Settle the carbon debt and release the power of example! by jan-k

Hello, I am extremely interesting in this idea. Unfortunately to leave the discussión on climate debt as well as green or natural debt means a clear compromise in economic terms by developed countries that have helped the change of climate. In other words, it is necessary from them financial and economic help for those suffereing the change of the climate, small island that will face the destruction from the waters, et cetera. The idea si excellent but certain elements should be adressed beforehand in order to have acknowledgement of countries in the process of development their own economies and for the survival of their fellow connationals.

Dear Sergio Pena, Thank's for your comment. I take up this issue how to finance adaptation to climate change in an article, where discuss what to do after the debt swap. My conclusion there are: ...the design of an emissions path towards sustainable emissions must be accompanied by a system to collect funds for adapting to the adverse impacts of climate change and managing inevitable climate-related risks. Following the ‘polluter pays’ principle the funds should be collected in proportion to the responsibility for climate change and redistributed in proportion to the needs for adaption and disaster management. The total amount of funds needed depends on the additional warming and adaption costs the chosen emissions path leads to. The payment for each unit of greenhouse gases emitted can be calculated by dividing the best available estimate of the total adaption and management fund required by the total emissions above the sustainable level under the chosen emissions path since the cut-off point for moral responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions discussed above. Please send your email to me: jan.kunnas@eui.eu if you want a PDF of that article. Perhaps, I should add something from that to this proposal as well.

Dear Jan, First off, let me say that I very much like the spirit behind your proposal; namely, to 1) remove a barrier to reaching a global climate agreement, and to 2) use individual acts to promote collective actions. I also learned from several of your examples I was not yet familiar with. I'd very much like to support your proposal, but first there are several questions/comments I have regarding how you might improve it. 1) I don't understand what you mean when you say there is a "mutual debt" in the context of historical responsibility. Could you possibly make this more clear for me? Specifically, I only see that debt as applying to developed countries, so there is nothing from developing countries to cancel it out. 2) You say the idea that nations can't act unilaterally to make a difference on climate change is faulty, yet your reasoning does not address sufficiently, in my opinion, the very real disincentive every country has for acting alone. Specifically, it is not in an individual - country or person's - interests to act alone because this will likely put them at a disadvantage compared to others who do not act. For example, driving up your domestic energy prices by forcing a massive shift to renewable energy - in order to make an example to others - while others just continue to use cheaper fossil fuels. The realist paradigm of international relations would not like this situation. Do you see a way to overcome this issue? 3) Given the disincentive mentioned in #2 above, I would like to see your proposal offer a concrete mechanism or platform to help individuals to overcome it (because there is no guarantee that one person's action will inspire others to act similarly). Can we help individuals to magnify their impact and its reach to others? One possible example I know is the Billion Acts of Green campaign run by Earth Day Network. People could make individualized pledges for actions to take in their own lives, but do so as part of a collection of people also making similar pledges. Thus, the individual's actions have a better chance of becoming/encouraging something bigger, thereby justifying their sacrifices. Link to Billion Acts of Green: http://www.earthday.org/takeaction/ I hope these three points are helpful and I look forward to your thoughts in regard to your proposal. Best, Timothy Damon

Hi Timothy again, I took a look at the link provided, and added the following rewrite of your suggestion to my proposal. I hope you do not mind. The power example could be intensified with a platform where fellow citizens could publish their own actions for other to follow. People could make individualized pledges for actions to take in their own lives, but do so as part of a collection of people also making similar pledges. Thus, the individual's actions have a better chance of becoming/encouraging something bigger. A possible reference point for this could be the Billion Acts of Green campaign run by Earth Day Network.

Something To Consider I have created a white vapor, from gasoline, with twice the power of gasoline, and at the same time I also got a non flammable liquid from the gasoline, by spraying a fine mist of gasoline onto a 600 degree Fahrenheit heater, neither the white vapor, or non flammable liquid, will mix with the gasoline they were created from. I created a flammable gas from distilled water, by spraying a fine mist of distilled water onto a 221 degree Fahrenheit heater. The only thing flammable in water is the hydrogen atom. I feel like I am Galileo trying to convince the Catholic Church that the planets orbit around the sun, only I am fighting against the Chemistry society, to prove that atoms have boiling temperatures inside of liquids, and that by spraying the liquid onto the right temperature you will find these boiling temperatures, and the atoms inside the liquid will separate. Who knows how many new fuels can be created from this, not to mention what it can do for medicine, science, and the environment. We know when heated, a liquid produces a gas. This gas will separate from the liquid, it was created from. We know all liquids have their own boiling temperatures. What if it was possible to take any liquid to any temperature, and just like all liquids, atoms in liquids will have boiling temperatures to. Therefore it would be possible to take liquids to the boiling temperature of atoms inside of those liquids, and like going to the boiling temperature of any liquid. The atoms that boiled would separate from the atoms that didn’t. One atom, or group of atoms will become a gas and the other atom or group of atoms, inside the original liquid, will remain a liquid. Thus you have separated the atoms in that liquid, and at the right applied temperatures, it would be possible to separate the atoms in all liquids. I have a synopsis, all I ask is to read it and decide, if I am right. If you know nothing about Sublimation please look it up on the internet. Sublimation happens to snow when ample amounts of heat is applied to it, of course in explaining Sublimation, the scientist, used an unknown temperature, from a flame, or torch. When a large amount of ample heat is applied to the snow, the snow goes from a solid matter to a gas, without becoming a liquid matter. It is the size of the snowflake’s frozen matter that makes this possible. The snowflakes are extremely small, and they assume the applied temperature faster than the snow can melt, so by going to the applied temperature. The solid matter (snowflakes) bypasses the temperature needed to change to a liquid matter, which is above 32 degrees Fahrenheit, the freezing temperature of water. The snowflakes assume the applied unknown temperature, using the Sublimation effect and snowflakes become a gas, which happens above the 212 degree Fahrenheit temperature, the boiling temperature of water. We all know how long it takes snow to melt, but snowflakes are small and will go to the applied temperature very fast, faster than the snowflakes can become a liquid. Agreed? Sublimation is what science calls it. Using the Sublimation principle and specific temperatures, I replaced the snowflakes with small droplets of liquid, I used specific temperatures, and instead of applying unknown temperature to the liquid, I applied the liquid to the heating element, or heat source, in spray form. I used the same principle, as Sublimation, just a different way of applying the heat. I did this to gasoline and water; it can be done to any liquid. On gasoline I used 600 degrees Fahrenheit, for the heater temperature. Spraying a fine mist of a liquid onto the heat source, at specific temperatures is totally different from Sublimation, and I start with a liquid. I call it my Flashing Liquid Process. I have found a way to take any liquid to any temperature, before it changes state from a liquid matter to a gas. Using my Flashing Liquid process on gasoline at 600 degrees Fahrenheit, I got a white vapor that has twice the power of gasoline. I saw it on two different vehicles and 2 different Dynamometers. The white vapor I produced, had a zero parts per million hydrocarbons reading, this I have seen on a smog analyzer. To further prove what I discovered I put clean dry rags over the vehicle exhaust pipe, running the vehicle on the white vapor, and on all 7 vehicles, I have run the white vapor on, all the rags smelled like they had just been ironed. Some of the vehicles ran for half an hour on, the white vapor, very clean. At the same time the white vapor was created, I also accumulated a non flammable liquid, neither the white vapor, nor the non flammable would mix with the gasoline they were created from, after I Flashed the liquid gasoline. I did my Flashing Liquid Process to distilled water. On water I used between 212 and 230 degrees Fahrenheit. I could not find a temperature control to get the exact temperature. I split the difference between the 212 and 230 temperatures and 221 degrees Fahrenheit has to be the temperature that the hydrogen atom boils inside of distilled water. I found that public water has unspecified amounts of chlorine added. Chlorine influences the boiling temperature of water, so I used distilled water. Distilled water and gasoline are non conductors. You see, I used electric heaters, and thought about shorting out the electrical, when and if, it is used on a conventional or hydrogen powered vehicle. When I sprayed the distilled water onto the heat source at the above mentioned temperatures, I detected, with a combustible gas leak detector, a flammable gas from the vapor I produce. Think about it, the only thing flammable in water, is the hydrogen atom. Hydrogen in water cannot be detected, with a combustible gas leak detector. To get hydrogen from water with temperature, you would have to find the boiling temperature of the hydrogen atom, turning it to a gas, while the oxygen atom, still in liquid matter form, having not been flashed and reached its boiling temperature, remains a liquid. The liquid oxygen atom remains a liquid long enough for the hydrogen atom to become a gas, and separate from the liquid oxygen matter. Of course liquid oxygen boils at, according to one internet source, -368.77 degrees Fahrenheit, below zero, so it will boil as soon as the hydrogen atom separates from the oxygen atom, inside the distilled water. This is Hydrogen from water using the right temperature applied a different way. Science says when atoms separate, a void is created in the original atomic structure, and the void will be filled. Air being present, when my Flashing Liquid Process takes place, the surrounding air fills the void, and oxygen, being in that air, is what turns the vapor I created from gasoline, white. I have seen the bubbles form, and the gas inside the bubbles is clear, until they break, then like magic, when the clear gas is exposed to the air, the clear gas turns white. The oxygen in the surrounding air creates a hotter burning vapor, this is where I get twice the boost in power over gasoline. The liquid that forms the bubbles, that has clear gas inside, is the non flammable liquid that I created when I Flashed the gasoline, at 600 degree Fahrenheit temperature. A Gas Spectrum Analyzer, would add documentation to my synopsis. Prove me wrong, you have the temperature, use an electric fry pan, turned to its highest temperature, which should be around 600 degrees Fahrenheit. Spray a fine mist of gasoline onto the heated surface. Don’t worry, science is wrong about gasoline igniting at 536 degrees Fahrenheit. I have seen a heating element turn a dull red (about 1000 degrees Fahrenheit) before the gasoline auto ignited. The electric fry pan cannot reach that temperature. Analyze the white vapor, and non flammable liquid on a Gas Spectrum Analyzer. I know what I discovered. I will call the white vapor I created from gasoline, Billy Gas. I know its saturation temperature is around 65 degrees. It remains a gas at higher ambient temperature, than 65 degrees Fahrenheit. Find that saturation temperature on the combustible liquids chart. I have 3 videos on You Tube my channel Bill Kendrick, watch them and read the comments, make your own decision. A large mass of heat will be needed to sustain the desired temperature, when the liquid is sprayed onto the heat source, and the droplets need to be as fine as possible, to react to the applied heat faster. Yes I think I found the way to separate the atoms in any liquid with the right temperatures. I say every liquid atom has its own boiling temperature, when my Flashing Liquid Process is applied. Try it and see for yourself. Heat transfer happens first and I say faster than matter can perform a change of state, when the matter applied, is very small. One can take any liquid above its boiling temperature, by doing this. Bill Kendrick

The proposal could show more awareness of the literature on cross cultural communication about climate change. California and Europe have used the argument of acting alone, and it has had some impact, but less than anticipated. European researchers have also looked at the first mover advantage of acting first on climate change, and their work has shown the impact is not huge. These latter two facts could be taken into account by the authors. - The idea of leading by example is a good one and competition to do the right thing has even been observed. However, both the EU and California have, in part, taken this approach and the number of other jurisdictions joining in has been pretty small so far. The EU has done a whole work package on leader-follower type formulation and first mover advantages under the pan European European sponsored AMPERE project and the results are not totally negative but progress has been slow. - How will states and other actors be persuaded to adopt the proposed steps? How to address the issues of communication about technologies and policies? Scaling up? How is this different from various climate change technology clearinghouses already in operation?

Mankind presently is prisoner of its own history & struggling; it should act to create history afresh, here "Swami Vivekananda Fruits-Trees Expansion Mission" shall be helpful.

I find quite interesting the idea of taking a look to international debt as a mean of exchange to address CO2 abating programs. Of course, achieveing meaningful results with this, has to be the result of careful design and many meetings and discussions. When there is a debt, there is somebody who supplied the money and that somebody wants his or her money back and something has to be done in this respect.

History, the interpretive chronicler of perceived major events &/or events perceived as major in the eternal journey of mankind, can provide us with explanations & at best the reasons for mankind's present predicament. It will not be able to offer solutions; for the solution lies in uncovering the basic goodness in human beings and helping it blossom & bloom. Here the "Swami Vivekananda Fruit-Trees Expansion Mission" shall be of considerable help to all of us.

Jan, I'm linking your proposal to the IMBECS Protocol (Team Marine BECCS) proposal under U.S. Government (Agency actions). https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1300401/planId/1306813 I've long held the opinion that a majority of the climate change mitigation challenge is economic in nature. I'm glad to see someone of your caliber turn your attention to this issue. Best regards, Michael

Thanks Michael for the offer. I will though not request for membership in a proposal that I do not have anything to add to. I like it as it now stands. I see great potential to move the production of bio fuels to the oceans reducing the current pressure on the oceans and reserving farmland for food production. You just received my vote, good luck! Just one question, how would increased fuel production in the oceans affect acidification of the oceans? Is there a possibility to counteract this at the same time?

Comments from the Judges: - This identifies a political solution to move forward (whether rich countries would actually do it, since the current debt is largely in private banks’ hands, is an open question). But after that, it would involve the power of example. Debt-swap idea might at least get people talking. Not sure this will work, but it’s a fresh approach, and if there were easy answer, we probably would have done it already. - At the first 8 COPs, "who owes who what for what" was a big topic, and there was a flurry of discussion about debt forgiveness 10 years ago, and then it got dropped. I like the idea of bringing up this idea again. In the current environment, such conversations may have a more bilateral character, e.g. talks between U.S. and China or even talks between California leaders and China, rather than being at the global level at UNFCCC. But the debt issue may be a fruitful choke point to attack, and dialogue on this issue could be helpful and useful.

Would this debt relief also penalise bondholders from developing countries? And if not, what would stop the bondholders from developed nations selling their bonds to private financial institutions in developing nations, who could then demand that those bonds be paid in full. It’s relevant because we need developing countries to invest in themselves, so penalising bondholders from developing countries would send the wrong signal. However, the way this proposal deals with debt relief against the cost for past emissions is a very worthy idea, so it gets my vote.

Hi Jan-k and your friends, consider voting for my proposal shown on this link. https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1300206/planId/1002 Thanks.

Hi Jan, Please consider voting for my proposal, https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1300801/planId/1309001 Good luck with your entry! Asante/Thank-you @conserveaction

Unfortunately, I cannot afford to attend the conference, but I would be more than happy to continue the discussion here on this page or elsewhere.

Only by implementing the following theme.. https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1300103/planId/1310401 ...It would be possible for all people to come together and develop the earth in a sustainable way..

Great article. It helps a lot for my work. Thanks for sharing the effective and helpful ways.
vin lookup