coded generatively. Think of what you want and need to say to the people of the world. Think of what they want to know from you. Think of what it takes to tell the story of "what is" , "why" and "what needs to be done". The details are important but the summary is human magic. We like our Y Worlds Cooperative Model framework. LIke anything in our Cooperative, it is available for your use and development. Alan Yelsey alan@kvsstudio.com yworlds.com @yworlds 612.616.5430

James Greyson

Jul 26, 2012
05:59

Member


37 |
Share via:
Hi Alan, thanks for this extra info. I'm intrigued but must admit I'm now more confused. Do you have examples of any "universal 2 dimensional cellular models filled with patterns that carry meaning" I could see ? Many 'big data' projects are saying 'if we know enough about the interactions in a system then we can visualise them and know what to do to change them.' Sounds like your message is similar?

Alan Yelsey

Jul 26, 2012
06:45

Member


38 |
Share via:
Hi James, here are some examples of cellular models filled with pattern: go to www.kvsstudio.com, in the center view the movies labelled emoticom and (less cellular) geographic data plotter go to www. yworlds.com concussion & yperson cells http://yworlds.com/section/knowledge/ontologies/y-person/ mascots NETS model cells http://daily.yworlds.com/2012/07/26/an-open-letter-on-mascots/ wind http://yworlds.com/section/tech/inspiration/patterns/ starry night http://yworlds.com/section/tech/inspiration/controls-2/ http://www.bestiario.org/research/remap/#project_id=407 As always, I am available to talk via skype at alan.yelsey1 or 1+612.616.5430. We take the ontology of climate using the universal format: http://yworlds.com/section/knowledge/ontologies/semiotic-roadmap/ We focus on the human centric aspect and at the same time the matter and energy and systems aspects. We make 1-4 level models of the ontological classes, and then fill them with moving color to identify the meaning we with to convey. This is definitely not about big data. This is about cutting the chase by producing high level synthesis and meaning that tell us the what and why of climate, and how we can and should reshape it. The research and data associations and theories converge through a proof process toward a systemic set of conclusions. We know that one billion incredibly efficient battery aided human powered bike machines, a massive decline in the production of edible animals, macromachines that can adjust ecosystems, living and working in close proximity, taxing fossil fuels to fund conversion and damage control and many more approaches have little downside and potentially major upside. We want to see an accurate and comprehensive high level synthesis that is digestible by all. That is what cellular/pattern visualization brings to the party. I would enjoy introducing some of this approach to your party! Best, Alan

James Greyson

Jul 30, 2012
08:19

Member


39 |
Share via:
Thanks Alan, let's have a chat about this. Will try to call you. Best wishes, James

Karl Geissler

Aug 17, 2012
03:43

Member


40 |
Share via:
Hi jerzy and all, I just discovered this wonderful forum and would like to ask for your opinion, discussion and assistance. We are a very small company in Germany cooperating with an inventor in Korea. He has developed an additive to the coolant, to be in any water cooled engine, i.e. car, truck, bus, boat, machine. This coolant by the name of Cartential has been patentedKorea and Europe. The effect of the application is a sizeable reduction in emissions, i.e. Nox, HCO, CO2, and in consumption. The automotive industry doesn't seem to be interested in it. We have sent an Open Letter to the German Chancellor after she has appealed to the industry at the "Petersberg Climate Dialogue" in July to come up with innovative solutions to reduce overall emissions: http://www.cartential.com/Content/Documents/ict-openletter-en.pdf We also have approached CARB to find out what specified tests are available in order to submit this coolant additive for further testing or approval so its application for a mass testing for example in the California region could get started. Thank you and Greetings from Germany!
ADD YOUR COMMENT
You must be logged into your account to post a comment.