The Geopolitics of Climate Change

Photo of a tree withered in dry land

With a glacier as the backdrop for this video, I figured it only appropriate to discuss resource exploitation, Arctic shipping, and agriculture as it relates to climate change.

Places like Canada and Greenland hold immense resources, but extraction isn’t straightforward. Given the harsh conditions (an ice sheet in Greenland and permafrost in Canada), these resources will remain where they are until some new tech comes along or some drastic changes occur. The use of the Arctic Ocean as a shipping route is another hot topic. Given that the Arctic won’t be ice-free in the winter for a while, this route poses some big challenges: lack of icebreakers, infrastructure limitations, and demographic issues in the countries that could make this happen.

However, a more immediate impact will be felt on global agriculture. Wheat thrives in extreme conditions and depends upon globalized supply chains for fertilizers and irrigation. These supply chains will weaken in the coming years and could even collapse, leading to widespread famine in several places.

Sure, there will be some new opportunities tied to climate change, but the crises that will follow should be of much greater concern.

Prefer to read the transcript? Click here

Here at Zeihan on Geopolitics, our chosen charity partner is MedShare. They provide emergency medical services to communities in need, with a very heavy emphasis on locations facing acute crises. Medshare operates right in the thick of it, so we can be sure that every cent of our donation is not simply going directly to where help is needed most, but our donations serve as a force multiplier for a system already in existence.

For those who would like to donate directly to MedShare or to learn more about their efforts, you can click this link.

Learn about medshare here

Transcript

Hey everyone. Peter Zeihan here. Coming to you from New Zealand at the Earnshaw glacier, Ernst falls. Ernst. Ursula mountain. You get the idea. Considering the location and considering the popular request, I’m going to use this as an opportunity to talk about the geopolitics of climate change. Everyone, including team Trump, is now talking about the effect that it’s going to have on the system. 

Of course, everyone is dealing with their own way. The Trump administration, the incoming Trump administration, is of the belief that as seaways and minerals become available, the United States preemptively reach out and grab the relative in territories. Ergo, a lot of the talk about Greenland and Canada specifically, but it’s not that clear cut. And it’s not that short term. 

Well, the Ursula Glacier here, like almost all in the world, is in rapid retreat. It’s still going to be around for a few decades. And when you look at things like the permafrost in northern Canada or the ice in Greenland, you have a much more durable climate zone. So, for example, in the permafrost, it’s a mess. In the summer it’s a swamp, it’s mushy, it’s hard to build things on. 

And there is only one road leading from mainland Canada, where populated Canada up above the Arctic Circle to Yellowknife. Actually, that’s not even above the Arctic Circle, I don’t think. I’m not sure about that. Anyway, one road open seasonally. Anything north of that is a mushy frozen mess. And they basically, if they’re going through mineral extract, they have to build a runway with things that the air drop in and then fly in supplies. 

And there aren’t a lot of materials on the world that you can produce and then fly out because there’s a processing step. So meaningful climate change, it allows for the exploitation of northern Canada isn’t going to take years or even decades. It’s going to be a couple of centuries. Greenland, maybe a little bit faster there. You’ve got an ice sheet that’s over a kilometer thick. 

For those of you on the Americans, that’s point six miles. It will probably be well over a century before technology exists to go after it, or for the ice to slow off. By then, the West Antarctic Ice sheet will probably already collapse. We’ll be in a functionally different sort of situation anyway. So are there minerals up there? 

Undoubtedly. Are they accessible in a human lifetime with today’s technology? Absolutely not. And anyone else is trying to sell you some snake oil or is just dumb. Okay. Second shipping. The idea is that as the ice retreats on the seas in the Arctic Ocean, you could then open up a direct route from Northeast Asia to Western Europe. 

But let’s be honest about what we’re talking about here. This is a China play. So the theory would be that the Chinese are going to build infrastructure along this multi thousand mile coastline, so they can then open the shipping route. Well let’s talk timing. If you want to do that you have to wait for the Arctic to be ice free in the winter. 

That’s not ten years. That’s not 20 years. That’s 60 or 70 years. Most likely because the Eastern navigation will be gone every single time the moving sea ice comes through. Far more importantly, 

It’s all Russian territory that is on that sea bridge. And I don’t know if you knew this, but building roads in Russian Siberia is just as difficult as building them in Canadian tundra. 

So there is one, exactly one road that goes from populated Russia north of the Arctic Circle to the city of Murmansk. That’s it. And that’s all the way at the northwest part of Russia, almost to Norway. The rest of the coastline is either unpopulated or unlinked to any physical infrastructure. So once again, you have to wait for summer to get things in there. 

So things, simple things like search and rescue just can’t happen. Also, newsflash two problems. Number one, the Russians are dying out. And when it comes to the point where they have to choose what to abandon, the Arctic will probably be at the top of the list because there’s not a security threat from the Arctic. Second newsflash the Chinese are dying out, and China as a country won’t be long gone before the Arctic is ice free. 

And one final point on the maritime transport issue. Do you want to patrol the Arctic Ocean? You either have to wait for it to be ice free decades from now, or you need an icebreaker fleet that can handle moving sea ice that’s thick. There are only a handful of ships that can do that in the world. Most of them are Russian. 

They’re nuclear. Oh, but a surprise. The Russians can’t build them anymore. They need parts from the West. And surprise the equipment they need to try to assemble. Everything just sank in the Mediterranean about a month ago. That just leaves Canada, which has icebreakers that are decent, but it’s not enough to control their own territory. 

You want to do this for real? You not only are subsidizing the Chinese, you have to build dozens of ships that are purpose built for one thing and have no use anywhere else in the world. We only have a 300 ship navy. You’d need at least 50 of these things cruising around the Arctic Circle if you want to do anything meaningful. 

And there’s nothing meaningful to do. 

Good thing that we’re going to steal first from climate change isn’t about transport, and it isn’t about minerals. It’s about agriculture. Because right now, the single largest calorie crop in the world for human consumption is wheat. And wheat is a weed. It grows anywhere. The places that are too hot or too wet or too dry or too cold for anything else. 

You can still grow wheat. But in a globalized system where you can access things like fertilizers and industrial irrigation. What we have done over the last 80 years is progressively push wheat to the margins, in places where only wheat will grow, and everywhere else we grow. Everything else that is worth more money. Citrus, avocado, soy, cannabis, you name it. 

So if we had a globalization scenario with or without climate change, you can count on those supply chains that provide us with all the raw materials and all the machinery and all the logistical support that allows us to grow wheat in places. Nothing else will grow to break. And large portions of the world that today grow wheat won’t be able to anymore. 

The places I’m most concerned about Kazakhstan, Russia, China and those are three of the big six producers. So we will see famine long before we see meaningful traffic on the Arctic Ocean, long before we see meaningful mineral extraction from Canada or Greenland. Yeah, that.

Climate Change Will Be Different for Everyone

Photo of a tree withered in dry land

Let’s talk climate change. With conservative estimates, we’re looking at a few degrees of warming by the end of the century, but if we look at this in the light of global trends, it could be even worse.

This will manifest in more heat and humidity, especially in already hot and humid regions – think Singapore, Houston and parts of the Middle East. This will drive up mortality rates and decrease functionality, which will have an outsized impact on the poorer areas.

Food production is a big concern of mine. As temps warm, wind and moisture patterns will be altered. While this will benefit some areas (increasing water availability and potential for multiple harvests), many regions will lose their agriculture industry or face increased challenges in maintaining production. The main crop to watch is wheat, since it’s currently grown in marginal areas that will be most impacted by climate shifts.

Between climate change, depopulation, and deglobalization, we’re going to have plenty to talk about in the coming decades…

Prefer to read the transcript? Click here

Here at Zeihan on Geopolitics, our chosen charity partner is MedShare. They provide emergency medical services to communities in need, with a very heavy emphasis on locations facing acute crises. Medshare operates right in the thick of it, so we can be sure that every cent of our donation is not simply going directly to where help is needed most, but our donations serve as a force multiplier for a system already in existence.

For those who would like to donate directly to MedShare or to learn more about their efforts, you can click this link.

Learn about medshare here

Transcript

Hey, everybody. Peter Zeihan here coming to you from a colorful Colorado. Today we’re taking an entry from the Ask Peter forum, specifically what I think the world will look like with a few degrees of warming. Since the industrial period began, we’re up 1.2°C, and assuming nothing changes, we are on track to be probably 3 to 4°C warmer by the end of the century.

And I think that’s overly optimistic because if we really are getting ready for a globalization period in human history, then the lower carbon fuels, oil, and gas are the ones that are internationally traded, and those are the ones that will vanish. And the high complexity fuel systems that require a dozen or more countries in order to make them function, say, solar, are not going to be available in large quantities.

So that will leave most countries with significant economic degradation. And if they still want electricity and heat, they’re going to have to use coal and/or wood. That’s a problem. So I would estimate we’re going to skid right past six degrees by the end of the century, and that’s six degrees centigrade, not Fahrenheit. So it’s a pretty significant change.

The downside with making specific forecasts is that, n equals one, as they like to say, we don’t have records in data to be able to provide us with very specific recommendations. What I’m about to say is probably should be considered much more broadly than I’m even going to say it, but there are a couple of patterns we can look at.

But because we do have over a century of hard data indicating that we are moving in this direction and what some of the early impacts can be. So number one, heat and humidity. As a rule, when the air gets warmer, it can hold more water. That’s a problem for hurricanes. But it also means that places that are already humid are likely to get more humid.

And think of it this way: if you live in a place that is already warm and humid for most of the year—I’m thinking here, Singapore, or Manila, or Houston—you know it’s going to get warmer, you know it’s going to get more humid. And when you pass a certain point, roughly, you know, 90°F, the body has a hard time cooling down.

And when you pass 100°F, it just doesn’t happen. And a lot of these places are going to be edging into a zone where they’re looking at hitting that 90-degree temperature in the night for large portions of the year. And so the implications for human health are pretty damning there. And functionality will be a real problem. Mortality rates will certainly spike.

And so you have to look at the economic capability of these cities and whether or not they can make this adjustment. I mean, some of them, Houston, Singapore, pretty much all of the Arab cities of the Persian Gulf, did this years ago. And you basically go from your air-conditioned house to your air-conditioned garage to an air-conditioned parking garage to an air-conditioned office block.

And if you happen to be one of those poor saps investor works outside, that’s too bad. But, like the Arabs in the Gulf has certainly shown that you can force people to work in 110-degree temperatures for short periods of time. You can still get stuff built. It’s not the best way to live. And you do have mortality rates that are a lot higher.

The Arabs get around this by using guest labor, which is a step off of slave, and then when they get too old to handle it, like, you know, 32, they send them home. But there are models that work—just the bulk of your population basically lives in an aquarium. Then you’ve got the cities that, due to economic vibrancy or strength or soon-to-be vibrancy, are likely to be able to make this transition.

They either on the edge of having enough money to make everybody live indoors, or they’re going to have it soon. I’m thinking there about Ho Chi Minh City in Vietnam. Or, Istanbul in Turkey, or Bangkok in Thailand, or maybe, just maybe, Rio de Janeiro in Brazil. And then you’ve got those cities that, it doesn’t look great.

They’re hot, they’re humid. And having the organizational capability and especially economic resources in order to make the switch, less problematic. And this is going to be most of the cities, especially in northern India. This is going to be Pakistan. I’m worried about the cities of northern Brazil in this regard. There are some cities in Iran that don’t look particularly promising.

A lot of North Africa falls into a similar category. These are just places where the economic wherewithal or the strength of the state is simply not sufficient in order to rewire all the infrastructure for a different sort of life. The second big category is going to be food production. There’s a lot about climate change and the specific effects that we’re still in the very early phases of learning.

So I don’t want to blow this out of proportion. But one of the things we do know for certain is that the poles are warming faster than the equator. And when you have big temperature differentials, you get winds, in this case, winds going from roughly the equator in the direction of the poles. Now that changes, most importantly, moisture patterns.

So if there is a large body of tropical or similar tropical water between you and the equator, when the wind goes over that zone, it’s going to pick up more moisture. Remember the water? The year is warmer, too, and you’re going to get storms going from the equator towards the pole, transferring moisture. Now this is good or bad based on where you are.

So, for example, if you are in the United States, especially in the Midwest, you’re looking at more moisture coming in from the Gulf, and warmer moisture at that. So you now have two streams of moisture. You have the jet stream that goes west to east across the continent, that brings moisture. And now you’ve got this Gulf current that’s always been there but is going to be much more powerful.

You live on the coast. That means hurricanes, which is not great. But if you’re in, say, Illinois, it means you’re actually getting more and more water. And water management is the issue. Well, as we’ve seen with plants, plants are a lot like people. As long as you can get a lot of water, then you don’t have to worry so much about the heat.

So we’re starting to see in parts of the Midwest—not even the southern Midwest, most notably Illinois—where we’re starting to see the very early stages of double cropping. So this is one of those where climate change could actually have a very positive impact on global agriculture. Other places that do have this tropical feature aren’t necessarily as well positioned to take advantage of it.

So like Mexico has this, China has this, but these are very rugged areas. And if you just dump more water in a rugged area, you get landslides, mudslides, and flooding. So not exactly great for agriculture. Other places are looking to probably get dried out by this factor because if you don’t have a tropical body of water below you, maybe you’ve got a desert.

And that describes the entirety of the Russian wheat belt, including Kazakhstan. So you’re looking at that area becoming desiccated. Northern Europe, while not exactly going to be falling out of its breadbasket status, has been seen. The weather patterns move steadily offshore for the last half-century as a result of this phenomenon. They do have the Mediterranean below them, but it’s not warm enough.

It’s not large enough, and so these winds are simply pushing normal moisture patterns out to sea or into Scandinavia. Australia could be a bit of a problem because the part of Australia that actually grows the food is on the southwest and the south, and while they do have this moisture effect that is kind of hitting the north part of the country, that’s not where the agriculture is.

So similar effect to what’s happening to Europe, just on the opposite side of the planet. So it’s pushing what weather used to hit the Murray-Darling basin or the Perth area in Western Australia and pushing it south towards and could occur the crop that is going to be most impacted by this is by far is wheat.

Wheat is wheat. And so, it used to be the only thing that most places grew. But in the globalized era, everyone started growing what they could grow best in their zone. And wheat gave way to corn and soy and marijuana and avocados and alfalfa and all the rest. And so wheat gets pushed to the margins, the places where it’s the warmest, where it’s the driest, or it’s the coldest, whatever it happens to be, because it’ll grow anywhere.

Well, if you change the environment of the planet, the places that are going to be pushed into non-production are going to be the ones at the margin. And wheat is the crop in most places where they’re going to see the most pressure. In North America, that’ll be in the Great Plains. In Argentina, that’ll be the southern pampas. In the Eurasian space,

It’s definitely the entirety of the Russian wheat belt. And in Australia, it’s probably going to be Western Australia. So you take all of this together, and we’re looking at parts of the world that are more equatorial, more tropical, becoming less habitable, less dynamic. And you’re going to have to spend most of their money on adapting their population-supporting infrastructure simply to be able to be inhabitable.

And if you’re looking for agriculture, we’re looking at the number one calorie source for the world, being in much smaller supply that will obviously play through in the geopolitics. But until we actually see governments start to crack, it’s really hard to say how. Remember, at the same time this is all going on. We’ve got the globalization shattering merchandise trade and energy trade, and we also have depopulation shattering the ability of countries to have a tax base and a workforce.

So there’s going to be a lot of variables going on at once.

Will Climate Change Be the Death of Wheat?

A photo of a wheat in the winter

Although climate change models are still evolving, historical climate data shows a clear warming trend. So, let’s discuss the impacts of climate change, specifically who will be affected the most and who might even benefit from it.

When you think of climate change, think of it as an amplification of current conditions. So, hot and dry areas will likely become hotter and drier. Hot and humid regions are likely to get even wetter and face severe health risks. Agricultural zones in marginal climates will suffer the most, especially those dependent on wheat.

Speaking of wheat – humanity’s primary calorie source – you might want to enjoy that cinnamon roll and pasta while you have the chance…Okay, maybe that’s a bit dramatic, but you can expect production to decline and prices to soar. This will especially impact places like the American Great Plains, central Argentina, the Russian wheat belt, and northern China.

However, regions with dual wind streams are poised to do pretty well amidst the warming climate. Think of zones like the American South and Midwest, parts of Argentina, Uruguay, northwestern Europe, and New Zealand. Unfortunately for the Chinese, their agricultural regions are particularly vulnerable, which will lead to severe food shortages and famine.

Prefer to read the transcript? Click here

Here at Zeihan On Geopolitics we select a single charity to sponsor. We have two criteria:

First, we look across the world and use our skill sets to identify where the needs are most acute. Second, we look for an institution with preexisting networks for both materials gathering and aid distribution. That way we know every cent of our donation is not simply going directly to where help is needed most, but our donations serve as a force multiplier for a system already in existence. Then we give what we can.

Today, our chosen charity is a group called Medshare, which provides emergency medical services to communities in need, with a very heavy emphasis on locations facing acute crises. Medshare operates right in the thick of it. Until future notice, every cent we earn from every book we sell in every format through every retailer is going to Medshare’s Ukraine fund.

And then there’s you.

Our newsletters and videologues are not only free, they will always be free. We also will never share your contact information with anyone. All we ask is that if you find one of our releases in any way useful, that you make a donation to Medshare. Over one third of Ukraine’s pre-war population has either been forced from their homes, kidnapped and shipped to Russia, or is trying to survive in occupied lands. This is our way to help who we can. Please, join us.

Support medshare's ukraine fund
Support medshare's global efforts

Transcript

Hey everybody, Peter Zeihan here, coming to you from Blue Lake at the border between Yosemite National Park and the Ansel Adams Wilderness. That’s the Pinnacles behind me, and let me tell you, the hike up here was quite the challenge! Today, we’re tackling a question from the Ask Peter forum: with climate change, where are we going to feel it first? Who’s going to be hit the hardest, and is there anyone who might actually benefit?

First off, let’s remember that our understanding of climate change is still developing. Yes, there are plenty of smart people studying it, but when it comes to understanding how the atmosphere works on a global scale, we’re learning as we go. I find it most reliable to look at the past rather than just the projections. We have over a century of climate data from most locations, tracking temperature, wind, and precipitation. If you look at what’s happened over the last 140 years or so since industrialization began, there’s been a clear uptick in temperatures.

By the time my fourth book, The End of the World Is Just the Beginning, was published, that temperature increase was 1.1°C over the entire period. In the last few years, it’s ticked up to 1.2°C. This doesn’t just mean that the world is getting warmer; it’s getting warmer in different areas at different rates. One key thing to remember about precipitation is that while warmer air can hold more moisture, it also requires more moisture before precipitation occurs. So, hot and dry areas are getting drier, and wet and hot areas are getting wetter.

As long as you have electricity, a degree Celsius isn’t a big deal. Take the United States, for example—back in the 1930s and 40s, Florida and Iowa had similar populations. Now, Florida’s population is about eight times that of Iowa, thanks to air conditioning and reliable electricity. But I’m more concerned about two specific regions.

First, the developing world areas that are already hot and humid, like Brazil, the northern coast of South America, sub-Saharan Africa, Southeast Asia, and the Indian subcontinent. These regions are already very wet, humid, and hot, and adding even a little more heat could be a serious health risk.

The second area of concern is agricultural zones that are already hot and dry. Agriculture tends to be concentrated in regions where specific crops grow best—avocados in California, wine in southern France, and so on. Wheat is the exception because it’s essentially a weed and will grow almost anywhere. As the world has diversified its agricultural production and globalization has spread crops globally, wheat has steadily been pushed to the margins, except in places like northern France, Quebec, and parts of Pakistan and India where it’s tied to cultural or food security.

Wheat is now grown in cold and dry or hot and dry regions like the American Great Plains, central Argentina, the Russian wheat belt, and northern China. This means that when climate change starts reducing moisture in these areas, wheat production will collapse, and prices will skyrocket. And since wheat has been humanity’s number one calorie source for millennia, this is a big deal.

But it’s not all doom and gloom—some places might actually benefit. Regions that receive moisture from two different wind streams, like the Gulf Stream and the monsoons, are less likely to suffer catastrophic crop failures because both wind systems are unlikely to fail in the same year. This is good news for the American South, the American Midwest, northern Argentina, Uruguay, northwestern Europe (especially the UK and France), and New Zealand.

However, most of the world relies on a single wind current, so even minor climate changes could have outsized impacts on agriculture, especially wheat.

Now, on my way down from the hike, it hit me that there’s a country out there with both monsoonal and jetstream moisture, and that’s not necessarily a good thing. In the American Midwest, both hit the same region, but in China, the monsoon affects the southern rice belt, while the west-east jetstream waters the northern wheat zone. This is bad news for China. Everything I said about wheat applies, but it gets worse because rice requires meticulous water management—flooding and draining the fields multiple times. If rain comes at the wrong time, the entire crop can be lost. So, no matter how climate change unfolds in the next few decades, we can be sure that hundreds of millions of Chinese people will be at risk of starvation.

Alright, now I’m really done. See you next time!

The Problem with the COP28 Climate Change Conference

COP28, the United Nations Climate Change Conference, is underway in Dubai. As with many of these foo-foo summits, I’m not expecting much to come out of it.

COP28 is a progress report on countries’ emission reduction commitments, equating to a parent-teacher conference where all countries get Ds or Fs on their report cards. The current focus of this year’s conference is adding protocols around methane.

Methane is the low-hanging fruit of climate-change talks, so it’s a no-brainer to add regulations surrounding it. However, China’s reluctance to abandon coal production (and, as a by-product, methane) underscores the difficulties in addressing emissions on a global scale.

Prefer to read the transcript? Click here

Here at Zeihan On Geopolitics we select a single charity to sponsor. We have two criteria:

First, we look across the world and use our skill sets to identify where the needs are most acute. Second, we look for an institution with preexisting networks for both materials gathering and aid distribution. That way we know every cent of our donation is not simply going directly to where help is needed most, but our donations serve as a force multiplier for a system already in existence. Then we give what we can.

Today, our chosen charity is a group called Medshare, which provides emergency medical services to communities in need, with a very heavy emphasis on locations facing acute crises. Medshare operates right in the thick of it. Until future notice, every cent we earn from every book we sell in every format through every retailer is going to Medshare’s Ukraine fund.

And then there’s you.

Our newsletters and videologues are not only free, they will always be free. We also will never share your contact information with anyone. All we ask is that if you find one of our releases in any way useful, that you make a donation to Medshare. Over one third of Ukraine’s pre-war population has either been forced from their homes, kidnapped and shipped to Russia, or is trying to survive in occupied lands. This is our way to help who we can. Please, join us.

Support medshare's ukraine fund
Support medshare's global efforts

TranscripT

Hey everybody Peter Zeihan here. Coming to you from a snowy Colorado. Today, we’re going to talk about what’s going on in the Persian Gulf. There’s something called the COP 28 conference going on, which is the United Nations Global Climate Change Update conference. The acronym stands for Nothing, so don’t look for it. As a rule, I don’t comment on these things because any organization where Djibouti and Japan are both represented generally does nothing and there’s not a lot you should expect to come out of these talks at all.

It’s really just an update on where everyone is. Folks made commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions a few years ago. This is kind of progress report. And the bottom line is pretty much everybody gets a d/f. Not a lot has happened. Two things. Number one, the way these things are negotiated is you have political authorities and you have scientific authorities.

The political authorities are the ones who actually have to get stuff done. And the scientific authorities tend to be the ones who set the thresholds and the targets. And oftentimes the two of them don’t discuss things very often. And so the political statement and the scientific statements often have very little to do with one another. Nothing really different here this time around.

What is different this time around is they’re trying to add a completely new category to the greenhouse gas emissions protocols. So until now, it’s been focused mostly on carbon dioxide, which is by far the number one source of climate change. But this time, they’re trying to add methane. Now, methane, a.k.a. cow farts, a.k.a natural gas, is a much more potent greenhouse gas emission, but for a shorter period of time.

So CO2 lasts in the system for centuries with a moderate warming effect, whereas natural gas usually dissipates within about a decade but has a much stronger impact in that time. So if you’re looking for the low hanging fruit in climate talks, methane is where you want to go. And in cases of like the United States, most of our methane emissions are linked into oil and gas production in some way.

In a lot of oil production and shale fields, natural gas comes up as a byproduct. And so really, all you need to do is have better sealant on the pipelines and the production system. You would have a pretty outsized impact on methane emissions from a climate point of view. In addition, a lot of these things pay for themselves because natural gas is a product that can then be sold into the power system or the chemical system.

So the Biden administration is in the process of perfecting some regulations with the goal of reducing American methane emissions by about 80% over the course of the next decade, which I think is an actually fairly achievable goal that I don’t think the oil and gas industry is going to push back against too much because, again, it’s a product.

But that doesn’t mean it’s going to be involved in these cop talks at all because of the Chinese. Give you an idea of just how hypocritical some of these talks are and how little progress you should expect. The Chinese are against involving methane as an emission target because most of their methane is a byproduct of their coal production.

And if they’re going to continue to use coal for the vast majority of their power, then they’re going to kick out a lot of methane as a side effect. And unlike in the United States, where this is something that can be solved by sealing up pipes, all you have to do in China, if you want to not have the methane, is to shut down the coal, the coal mines.

So the Chinese are kind of dead set against this category in general anyway. We’ve seen this in environmental regulations before with the Chinese, where in a lot of the advanced countries, most notably the United States, it’s an issue of kind of cleaning up after yourself and a lot of it pays for itself. Something very similar happened back in the eighties, in the nineties with something called the Montreal Protocol, which is something that banned chlorofluorocarbons, which is something that used to be in freon and air conditioning systems.

We banned it because it was bad for the ozone layer, gave everybody sunburns and we replaced it with something called HFCS, which were an order of magnitude better. Now, the Chinese were the ones at the time were produce most of the world’s freon, and they didn’t think that the replacement technologies are something that they could master. So for technological sovereignty issues, they refused to go along with it until the rest of the planet had made the switch and then they finally joined on the tail end.

We’re probably going to see something like that with methane in the talks this week. Okay. That’s it. By.

North American Fires Cause a Smoky Start to Summer in the US

Let’s just say that our old friend Smokey Bear wouldn’t be too happy with the Canadians this past week. And these fires are likely only the beginning of a very long summer of low air quality.

We’re getting hit with the trifecta right now. Wildfires (which are as essential a part of BC’s natural ecosystem management as they are to California’s chaparral) in Northern Alberta and Eastern BC, fires (which happen very rarely) in Quebec and the Maritime provinces, and agricultural fires (yearly slash and burns) in Mexico. These are all large enough to cover a vast swath of the US with smoke individually; adding insult to injury, the smoke from multiple fires is overlapping at different elevations.

So can any of this be attributed to climate change? I’m going to say yes…because it’s only June. Some of these fires started in MAY. Barring an unprecedented wet summer, we’ll be dealing with this for months to come.

It may be time to upgrade those filtration systems if you haven’t already.

Prefer to read the transcript of the video? Click here

Here at Zeihan On Geopolitics we select a single charity to sponsor. We have two criteria:
 
First, we look across the world and use our skill sets to identify where the needs are most acute. Second, we look for an institution with preexisting networks for both materials gathering and aid distribution. That way we know every cent of our donation is not simply going directly to where help is needed most, but our donations serve as a force multiplier for a system already in existence. Then we give what we can.
 
Today, our chosen charity is a group called Medshare, which provides emergency medical services to communities in need, with a very heavy emphasis on locations facing acute crises. Medshare operates right in the thick of it. Until future notice, every cent we earn from every book we sell in every format through every retailer is going to Medshare’s Ukraine fund.
 
And then there’s you.
 
Our newsletters and videologues are not only free, they will always be free. We also will never share your contact information with anyone. All we ask is that if you find one of our releases in any way useful, that you make a donation to Medshare. Over one third of Ukraine’s pre-war population has either been forced from their homes, kidnapped and shipped to Russia, or is trying to survive in occupied lands. This is our way to help who we can. Please, join us.

CLICK HERE TO SUPPORT MEDSHARE’S UKRAINE FUND

CLICK HERE TO SUPPORT MEDSHARE’S EFFORTS GLOBALLY

TRANSCIPT

Hey everybody. Peter Zeihan here coming to you from cloudy Colorado. Today we’re going to talk about this horrible smoke that is hitting most of the country. Basically, if you are east of the front range, you’ll experience it in some way with particularly dense clusters in places like the American Northeast. I hate to say it, folks, but this is just going to be the beginning of a very, very, very long summer of low air quality.

We’ve got three things happening at the same time that have never happened together before. The first, which is something that happens every few years, is we’ve got forest fires in northern Alberta and northeastern British Columbia, which is generating a significant amount of smoke that is currently hitting the Great Plains in the Midwest. Second, and this is something that happens very rarely. We’re getting extensive fires in both Quebec and in Canada’s maritime provinces, which is generating most of the smoke that is hitting the American northeast. And then third, something we get every year is we’re at that part of the season where the Mexicans are doing a slash and burn preparation for certain types of fields. So we’ve got more smoke coming up from the south, which is primarily hitting Texas right now.

Anyway, all three of these are big enough that they have the potential to have a huge swath of coverage for the continent. And in a lot of cases, we’re seeing overlapping layers. Now, smoke and fire should not automatically translate into poor air quality because it really matters what the elevation is oftentimes. A few days after the smoke leaves the source of the fire, it drifts up. And when it does that, it still makes your skies kind of crappy. But you’re not dealing with those PMI issues because we’ve got three different sources in three different geographies. We’re getting smoke at multiple elevations, which is making it more of a problem. So really, all we’re waiting now for is for the Californians to have smoke, but luckily they have had the wettest year on record so far. So the chances of me going backpacking in Yosemite this year are very low. There’s still 40 feet of snow on the ground at high elevation. And so they’re probably going to have a relatively wet and therefore not fire filled summer.

For those of you who are concerned about climate change, is that part of this? I’m going to have to say yes for the simple reason that it’s only June and the Albertan and the Quebec fires, you know, started in May. We’ve never had wildfires on this scale this early in the season, which means barring some really atypical summer precipitation in the Great White North, we’re going to be dealing with this smoke and these fires all through June and July and August and September until we get snow. We learned that over and over and over again with the California fires. You basically have to wait for Christmas for this stuff to get put out completely. So if you haven’t put a filtering system for your home back in your Amazon cart, now might be the time. If you’re living in an apartment or you don’t have a traditional HVAC system. There are a number of models of standalone air filters. You might want to consider investing in those because this is going to be kind of a crappy summer if you are east of the front range. I can see the smoke from my neighborhood, but luckily the mountains are providing enough of a bulwark that I’m okay here. Of course I am going to Canada here in a few hours and then all bets are off.

Alright. That’s it for me. You guys take care. Stay safe.

Where in the World: Adair and Winds, Pt. 1

NB: The following video is one I recorded while on my annual backpacking trip in August; please excuse any potential anachronisms.

Camping at Adair Lake is most comparable to spending a night in a wind tunnel – and yes, it was as peaceful as your picturing. The little sleep I did get was supplemented with some thought around wind’s impact on global agriculture.

Many of the world’s agricultural zones get their moisture from 1 of 2 wind sources – jet streams or monsoons. As the climate shifts, we will see more dramatic shifts in winds, leaving these single-wind-source agricultural zones with substantial moisture vulnerabilities.

There are, however, 5 zones that were blessed with multiple wind currents and their importance will become very apparent as the climate continues to change.

Here at Zeihan On Geopolitics we select a single charity to sponsor. We have two criteria:
 
First, we look across the world and use our skill sets to identify where the needs are most acute. Second, we look for an institution with preexisting networks for both materials gathering and aid distribution. That way we know every cent of our donation is not simply going directly to where help is needed most, but our donations serve as a force multiplier for a system already in existence. Then we give what we can.
 
Today, our chosen charity is a group called Medshare, which provides emergency medical services to communities in need, with a very heavy emphasis on locations facing acute crises. Medshare operates right in the thick of it. Until future notice, every cent we earn from every book we sell in every format through every retailer is going to Medshare’s Ukraine fund.
 
And then there’s you.
 
Our newsletters and videologues are not only free, they will always be free. We also will never share your contact information with anyone. All we ask is that if you find one of our releases in any way useful, that you make a donation to Medshare. Over one third of Ukraine’s pre-war population has either been forced from their homes, kidnapped and shipped to Russia, or is trying to survive in occupied lands. This is our way to help who we can. Please, join us.

CLICK HERE TO SUPPORT MEDSHARE’S UKRAINE FUND

CLICK HERE TO SUPPORT MEDSHARE’S EFFORTS GLOBALLY

Where in the World: Tenaya and Climate Change

Waking up to ash from the Red Fire scattered across my tent wasn’t exactly how I pictured my morning going, but it does bring to mind an interesting topic – Climate Change.

No one has a great idea of how climate change will actually play out, it’s more of a broad spectrum guess situation. Making meaningful policy and planning for the future a complex task to face. However, there are some tactical factors that decision makers should be looking at; these are sources of wind and stability of the climate zone.

Think back to Oregon’s record temps in the summer of ’21 or where most countries are sourcing their food from. Understanding these realities is the only way to create policy that will actually help mitigate the impact of climate change.

The scary reality is that just because we (I’m talking people in general) might not be feeling the impacts of climate change, the food we consume (likely) is.

NB: The following video is one I recorded while on my annual backpacking trip in August; please excuse any potential anachronisms.

Here at Zeihan On Geopolitics we select a single charity to sponsor. We have two criteria:
 
First, we look across the world and use our skill sets to identify where the needs are most acute. Second, we look for an institution with preexisting networks for both materials gathering and aid distribution. That way we know every cent of our donation is not simply going directly to where help is needed most, but our donations serve as a force multiplier for a system already in existence. Then we give what we can.
 
Today, our chosen charity is a group called Medshare, which provides emergency medical services to communities in need, with a very heavy emphasis on locations facing acute crises. Medshare operates right in the thick of it. Until future notice, every cent we earn from every book we sell in every format through every retailer is going to Medshare’s Ukraine fund.
 
And then there’s you.
 
Our newsletters and videologues are not only free, they will always be free. We also will never share your contact information with anyone. All we ask is that if you find one of our releases in any way useful, that you make a donation to Medshare. Over one third of Ukraine’s pre-war population has either been forced from their homes, kidnapped and shipped to Russia, or is trying to survive in occupied lands. This is our way to help who we can. Please, join us.

CLICK HERE TO SUPPORT MEDSHARE’S UKRAINE FUND

CLICK HERE TO SUPPORT MEDSHARE’S EFFORTS GLOBALLY