Carbonomics Overview

Carbonomics is a new form of eco-nomics. It is the only accounting system which can evaluate oomans' impacts on the Earth's life support system. It is the only accounting system which can evaluate geophysiological phenomena. It is the only accounting system capable of doing both. 'Carbonomics' is so comprehensive it can evaluate any ooman activity and most, but not all, ecological phenomena. It provides a common measuring system for both ooman activities and the Earth.

However, whilst 'Carbonomics' can measure the geophysiological consequences of ooman activities it cannot provide indices of ooman well-being. However, this does not mean it is irrelevant to ooman welfare. On the contrary, it could play an invaluable role in determining geophysiological justice between all countries around the world - perhaps the most important factor in ooman welfare. There is currently no other criteria for determining global equality between the rich and poor worlds without triggering off endless disputes about the redistribution of wealth which will almost invariably end up with countries trying to outperform each other economically causing a spurt in economic growth which will overrun the Earth's geophysiological limitations.

'Carbonomics' cannot determine what the rate of resource depletion should be to maximize ooman welfare - especially over multiple generations. However, once again, it could be used to ensure that resources are not exploited out at a rate which destabilizes the Earth's life support system. This should automatically ensure the a more even distribution of resources over the longer term.

The purpose of this article is to outline the need for a global Carbon audit and a global Carbon spiral budget to formulate policies to combat global burning. The advantage of such a budget is that it can firstly, harmonize local, national, and global, green policies; secondly, ensure green policies are in harmony with the Earth's geophysiological needs; and, thirdly, assess the ecological viability of current local, national, and global, green policies.

The Earth's global average temperature is influenced by the concentration of atmospheric Carbon. The level of atmospheric Carbon is determined by the release of Carbon emissions into the atmosphere (the supply side of the Earth's Carbon spiral) and by Photosynthesis (the demand side of the Carbon spiral). There has been an accumulation of Carbon in the atmosphere since the start of the industrial/agricultural revolutions when the industrializing countries began dumping increasing quantities of pollution into the atmosphere and deforesting an increasing proportion of their lands. In order to combat anthropogenically-induced global warming (hereinafter referred to as global burning) it is necessary not only to reduce anthropogenic Carbon emissions but to increase the scale of the Earth's Forest cover.

Unfortunately, whilst the world's leading authority on the greenhouse effect, the inter-governmental panel on climate change (ipcc), has made recommendations for dramatic reductions in greenhouse gas emissions it has not made any recommendations concerning the need for Reforestation. This ommission could be disastrous because even if the required reduction in Carbon emissions was eventually achieved, the level of atmospheric Carbon could go on rising if oomans continued to decimate the Planet's Photosynthetic capacity. If action is not taken soon to Reforest large parts of the Earth, global burning could accelerate and further discussions about reducing Carbon emissions will be irrelevant. The ipcc's focus on Carbon emissions has led politicians and green organizations to dismiss the vital role of global Reforestation in reducing global burning. The ecological priority for combating global warming is not, as suggested by greenpeace and friends of the Earth, the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, but Reforestation.

Assume, however, that eventually the ipcc decides to recommend the need for Reforestation. Given the ipcc's non-political remit it will doubtlessly couch its recommendation in the same way as it did the reduction in Carbon emissions i.e. in global percentage terms. This will be taken to mean, especially by the over-industrialized nations, that each country around the world should increase the scale of its Forest cover by the same percentage.

The poor/industrializing countries, however, are no more likely to accept a global percentage increase in Forest cover than they are to accept a global percentage reduction in Carbon emissions. Why should they? During the industrial revolution, the over-industrialized nations have released far more Carbon into the atmosphere and have destroyed a far greater proportion of their Forests than the poor/industrializing countries. The over-industrialized nations have made the biggest contribution to global burning and, correspondingly, must take primary responsibility for combating this ecological threat. The poor/industrializing countries will play their part only if the over-industrialized nations repair the damage they have inflicted on the Earth's life support system during the industrial revolution. But why, it might be asked, should the over-industrialized nations take responsibility for the ecological damage they have caused over the last couple of hundred years? The answer is that half the Carbon released during the industrial revolution is still in the atmosphere. Whilst it is impossible for the over-industrialized nations to rectify the centuries old political injustices they have perpetrated against poor/industrializing countries, they cannot escape their historical responsibilities for boosting global burning. The over-industrialized nations' crimes against the Planet are not dead and buried in the long distant past like so many imperialist crimes but are about to take their toll not merely on present, but on future, generations. The over-industrialized nations have been sponging off the Earth's life support systems in poor/industrializing countries' for centuries and if this is not stopped there will eventually be a geophysiological breakdown.

Poor/industrializing countries will never agree to global policies to combat global burning unless these policies are formulated on a just and equitable basis i.e. in which the different contribution each country has made to global burning since the start of the industrial revolution is taken into account. The basis of global geophysiological equity is that each country must balance its historical Carbon budget so that Carbon emissions equal the amount of Carbon absorbed through Photosynthesis. This means that most of the over-industrialized nations, which are Carbon debtors, will have to carry out wholesale Reforestation, whilst the poor/industrializing countries, which are Carbon creditors, will be able to go on releasing Carbon emissions whilst they develop and eradicate poverty.

If no agreement can be reached between the over-industrialized world and poor/industrializing countries, as to how much each country should reduce its Carbon emissions and increase its Forest cover then every country around the world will continue polluting the atmosphere and deforesting their share of the Earth's life support system until there is a geophysiological collapse - and, on present trends, this could happen within the next three decades. The only way to create a sustainable green world is through the establishment of a global Carbon budget which can ensure geophysiological justice between all countries. This global agreement will be one of the foundation stones of a New Ecological Order.

The ipcc should draw up an audit of the Earth's stocks and flows of Carbon. It should then formulate a global Carbon budget to combat global burning i.e. it should determine the scale of the Earth's Forest cover, and the quantity of Carbon in the atmosphere, to stabilize the Earth's climate. Once this has been done the global budget could be divided up amongst all countries around the world - taking into account their historical Carbon status. Each country around the world would have a national Carbon budget which, in turn, it would divide up into regional Carbon budgets for each region within the country. Only when there is a global Carbon budget would it be possible to calculate national, and then regional, budgets. National/regional ecological/environmental policies can be drawn up only within the context of global geophysiological policies. It is not possible to develop ecologically sound policies on a local, regional or national level without a global Carbon budget. The Earth comes first.

All national policies should be assessed in terms of their contribution to a national Carbon budget. (The same would apply to regional policies and regional Carbon budgets). Any policy which exceeded this budget by dumping too much pollution into the atmosphere, by suffocating too much land under tarmac or cement, or by reducing terrestrial Photosynthesis, etc, would have to be curbed or abandoned. A global Carbon spiral budget has three vital advantages over other forms of ecological assessment.

The plain and simple fact is that if the current exponential growth in the number of cars, kids, cattle, capital, and carnage, is allowed to continue then THERE WILL DEFINITELY BE A BREAKDOWN IN THE EARTH'S LIFE SUPPORT SYSTEM FOR OOMANS. The over-industrialized countries are responsible for most of this exponential growth and the consequent exponential growth in ecological damage. They are living far beyond their ecological means. A global Carbon spiral analysis can provide the most accurate gauge of the Earth's geophysiological limitations, and is the most accurate means of measuring the extent to which countries are (or are not) exceeding these limitations.

The proposal for global, national and regional, Carbon spiral budgets may seem somewhat bizarre but, in a number of respects, it is merely a substitution for monetary-based budgets. The advantage of a Carbon budget is that whilst money is capable of astronomic growth which will eventually lead to the destruction of the Earth's life sustaining processes, Carbon is rooted in, and thus limited by, the Earth's natural processes. Whilst money is infinite, Carbon is finite. Whilst money knows no standards (whether gold, dollar, or yen), Carbon can be fixed by the concentration of atmospheric Carbon and the scale of the Earth's Forest cover needed to maintain climatic stability.

In a sustainable green world, Carbon budgets would replace monetary budgets; a living economy (based primarily on Trees) would replace a dead economy (based on fossil fuels); and, sustainable Wood economies would replace an unsustainable global economy. Carbon would be a green currency in comparison to ecocidal currencies such as the dollar, the yen, or gold. There is no such thing as a steady state economy, only a steady state climate. A steady state climate can be constructed only by using Carbon not cash. Just as economists meticulously measure the demand and supply sides of a monetary economy to promote economic growth, so greens will have to do the same for the Earth's Carbon spiral if they are to protect the Earth's life support system and thus survive on Earth.

An Overview of Carbonomics

The Need for a Global Carbon Spiral Budget

All publications are copyrighted mundi club © You are welcome to quote from these publications as long as you acknowledge the source - and we'd be grateful if you sent us a copy.	We welcome additional information, comments, or criticisms. Email: carbonomics@yahoo.co.uk The Mundi Club Website: http://www.geocities.com/carbonomics/
To respond to points made on this website visit our blog at http://mundiclub.blogspot.com/