Nomad Century: How to Survive the Climate Upheaval

This book is both frightening and hopeful. The world is in much more danger than most people realise.

It is exactly what it says in the title.It is a book that we all hope will never come true, but sadly shows every sign of doing so.

This book should be compulsory reading FOR EVERYONE ! It is that important that we know it is human’s final century !

I've read a few books about climate change. It's generally quite depressing as it seems an unstoppable express train and any solutions generally feel like things that will never happen.This book takes a slightly more realistic stance, taking climate change as a given, and looks at how migration is a way out of it, at least in terms of human survival. As it happens the demographics of the north mean immigrants are needed in large numbers to offset the ageing population and low birthrate of many of the "developed" countries. It's obviously a political hot potato, but it's a way out of the hole we have dug ourselves until the planet has cooled down or technology has overcome the issue one way or the other.The later chapters look at all the usual things we can do like eating less meat and it also looks at geoengineering, which seems inevitable at some stage. I do like the fact that the book isn't preachy.In the meantime, there is nothing we can do except vote for the political parties we think will help and adopt a few of the easier things which can help. Then sit back and wait until the immigrants arrive.

Gaia Vince explains how mass migration is inevitable. Hundreds of millions of people will have to escape places rendered uninhabitable by climate change. She provides multiple strategies to mitigate the risks involved, the most striking being the building of new mega-cities in the north to house the migrants (which could include you, dear reader, in an ‘advanced’ country) and create new communities. The absence of meaningful steps towards this, and climate change generally, by most governments is shocking when Vince sets out the many tools available or in development.It is easy to dismiss many of her suggestions as politically unworkable, because, tragically (not a word I use lightly) – they are.In a country where politicians are so dim that (1) they suggest a cap of 20,000 ‘of refugees legally accepted for resettlement in the UK’ when we have international obligations to grant asylum to those who meet the required conditions and (2) in effect, they want to (further) reduce the ability of immigrants to work, what hope is there that people will listen to Vince when she points out that allowing immigrants to work almost universally increases GDP. Sorry, mate, that won’t get me re-elected and that’s all I care about.Vince asserts that ‘To have the option to cool the planet but not use it would be morally indefensible,’ a statement that is superficially unarguable: until those irritating externalities and competing moralities kick in. She identifies the pumping of sulphates into the atmosphere as ‘the most promising’ form of geoengineering, and to be fair, she discusses the uncertainty over unexpected side-effects. But although she touches on ‘a fear that some places might experience a reduction in precipitation’, she concludes by with what is, in the context, a triviality: people in the north will see temperatures drop, some of whom may share Vince’s ability to ‘keep citrus trees in my garden’ and ‘enjoy the newly Mediterranean climate of southeast England’, plus lower heating bills.In contrast, Alan Robock of Rutgers University provides a balanced view, noting the potentially life-saving benefits of stratospheric engineering, while warning us of the risks. (He makes no prescriptions – too much research still needs to be done). Although the number of risks is not relevant, there are 28 of them, some alarming, such as: ‘1. Drought in Africa and Asia 2. Perturb ecology with more diffuse radiation 3. Ozone depletion 4. Continued ocean acidification 5. Additional acid rain and snow 6. May not stop ice sheets from melting 7. Impacts on tropospheric chemistry 8. Rapid warming if stopped … 9. Less solar electricity generation 10. Degrade passive solar heating … 15. More sunburn 16. Environmental impacts of injection technology (e.g., local pollution, noise, CO2 emissions) … 17. Whiter skies … 27. Military use of technology…’I am no expert on climate change but I worry about taking Vince’s manifold assertions at face value. Many of her political prescriptions are, in the context of the policies of many countries, completely unworkable unless the selfishness exemplified by the Red Wall MPs and their constituents (which is evident everywhere) can be changed, a very challenging prospect. Resolve key questions (such as which part of the Earth gets a sulphate layer?) by ‘a global governance body… urgently appointed, with powers’? Good luck with that in the USA, UK, Russia, China – again, almost everywhere really. And it is so easy to make a statement like ‘people adversely affected by solar cooling must be compensated’ when compensation schemes, even if agreed by governments, carry multiple challenges (see criticisms of the Windrush scheme, Post Office scheme, ad infinitum), not to mention who pays. And there is a delicious subtext – would this mean that Vince is compensated for the death of her citrus trees? Compensation for residents of London and northern Europe is likely to be as popular as that paid to slave traders is today.Finally, a small detail can shake confidence in a book. Vince notes research showing that ‘immigrants bolster patriotism and national trust in American institutions’ and tells us that this is ‘borne out in countless examples, including the Irish-born French immigrant Samuel Beckett who was awarded the Croix de Guerre for his heroism in the French Resistance’. This seemed strange to me, a lover of Beckett’s work and I turned to Beckett’s Political Imagination by Emilie Morin, only to find a spectacular refutation. When his undercover work in WW2 with the French Resistance was mentioned to him:‘he objected: “That was different […]. I was fighting against the Germans, who were making life hell for my friends, and not for the French nation.”’Clear enough? From Beckett, she moves on to other first or second-generation immigrants, including Boris Johnson, Rishi Sunak and Priti Patel. Whatever their level of patriotism, that is not what they will be remembered for. Many commentators say that Johnson’s only loyalty is to himself.Ultimately, whatever its flaws, this is a book to be read. Its prescriptive tone – so many ‘musts’! – can be tiring and the second half is a bit of a slog. Whether or not it is a good and reliable overview of the issues is for experts to judge, but it caused me to engage much more closely with some of those issues.

Minus one star for the prehistory and history chapter in which the facts are twisted to suggest that human beings have always been nomadic migrants. It is far from true ; neither hunter gatherers nor farmers were nomads and the vast majority of people throughout prehistory and history stayed put and when our ancestors did migrate they moved the minimum possible from their homes. What Ms Vince is suggesting as the solution for this century has never happened before and, when one considers the amount of hate in the world today, seems unlikely to happen this century either. Ms Vince is, however, a refreshingly balanced environmentalist without too much of that puritan zeal which turns off their listeners. In the absence of the sort of belief in God and an afterlife which prompted outbursts of repentance in past centuries it is difficult to imagine enough people changing their lifestyles too much. Her point about the benefits of migrants is a little misleading for the benefits depend on the proportion of migrants - too many all at once does indeed do the harm most people expect of them. The main plus of the book is that it mentions a huge number of the technological advances which do make her scenario possible. If she can persuade the planet's three thousand billionaires to disgorge than we are home and dry but I am pessimistic about both that and the nations of the world managing to co-operate ; evolution may have rewarded co-operators in the end but only after they had won the competition. The key to the situation is Russia and it might help if we all stopped thinking of Russia as the enemy - an attitude which hardly makes them co-operative !

The single-best book on transformative adaptation to climate change that I’ve read so far. Why? Because it hammers home the undeniable reality of another “inconvenient truth”: that millions—perhaps billions—of human beings will be seeking asylum from the ravages of climate chaos in the not-too-distant future. With forethought and planning we have within our grasp the wherewithal to achieve a compassionate and just accommodation for climate refugees seeking not only a safe haven, but the better life to which we all aspire.

Ok, she lays out the facts very well. It is possible to quibble about the 4 degrees of warming for 2100, but why? There will be lots and lots of people moving and predictions to date have tended to err on the conservative side. She points out that humanity has a history of moving. She hopes that we will claim this history in a positive way. Unfortunately, almost all of that history took place in a very different time with a very different population level. To her credit, she also talks about the role of the nation state and borders, etc. in slowing down migrations. As she points out in passing there is "no humane" way to keep people at home if they will starve there. Quite right. Unhappily the history of humanity is full of non humane ways of behaving. I foresee guns at the borders. Maybe the borders are eventually over run, but civil society as we know it is in for quite a test. This book in another in trying to be optimistic about what good could come out of all this. The unity of humanity! A true chance for redemption following the blood of national war! Etc. Still, it is not necessary to follow the author down this path to appreciate the message: lots and lots of people are going to moving in the not too distant future.

Not all doom and gloom in this book, but a stark look at what can happen with no action. Some great information on options that can be considered and a call to action.

Good information but the author seems quite satisfied with the idea of the upcoming migrations. It is implied this will all work out for the better but the possibility, as evidenced by current reactions, will probably be very volatile and will more than likely end up as a violent upheaval politically, economically and socially.

An excellent overview on the potential impact of climate change