-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
/
cultural-stories-shaun-chamberlin.html
executable file
·106 lines (72 loc) · 25 KB
/
cultural-stories-shaun-chamberlin.html
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" />
<title>Transcript of Radio EcoShock Interview with Shaun Chamberlin</title>
<style type="text/css">
td {vertical-align: top; padding: 0px; margin: 0px}
img {padding: 0px 0px 0px 0px}
form {padding: 0px 4px 0px 4px}
li {padding: 2px 0px 2px 0px}
p {padding: 0px 4px 0px 4px}
a:link {text-decoration: none}
a:visited {text-decoration: none}
a:active {text-decoration: none}
a:hover {text-decoration: none; color: red;}
</style>
</head>
<body style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; color: black; background-color: white; background-image: url(images/grid.gif)">
<table style="width: 602px; margin: 100px auto; border-spacing: 0px; border: 2px solid white" width="600" border="2">
<caption></caption>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="border-color: #284098">
<a href="/"><img src="images/logo.png" width="600" height="334" style="border: 0" /></a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="height: 15px; border-width: 0px"></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="border-color: #284098">
<h3>Transcript of Radio EcoShock Interview with Shaun Chamberlin</h3>
This is a transcript of an <a href="http://www.energybulletin.net/node/52161">interview</a> with <a href="http://www.darkoptimism.org/">Shaun Chamberlin</a> on <a href="http://www.ecoshock.org/podcast.html">Radio EcoShock</a> in March 2010. His blog is called Dark Optimism and he is the author of the recently published book <a href="http://www.darkoptimism.org/book.html">The Transition Timeline</a>.
<p><b>AS: OK, let's start with what is Dark Optimism?</b></p>
<p>Well, it all started talking with a friend of mine who was trying to work what kind of person I am, what kind of a thinker I am, and I was lying in bed that night thinking about it and it sort of came to me in a flash that I'm a dark optimist. And over time it became the title for the work that I do, but really it's looking at life and not being afraid to look it when it's dark, when it scary, which as you well know if you look into the future it certainly can be at the moment, but with a faith that if we explore the unknown we often find that when things are unknown the are more scary than when we look at them. In all the horror movies you will find the scariest monsters and the ones you never sea and you just imagine, so looking into the dark is a tool too we can then use to create to better future then the one that we're left with by running away from that darkness.</p>
<p><b>AS: Yes, and you've been looking less for a technical fix and more to some of the stories we tell ourselves. How can that help us out?</b></p>
<p>Yeah, well this ties in a lot with my book [Transition Timelines]. When I was doing the research for that it was a project that came out of the transition movement and and various of the transition community were trying to write their energy descent actions plans and trying to look 20 years into the future of their communities. And they found that was very difficult because they needed to know about some of the big scale issues that were going to effect their communities which maybe they couldn't directly effect so things like climate change and peak oil, but also government policy decisions, nation food supply, things like this. And as I looked the shape of this future I realised that it's really shaped by the cultural stories that we tell ourselves, the narratives which flow through out our culture, and really I found in my opinion there are three dominant stories which really shape out ideas. And one is the idea is that the future will basically look like today, that we'll just carry on much the same, and you see that a lot in government documents for example that assume this has happened up until so we assume that this line, that trend will carry on into the future. And a second story that is very powerful is the apocalypse story, whatever that looks like, whether that's religious apocalypse or Terminator, or the Age Of Stupid. Whatever that forms that takes that's a narrative that we see through our culture. And the third one I think I think, as you have just hinted, is the techno utopia idea that science and progress will save us all and that we'll move onto this maybe Star Trek kind of a future. And those three stories I've found when I was talking to a huge diversity of people about our future I could usually categories them quite easily into one, or more than one sometimes, sometimes there's a compound vision based on a couple of those. And so one of the things that we are trying to do in the Transition movement is create a fourth story of our future - a story which is based around realistically looking at the limits, the environmental limits, that we're starting to really bump up against and creating a better future within that realist context.</p>
<p><b>AS: It seems to me at times that the denial movement or just letting things keep on going the way it is, may be the way it turns out. Did you work out in your book what that world would look like in 2020 or 2030?</b></p>
<p>Absolutely. I mean one of the things I really learned in writing the book about Reliance, which is one of the core concepts in Transition, is that is is very important not to just create a single vision of the future but rather to explore adequately a set of different visions. And so what did in the writing of the book was explore four of those scenarios, based on each of four stores I've just talked about, and look at a timeline for each of those up to 2030, because I like to say resilience is humility and action really, and we have to accept that as the Chinese say "when when men speak of the future the golds laugh." We have to accept that we don't know what's coming and the most sensible things that we can do are things which are useful in a range of possible futures. So absolutely, that's something we explored, which is looking at how each of those cultural stories would pan out taken to it's logical conclusion, then looking at much more depth at the Transition vision for the simple reason that doesn't have a lot of traction in our society at the moment. and I think i t really needs fleshing out so that people can feel that's it's a real vision that can get them out of bed in the morning.</p>
<p><b>AS: I find it interesting that while you're advocating and talking about joining a community level to get away from get away fossil fuel dependency you're also helping with a national action plan by the UK government. Can you give us a peek into the upcoming report on tradable energy quotes and maybe explaining that they are?</b></p>
<p>Well tradable energy quotas is a concept which has gone by a lot of names, things carbon rationing and energy rationing, very much among then. I think at the moment, certainly among green circles, there is a lot of backlash against this idea of tradable in that with good reason carbon trading is something which is deeply mistrusted. But when it comes to looking at the practical detail of how an energy or carbon scheme would operate, tradability becomes very essential to the concept, because unlike something like food which certainly here in the UK we have living memory experience of food rationing, that food is something that people need basically the same amount of each, roughly speaking. Energy is not quite like that in that certain professions, a country doctor or perhaps a farmer, require more energy than other lifestyles, and so if we just game every a equal entitlement of energy then we would end up with all the above energy use professions ceasing to exists overnight, which is obviously would not be of a great advantage to the society. </p>
<p>So the idea of tradable energy quotes is essentially once you're constraint, whether that's a nation carbon budget or whether that's a national oil depletion or gas depletion problem perhaps, that gives you a declining budget which you can then lay out over say a 20 year period and then that budget is turned into essentially rations for the economy and those are giving out on an equal per capital to every individual in the country and the proportion that is relevant to industry and organisations is auctioned to those organisations. And this means that all the energy and carbon within the economy can be captured and accounted for and the carbon budget can actually be achieved which is something which is really lacking in our international negotiation at the moment -- there are all sorts of promises with very little idea of how to achieve them. So those can actually be achieved without the need to measure tailgate emissions on cars or specific emissions from a particular factory because it's done at a national scale.</p>
<p>And as you say it sort of does seem like there is a sort of contradiction between addressing things at that level and the community and I guess my personal journey was that maybe five years ago when I was wonder what I could do about this global situation my first though was I need to get involved in the conference of parties process, the UN Copenhagen, Kyoto type process because that seems to me where the big action is at, that's where I can really make a difference. And there was a quote a from my now colleague David Flemming which really changed my whole perspective on that, he said "large scale problems do not require large scale solutions, they require small scale solutions within a large scale framework" and the more I think about that the more I see the truth in it. And so really what I've been doing then with my life since then is working at the small scale, working on those small scale solutions, trying to support the wonderful diversity of solutions, not just Transition Towns, but the huge diversity of local solutions that are out there, but also recognise that we really do need those frameworks to harness all those individual efforts and ensure they are sufficient for the scale of the challenges that we face otherwise, you know, obviously something like climate change is a problem which if one group does their bit and then one group doesn't then we don't have a solution. So we do need these frameworks but I really feel that without a focus on local and individual levels the frameworks are empty. Actually, the real realisation for me when I saw what the point of something like Copenhagen, I mean if Copenhagen had produced the kind of treaty we all dreamed of, really that would have meant nothing if it didn't stimulate change at the local level and that's where all the emissions come from, that's where all the energy demands come from.</p>
<p>So all the international, national level stuff only exists as a way to stimulate and support changes at the community level and once that sort of clicked in my heard it became very obvious that the community level would become the focus of my efforts while still trying to contribute to getting some kind of reasonable framework at that level.</p>
<p><b>AS: I can see how these tradable energy quotes would give the individual more of a chance to figure out their own solutions, but I think we all have the worry, and does this address it, that somehow the fat cats are going to keep flying around and driving in limousines and wasting energy in huge houses, while the poorest among us will have trouble getting enough energy for heating their home if peak oil comes around and if there's a shortage of supply. How do we get around that?</b></p>
<p>Sure, I mean that's obviously the fear with the tradable ration rather than absolute ration. I think the key thing to remember is that in such a scheme it's absolutely true the rich would be able to buy surplus rations from the poor if the poor found they had surplus rations. And really that is just a consequence of the fact that we live in a capitalist system. This is not a suggestion which overflows capitalism -- it's a fundamental fact of capitalism that if you're rich you can consume more stuff -- but really the critical thing about this scheme is that it changes the current picture. Whereas currently if oil for example is in short supply it goes it goes to either the person who can bid the most or more the person who moves the quickest and gets to the gas station first and under this scheme if the rich did consume more they would be paying the poor directly for the privileged, so it would actually be redistribution the wealth from the high consumers to the low. So not only would it create a very strong incentive for people at all income levels to reduce their [consumption] it would also insure that people were compensated directly if there was an imbalance in energy usage throughout the economy. </p>
<p><b>AS: Recently in the united states there are been threats of revolution and rage over a very basic plan for health care coverage. Imagine the furor if gas happy citizens are told that big government is going to ration you energy supply. That's going to be real problem, and yet when I look at Saudi Arabia and Kuwait building up their own energy and using their own oil supplies and I look at what's happening in China - all the car sales and everything - it looks like rationing is almost inevitable sooner or later.</b></p>
<p>Well absolutely, this is the fundamental problem that environmental problem have had for a very long time: really what we're doing here is recognising pre-existing natural limits and what we're trying to do is address them in a rational way. And again this comes back to the issue of cultural stories. If our cultural story tells us that there is infinite abundance and that human ingenuity will continue to create energy sources out of nothing forever more, than if anyone tells you that they want to ration it then obviously they are an enemy and must be opposed.</p>
<p>On the other hand if the story tells us we're move into a period where we've really encroaching our environmental limits and we need to address that in the most sensible, painless, rational way possible then suddenly sharing out what is available in the fairest possible way becomes a no brainer. So really this is why a lot of my work focuses on shifting these cultural perspectives, because as you say the political battles needed to implement something like a national rational scheme will never be won while the current cultural stories which shape the discourse are in place.</p>
<p><b>AS: Your report lean energy connect gives two reasons for tackling carbon: we're bound to run out of supplies and it's wrecking the atmosphere. But I've just in the Guardian newspaper, March 22nd, about a government advisory board giving a third reason, one I've been harping on about, the pollution from burning carbon,mostly from cars, is killing city dwellers by the thousands. The committee of MPs estimate up to 50 000 people die prematurely in Britain alone every year due to smog. Will you add that list of motivations to clean up the system?</b></p>
<p>Well, absolutely. That is a very critical thing. It's very interesting at the moment that out government is seemingly having a change of heart on it's attitude towards fossil fuels. There's that report you've just mentioned and there's also, just yesterday, they've announced off the back of a report by a group called the peak oil task force, which is an industry group made up by some of our biggest companies including Virgin -- who's chairman Richard Branson is very well known here, I don't know how well his fame has spread across the Atlantic -- and some of our big transportation groups, our rail companies, have launched a report basically stating that as an industry they are deeply, deeply worried that governments aren't taking peak oil seriously enough and that really need some support on this from the government level. And the government put out a statement yesterday essentially saying they're a bit confused because on one hand they've got the likes of Shell telling them there's nothing to worry about, on the other they've got some of their biggest industry representation that they're terrible worried about it that they've now called together a Colloquium I think they've called it, pulling together some of their biggest stakeholders trying to get to the bottom of why there is so much disagreement. And we got a could of representatives from the UK transition movement going along to that meeting. </p>
<p>It is interesting that whereas a few years ago you were laughed out of the room for talking about the need to get off fossil fuels these days it seems almost zeitgeisty.</p>
<p><b>AS: I want to ask you now, how can we use this Transition Movement to turn what looks like despair into better lives around us?</b></p>
<p>There's a big question. I suppose despair has a certain, in a strange way, a certain motivation within in it, in that despair is looking at what we expect in the future to look like and realising that it isn't what we want. And I think we can channel that part of despair and if we can make people understand that a different future is possible then suddenly that despair becomes not a sort of motivation to inaction, but a huge motivation to action. I suppose that really is the dark optimism idea in practice. So again it's about this Transition vision of what our future could look like and trying to make that a visible reality that people can see and feel that they can get involved with. I think part of the sort of beauty of Transition is that it operates on a human scale, really, and you're getting together with a group of maybe 15 other people from your local community to work on a particular, practical, project and there's something enough, that just functions on that scale. You know, the people who are thinking about the kind of topics that are maybe talked about on radio EcoShock, who are used to thinking about how can we feed 7 billion people or whatever, but it's a very hard job to get a human brain to think on that kind of scale, whereas operating at the human scale soothes that despair by says well here I am doing something doing something practical and real with my community, and while there's part of your brain saying "oh, but is that enough, is it sufficient?" that's soothed by the knowledge that there's this movement of thousands communities around the world doing the same thing. And given the abject failure of the international political process to deal with the scale of the problems we're looking at that's where the relief from despair can some from.</p>
<p><b>AS: Yes, there's some healing from learning from to grow food or learning a skill or meeting with others to get something done. I was wondering if you can give us some specifics with the Transition community that you've been working with?</b></p>
<p>I'm based in Kingston Upon Thames, which is a suburb in south west London. And some of the things we've been doing, we've had quite an engagement with our local allotment group and we've people are working to try and expand the space that is available for food growing locally both through getting more land allocated to that but also things like our local council here trying to get flower beds and things turned into edible flower beds which are still as attractive but also creating more usefulness and creating more local reliance through that. That would be one example where out local groups have been working to do something which feels engaging, which feels pleasurable, which feels like it's tangible, which is building something and building a demonstration to the rest of the community of what Transition is about. And of course builds up food resilience so that if we do come to a situation where we're really struggling to get by then we're creating more resilience. For me personally one of the things I find most important Transition is that it's a process which makes sense whether or not we win the fight on climate change, if you like. Whether we're fighting to avoid the tipping point in run away climate change, Transition has a very important role in trying to win that fight. but equally if we lose that fight Transition is going to have a very important role to play in creating that resilience against the kind of situations we're likely to find ourselves in. I think for a lot of people deeply troubled by the fact we could be losing that fight that is one of the most powerful aspects of it.</p>
<p><b>AS: You've just answered one of the questions I had which was I've heard heard you say Climate Change may be unstoppable as early as 2016. That only give us five years so a critic might say Transition is going to be too slow to make changes by then, and ditto the slow drop by tradable emission quotas - it might take years to get public acceptance - so are you finding that you can overcome those fears and still get people going on these projects?</b></p>
<p>Yeah, as I say I think the crucial thing is if that something which is a fear, a it certainly is a fear that I've spoken to lots of people who find it quite paralyzing, I think the key thing is work on projects which make sense either way and tradable energy quotas yes absolutely has a role in allowing nations to be able to meet the incredibly stringent carbon targets that are going to be necessary if we are going to avoid unstoppable, runaway [climate change], but even if we don't cross one of the tipping points, we're still going to have an energy problem, we're still going to have this situation where having those systems in place make the response to that am awful lot much more rational and [plain?]. I think this two pronged approach is the thing which helps people remain sane in times which as you say can be quite despair failed for people who are trying to engage with these issues.</p>
<p><b>AS: There must be people in these communities who are very apathetic or outright hostile to changes in their lifestyle?</b></p>
<p>Listening I think is the straight forward answer. Here in Kingston it's a fairly affluent suburb on the whole, but equally we have council estates which are some of the most deprived areas of London. And trying to find common ground between the different perspectives on life here has been one of our real challenges and I think listening to each other and not feeling like "Oh, I've listened to radio EcoShock and I've heard this answer and I'm going to go out and apply it" but actually respecting the opinions of the different people and the stories that different people bring and recognising that a diversity of outlooks and stories is a real strength. We don't need to agree on every aspect of what the future is going to look like, what we need to do is have a diversity of stories from which we can choose and apply the most appropriate if we're going to create the most positive future which we can.</p>
<p><b>AS: I sometimes see all these things, Transition, local community building, local food production, as a lifeboat building process, but then again is there anything wrong with life boat building if we think the ship might be sinking? Is that dark optimism?</b></p>
<p>[Laughs] I think dark optimism would say there's nothing wrong with lifeboats whether you think the ship is sinking or you think it will stay floating. Either way they're good things and there's no harm in building them.</p>
<p><b>AS: OK. We're starting to run out of time. Is there something else you would like tell our listeners at this point?</b></p>
<p>I think the key thing is to follow your passions. I mean regardless of where it is. I mean if you feel like "ah, this climate change thing really just leave leave me cold and I can see that's incredibly important and I can see it's this huge world changing thing which is coming but what I really want to be doing is making documentaries" or whatever that person's passion is, creating great art, I think it's very important that we do follow our passions. There's a quote that really always inspired me which is "don't ask what the world needs, ask what makes come alive and go do that because what the world need is people who have come alive". There's a guy here called David Attenborough who is a wildlife documentary maker for the BBC and he has been doing that for his whole life -- he's getting on a bit now -- and he's generally regarded in all the polls on such things as the most trusted figure in Britain because we all learned about nature by watching his programmes. And when he came out in one of his programs and said something like "the only question remaining on climate change is whether it's going to be disaster or an outright catastrophe" that was one of the key moments in our country for shifting the whole debate, the whole perspective, because everyone is so used to his word being law on the things he talks about. And I found that so interesting because I thought if he'd given up his passion to be a wildlife documentary maker and gone and spent his life campaigning on climate he might never had made as much impact on that very different issue as he did by doing the thing which made him come alive. So I think would be my one thing for people to take home. Don't give up on the thing you have passion about.</p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>