The DRAGON is the most ancestral and universal of myths. It is commonly associated with the idea of strength, power and wisdom. A fierce and implacable guardian of treasures and riches of every kind. Easy to imagine and to remember. It evokes fire and hence combustion and heat (and by analogy, global warming) but also greatness, heroism and magic. It induces fear and respect. Whether this will be its final name or not, it must be clear that this project has more to do with human beings than with software, economy and politics. Suggestion, motivation, individual and mass psychology are fundamental and call for special attention. THE DRAGON VALUES SYSTEM Version 1.2 of Feb. 3. 2019 f1
Purpose The ultimate purpose of the Dragon values system is to intensify and speed up as fast as possible the “healing” process needed to provide safety for the planet and current human civilization. Dragon Values must be seen as a financial and cultural incentive (with considerable political and economic fallout) to implement policies focused on energy transition, safeguarding biodiversity, contrasting global warming, etc. This system cannot and must not allow for any kind of anonymity. Anonymity, in fact, would conflict with both the distinction between actors playing different roles (involved by the system) and with the possibility of monitoring the actual implementation of measures taken to make the planet safe. This schematic presentation of the system is only to illustrate the basic idea, so as to develop it properly before moving on to the actual development phase (the phase involving fine tuning and electronic, organisational and political/economic implementation). Because of the global impact of the project and its enormous economic implications, all financial, diplomatic and geopolitical aspects must be viewed at once with realism and audacity. To fully develop the project, a multi-disciplinary and holistic approach will be required. A quest for synergies and cooperation with already existing systems, integration with complementary ideas, criticism, suggestions and proposals are welcome, indeed they are the very purpose of this initial phase. 10
Premises This project draws its origin from a few, well defined theoretical premises. Fact and theories held to be sufficiently proved and/or likely not to require justification or explanation. Opening or continuing debate on these points appears to dangerous, rather than merely useless. The first premise of all, in fact, is that an urgency exists. Many signs indicate an ongoing collapse: peak oil, peak phosphorus, extinction rates many times greater than in the past, climate change, degradation of the oceans, etc. These signs seem in fact to confirm the thesis of the famous 1972 study, The Limits to Growth. A study which, forty years later, seems unfortunately to find confirmation in facts and in many similar studies. The text is now freely available to all: - “The Limits to Growth” (scanned PDF version) ( http://www.donellameadows.org/wp-content/userfiles/Limits-to-Growth-digital-scan-version.pdf ) Apparently the fact that one is observing the beginning of a generalised and global collapse should not automatically imply urgency, since we do not exactly know the time this collapse will take. However, there are rational reasons to believe the timing of the collapse will be appreciably shorter than the time it took from the pre-industrial area to our present day situation. As Lucius Annaeus Seneca put it, “increases are of sluggish growth, but the way to ruin is rapid”. This empirical observation seems to find logical justification in what is now, not coincidentally, known as the “Seneca cliff”. For a more detailed view of this effect, one can read, for example: - “The Seneca effect: why decline is faster than growth” ( http://cassandralegacy.blogspot.it/2011/08/seneca-effect-origins-of-collapse.html ) To these theoretical premises, a third may be added: the central role of the energy question in both economic and ecological issues. Especially, the versatility and vastness of fossil sources must not make us ignore the issue of peak oil, as outlined already in the 1950s by the American geophysicist Marion King Hubbert . Despite the expansion of renewable energy sources, modern economy is still deeply tied to fossil energy. Economic and extractive problems of the fossil energy industry are everybody’s problem, and will be until we are able to cut down our dependence on such sources substantially. As if things were not already complicated enough, closely tied to the use of fossil energy is the question of climate change (which in its turn negatively affects the global economy). Climate and extraction issues have generated a violent media and propaganda war which has polarised holders of economic interests associated with fossil energy against their opponents, on irreconcilable positions. 11
Nor do we intend to spend more time here to demonstrate the scientific truth of anthropogenic global warming. In-depth analyses made by IPCC and studies across the last decades are more than enough to establish that the phenomenon is real and mainly caused by emissions associated with human activity. Taking not of this, however, in no way justifies demonising fossil fuels, for two simple reason: first, economy demands and has demanded them for a long time from their producers, benefiting and hence sharing responsibility with them; second, and more pragmatically, modern economy, in order to do anything, including an inevitable and massive energy transition towards renewable sources, needs to use the fossil fuels it still depends on. This last consideration, however, poses a technical question which is often neglected or even ignored in public debate: what to do with energy which emits climate altering gasses? Seen from this point of view, it becomes fundamental to look at fossil fuels, not as an absolute evil, but as a resource to employ wisely. It therefore becomes useful and crucial to understand the strategy of the sower: a farmer may eat all the wheat he raises in his fields in order to maximise short term returns, or he may use a certain quantity to ensure abundant harvests in the future too. It is easy to understand which of these two strategies is wiser, when we speak of wheat. When we speak of energy, things are less intuitive, however the “Sower’s way” remains a wise choice (and also asks for some expertise). For further information, one may refer to this study: “The Sower's way. Quantifying the Narrowing Net-Energy Pathways to a Global Energy Transition” ( https://arxiv.org/abs/1602.01203 ) Every opinion deserves respect, but if we notice a serious risk and want to act to avoid the worst, each one of us in the end is responsible for the choice we make. These theoretical premises are not and do not intend to be dogmas; rather they want to and do indicate taking responsibility as the starting point for this project. A starting point. A point of view on reality. A shared reference to allow all those who may decide to give their contribution, in a harmonious, consistent and constructive manner. From petrodollars to ecodollars (or carbon dollars) The Dragon values system is something far more complex and ambitious than a simple incentive system based on something resembling one of the many cryptocurrencies in circulation. One of its main ambitions, in fact, is nothing less than to modify the world financial axis which, in an apparently insoluble fashion, ties the currency of reference - the US dollar - to the quotations of the oil market. The reason is that the geopolitical and financial system revolving around so-called petrodollars is an almost impenetrable obstacle between us and energy transition, contrasting global warming and a large part of the policies aimed at guaranteeing stability of planetary ecosystems. Since a considerable part of the value of the dollar originates in oil, in fact, even 12
Recommend
More recommend
