“For the first time in human history, the power of the Sun has been brought down to the surface of planet Earth. We are about to enter a new technological golden age. This energy source (hydrino) threatens the current global financial system… Now would be a good time for human civilisation to take a good look at itself and decide its fate!
I’m talking about The Venus Project, and the work of the late Jacques Fresco… a global resource based economy… no poverty, no war, no environmental destruction… and we’d become an intergalactic, space faring civilisation within a generation, colonising the cosmos for the next 440 billion years! (until the Universe exhausts it’s conversion of energy into matter during it’s annihilation phase, and the Universe begins to contract… according to GUT-CP! :D)
Or we’ll perish. It’s that simple…
“Half as many animals with back bones would lose the majority of their habitats… yeah it’s the ones without backbones that are causing this!” 😀
“Well the way I see it, in my childlike, possible undiagnosed Asperger’s mind is… if humanity has the solution to ALL of its energy needs in the form of ‘hydrino’ energy, an understanding of the atom (GUT-CP) that can save our planet from all forms of ecological catastrophe… and humanity chooses to ignore that solution for whatever reason… then they must want to burn in a global oven! 😀 They might as well burn their children, which they claim to love and care for so much, in ovens right now!”
“So according to the UN report, either human civilisation utilises and adapts to this technology, and brings forth a new technological revolution… … or humanity continues on the path its on and brings about a Mad Max style ecological apocalypse… … either way I’m happy!… … in fact?” 😀
UN report on global warming carries life-or-death warning ‘Not impossible but will require unprecedented changes’
Report written by 90 scientists says preventing an extra single degree of heat could drastically improve life for millions, but sees little chance of it actually happening.
WASHINGTON (AP) — Preventing an extra single degree of heat could make a life-or-death difference in the next few decades for multitudes of people and ecosystems on this fast-warming planet, an international panel of scientists reported Sunday. But they provide little hope the world will rise to the challenge.
The Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued its gloomy report at a meeting in Incheon, South Korea.
We have 12 years to limit climate change catastrophe, warns UN
Urgent changes needed to cut risk of extreme heat, drought, floods and poverty, says IPCC IPCC climate change report – live updates and reaction The world’s leading climate scientists have warned there is only a dozen years for global warming to be kept to a maximum of 1.5C, beyond which even half a degree will significantly worsen the risks of drought, floods, extreme heat and poverty for hundreds of millions of people. The authors of the landmark report by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released on Monday say urgent and unprecedented changes are needed to reach the target, which they say is affordable and feasible although it lies at the most ambitious end of the Paris agreement pledge to keep temperatures between 1.5C and 2C. The half-degree difference could also prevent corals from being completely eradicated and ease pressure on the Arctic, according to the 1.5C study, which was launched after approval at a final plenary of all 195 countries in Incheon in South Korea that saw delegates hugging one another, with some in tears. “We must reduce greenhouse gas emissions to net zero or face more floods” Nicholas Stern “It’s a line in the sand and what it says to our species is that this is the moment and we must act now,” said Debra Roberts, a co-chair of the working group on impacts. “This is the largest clarion bell from the science community and I hope it mobilises people and dents the mood of complacency.”
Avoiding climate chaos means ‘unprecedented’ change: UN report The UN’s 195-nation climate science body plunged deep into overtime Saturday to finalise a report outlining stark options—all requiring a global makeover of unprecedented scale—for avoiding climate chaos. Working through the night, the closed-door huddle in rain-soaked Incheon, South Korea, was to convene a plenary later in the day to hammer through a “Summary for Policymakers.” Can humanity cap global warming at 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit)? What will it take and how much will it cost? Would climate impacts be significantly less severe than in a 2C world? The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was tasked with these questions by the framers of the landmark 2015 Paris Agreement, which calls for halting the rise in temperatures to “well below” 2C—and 1.5C if possible. That aspirational goal—tacked on to the treaty at the last minute—caught climate scientists off-guard. “Our understanding of 1.5C was very limited, all but two or three of the models we had then were based on a 2C target,” said Henri Waisman, a senior researcher at the Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations in Paris, and one of the report’s 86 authors. Based on more than 6,000 peer-reviewed studies, the 20-page bombshell will make for grim reading when it is released on Monday. “Leaders will have nowhere to hide once this report comes out,” said Jennifer Morgan, Executive Director of Greenpeace International, and an observer at the talks.
UN warns paradigm shift needed to avert global climate chaos Avoiding global climate chaos will require a major transformation of society and the world economy that is “unprecedented in scale,” the UN said Monday in a landmark report that warns time is running out to avert disaster. Earth’s surface has warmed one degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit)—enough to lift oceans and unleash a crescendo of deadly storms, floods and droughts—and is on track toward an unliveable 3C or 4C rise. At current levels of greenhouse gas emissions, we could pass the 1.5C marker as early as 2030, and no later than mid-century, the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) reported with “high confidence”. “The next few years are probably the most important in human history,” Debra Roberts, head of the Environmental Planning and Climate Protection Department in Durban, South Africa, and an IPCC co-chair, told AFP. A Summary for Policymakers of the 400-page tome underscores how quickly global warming has outstripped humanity’s attempt to tame it, and outlines options for avoiding the worst ravages of a climate-addled future. “We have done our job, we have now passed on the message,” Jim Skea, a professor at Imperial College London’s Centre for Environmental Policy and an IPCC co-chair, said at a press conference.
Preventing an extra single degree of heat could make a life-or-death difference in the next few decades for multitudes of people and ecosystems on this fast-warming planet, an international panel of scientists reported Sunday. But they provide little hope the world will rise to the challenge. The Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued its gloomy report at a meeting in Incheon, South Korea. In the 728-page document, the U.N. organization detailed how Earth’s weather, health and ecosystems would be in better shape if the world’s leaders could somehow limit future human-caused warming to just 0.9 degrees Fahrenheit (a half degree Celsius) from now, instead of the globally agreed-upon goal of 1.8 degrees F (1 degree C). Among other things: Half as many people would suffer from lack of water. There would be fewer deaths and illnesses from heat, smog and infectious diseases. Seas would rise nearly 4 inches (0.1 meters) less. Half as many animals with back bones and plants would lose the majority of their habitats. There would be substantially fewer heat waves, downpours and droughts. The West Antarctic ice sheet might not kick into irreversible melting. And it just may be enough to save most of the world’s coral reefs from dying.
Avoiding climate chaos means ‘unprecedented’ change: UN report – New Delhi: The UN’s 195-nation climate science body plunged deep into overtime Saturday to finalise a report outlining stark options — all requiring a global makeover of unprecedented scale — for avoiding climate chaos. … Without a radical course change, we are headed for an unliveable 3C or 4C hike. And yet, humanity has avoided action for so long that any pathway to a climate-safe world involves wrenching economic and social change “unprecedented in terms of scale,” the report said.
We have 12 years to act on climate change before the world as we know it is lost. How much more urgent can it get? Twelve years. According to climate scientists, that’s how long until we hit the 1.5C tipping point if we carry on as we are.
Such a shift in our planetary temperature will imperil not only low-lying areas because of the increased risk of floods, but will have consequences for all of us – not least due to the necessary migration of millions of people away from areas that become uninhabitable.
Coral reefs will vanish; many ancient trees will not survive; extreme weather events will become ever more common. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change paints a bleak picture.
Yet the scientists are also clear that we can still hold the line on further damaging change – if we’re prepared to act fast and invest a great deal of money. By reducing CO2 emissions by nearly half from their 2010 levels, we could give ourselves a fighting chance; by planting millions of trees and using technology to further capture carbon dioxide too, we might just do it.
But in all honesty it is hard to feel optimistic about the world’s ability to make that happen. The World Wildlife Fund’s lead climate change scientist, Chris Weber, says “the difference between possibility and impossibility is political will”, which in present circumstances is unnerving, to say the least.
Deadline for greenhouse gas emissions revealed in UN report
The world’s most authoritative body on climate science has today issued a stark warning about the future of the planet.
More than 90 scientists have pulled together thousands of pieces of research to compile the report from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
The report says global emissions of greenhouse gas pollution must reach zero by about 2050, for the world to avoid the effects of extreme climate change.
What about the Amazon?… … my Amazon! 😀
The Amazon Used to be a Hedge Against Climate Change. Those Days May Be Over. Direct human impacts like these have long defined the battle to save the rainforest. But Carlos Quesada, with Brazil’s National Institute for Amazonian Research, says a new threat is now looming. “The forest is responding to the atmosphere,” he says. And the atmosphere is changing. Chainsaws and cattle are still eating away at the forest’s perimeter, but carbon dioxide coming out of tailpipes and smokestacks thousands of miles away is altering tropical forests on a much larger scale. “So, in areas completely remote, far away from people’s influence, the forest is changing. Forests that are pristine, they are suffering.” … Quesada says all of this extra CO2 is causing global temperatures to rise on the one hand, “but on the other,” he says, “high CO2 can also stimulate growth.” Growth in trees like the ones we’re standing among. And for years, that’s what’s been happening. The Amazon and many other forests have been absorbing a lot of that extra CO2 and converting it into leaves, branches and trunks. Essentially capturing and storing pollution that would otherwise heat up the atmosphere even more. Quesada says until recently, the Amazon was hungrily absorbing the equivalent of the CO2 pollution from every car on the planet, every year. But even a huge forest like this one can only capture so much more CO2 before it reaches other biological limits. And Quesada says the Amazon appears to have done that, and stopped sucking up extra CO2. “So, we are changing the atmosphere,” he says. “The atmosphere is changing the climate system. And the climate system and the higher levels of CO2 are changing how the forest behaves.” In fact, a few years back, for the first time on record, it actually released more carbon than it absorbed. It flipped from what’s known as a “carbon sink” to a source of carbon. “It’s probably saying, ‘OK, that’s enough now — you guys stop.’” Which, Quesada says, presents a frightening scenario. “The Amazon was buying you some time that it is not going to buy anymore,” he says, because once that environmental service of absorbing extra CO2 from the atmosphere stops, all that extra carbon will instead accumulate in the atmosphere, driving global temperatures even higher at a much faster rate. “We will really start to feel it,” he says.
Recent intensification of Amazon flooding extremes driven by strengthened Walker circulation Abstract The Amazon basin is the largest watershed on Earth. Although the variability of the Amazon hydrological cycle has been increasing since the late 1990s, its underlying causes have remained elusive. We use water levels in the Amazon River to quantify changes in extreme events and then analyze their cause. Despite continuing research emphasis on droughts, the largest change over recent decades is a marked increase in very severe floods. Increased flooding is linked to a strengthening of the Walker circulation, resulting from strong tropical Atlantic warming and tropical Pacific cooling. Atlantic warming due to combined anthropogenic and natural factors has contributed to enhance the change in atmospheric circulation. Whether this anomalous increase in flooding will last depends on the evolution of the tropical inter-ocean temperature difference.
“See, if it boiled down to a choice between 7 billion humans and the Amazon forest… I’d easily choose the forest” 😀
“He isn’t joking on that one either!”
“One ‘journalist’ (ahem) who’s been following the story of Randell Mills and Brilliant Light Power is a gentleman by the name of Tom Whipple for Fall Church News Press. I thought Falls Church News would be some evangelical nut job American publication, but it turns out Falls Church is actually a small town in Virginia… … ten minutes drive from Langley…. and it also transpires that Tom Whipple is a thirty year veteran of the CIA, analyst in energy! 😀 … I think his wife was Virginia State Senator for the Democrat Party… anyhoo… it’s worth reading this guys articles.”
The Great Energy Transition: Fires, Floods, Fossil Fuels, & New Energy
August 17, 2018
By Tom Whipple
This summer we have been deluged with reports from every corner of the world concerning the devastation that fossil-fuel induced global warming is causing. Fires, floods, storms, crop failures, unbearable temperatures, and water shortages are occurring across the world, yet the consumption of fossil fuels continues to increase. While a handful of countries, mostly in Northern Europe, are taking serious steps to reduce the use of fossil fuels, the rest of the world is mostly in denial. These countries either believe there is not a fossil fuel/climate change problem or rank the need for economic growth ahead of the need to address climate change. Few are willing to admit that these goals are incompatible. Reductions in the use of fossil fuels by a sufficient amount to slow or stop global warming are fundamentally incompatible with current levels of economic activity. By its very nature, growing economic activity in today’s world requires more energy, 80 percent of which is currently coming from fossil fuels.
While the use of non-fossil fuel energy sources – wind, solar, tides, waves, hydro, nuclear, etc. – is increasing, the rate at which these sources of energy are replacing the still-growing use of fossil fuels is so low that climate-induced catastrophes seem more likely to increase than recede in coming decades. In short, large portions of humanity are between the proverbial rock and a hard place; either parts of our civilization are done-in by increasing harsh climate conditions, or we accept the economic hardships that mandated reductions in the use of fossil fuels would bring.
A corollary to major reductions in the use of fossil fuels would be the need for many new government policies and regulations controlling the use of fossil fuels. This is likely the main reason behind why the obvious reality of climate change has become so controversial in America. While the devastation caused by climate is increasing steadily, it has not yet reached the point where the overwhelming majority of our fellow citizens are willing to make economic and life-style sacrifices required to deal with what is likely to be an existential problem.
The only real solution on the horizon to this situation is to develop and deploy as soon as possible one or more new sources of energy, for the current major non-polluting sources – mostly wind and solar – have major deficiencies. Moreover, they are unlikely to grow fast enough to solve the underlying problem. For the last 50 years it has been widely believed that nuclear fusion of hydrogen would one day answer to the world’s energy problem; however, after decades and billions of dollars’ worth of research, a commercial product is nowhere in sight and seems unlikely to arrive in time to mitigate climate change.
For many years now, I have been following and reporting on the progress of two technologies that could (and I underline could) be the answer to global warming. Both these technologies offer the promise of non-polluting energy in unlimited quantities at a fraction of current costs. If these promises sound too good to be true, you have the reason why there is so much skepticism that these technologies could possibly be real. Both are based on new concepts that seem to conflict with currently accepted science. For many years there were rancorous disputes between the scientific community and those believing in the new technologies, but recently there has been a de facto truce with both sides simply ignoring each other.
The years of controversy have resulted in a situation where only a fully operational prototype that can be tested by outside laboratories will be enough to convince media and the scientific community that one or both of these technologies are real and are ready for the commercial market. We are not yet at that day, but it may be closer than most realize.
Our two technologies are Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR) and the chemical “hydrino” reaction being developed by Brilliant Light Power up in New Jersey. While many laboratories around the world are working on the LENR reaction, so far as is known only the Italian inventor Andrea Rossi down in Florida claims to be close to installing the first LENR-based reactor for a commercial customer. The differences in transparencies between Rossi and Randell Mills who is developing the competitive hydrino technology is like night and day. For numerous reasons, Rossi is highly secretive about his technology, only responding to questions about his progress on his blog in one or at most a few words. For years, Mills has been releasing detailed information about the designs of his evolving devices and about 95 percent of the science and technology behind his reactors.
While Rossi and Mills have at times been overly optimistic about how fast they could develop their radically new technologies into commercial products, the underlying science used by both companies has been validated many times over the years by outside scientists. To any open-minded observer who has been following these technologies, there is no reason to believe that any fraud is involved and that there are valid energy-producing technologies behind the devices both scientists are trying to perfect.
In a recent post, Rossi says he has a contract to build a 40-megawatt (MW) heat producing plant and hopes to have the reactors ready for installation before the end of the year. As is usual with Rossi, there are no details as to where the reactors will be installed, who the customer is, or which of two devices Rossi has under development will be used for his first installation. Although the heat-producing reactors will be installed at the customer’s plant, they will be operated and maintained by Rossi’s employees. The customer will only receive the heat from the device and will have little or no access to the details of the reactor’s operation.
In contrast to Rossi’s secrecy, Mills of Brilliant Light Power has just published a quarterly update on his progress that contains much detail, including engineering drawings, about the progress his firm has made in the last three months. As some readers may recall, last year Mills switched his strategic direction from developing a device that would produce electricity to two separate devices. One of these would, like Rossi, produce only heat that would be used in buildings or for industrial processes. The new electricity generating device is to use the plasma created by the hydrino reaction to power a magnetohydrodynamic subsystem to produce electricity. The magnetohydrodynamic generator should be much cheaper than one using concentrated photovoltaic cells and can be scaled to larger sizes.
By switching strategic direction, Mills has delayed by months or years the day when he will bring a working device to market but may have a more reliable and cheaper-to-build product when the development is complete. The one major problem that Mills is still working to overcome is to modify the reactor module so that it will run continuously under computer control. Computer control is necessary to have a marketable product. Mills had hoped to have accomplished this goal last year, but it is turning out to be more difficult than anticipated. In the past six months, however, many changes to the design of the reactor have been made which hopefully will result in a fully automated system being available sometime soon.
It is important to remember just what is at stake in the development of these new energy-producing technologies. The global market for heat currently is about $8 trillion (with a “T”) a year. The global electricity market is on the order of $3.5 trillion. Both these impending technologies offer the promise of producing heat and electricity at a fraction of current costs once they can be made to work reliably. Should this be the case, all other forms of energy production could quickly become obsolete due to their much higher costs of production, not to mention the problem of global warming. Given their potential, it is amazing that they have not received more attention simply because they seem to be too good to be true or move our understanding of science ahead by a notch or two.
“A star is drawing on some vast reservoir of energy by means unknown to us. This reservoir can scarcely be other than the subatomic energy which, it is known exists abundantly in all matter; we sometimes dream that man will one day learn how to release it and use it for his service.” – Lord Arthur Stanley Eddington 1920
Let There Be Light is an award winning 2017 documentary film investigating sciences century long endeavour in pursuit of ‘Fusion Energy’. The film focuses on the multi-billion dollar ITER project in France, telling the stories of a number of scientists involved.
Obviously to those of us familiar with the work of Dr Randell Mills, ‘hydrino’ energy and GUT-CP… we understand that the ITER project is a complete waste of time, 😀 and thus, the documentary film is more of a tragic comedy! (‘the greatest comedy of the century!’)
On a serious note, the film does highlight the necessity for our species to find a clean and abundant energy source, that will sustain our civilisation in the long term. As one scientist says “If we don’t crack fusion, we are doomed”, “I think we’re going hundred miles per hour towards a brick wall, and nobody seems to be paying much attention.”
Below is an excerpt from a 2009 BBC Horizon documentary entitled ‘Can We Make a Star On Earth?’ featuring Professor Brian Cox and Dr Saul Griffith (whom I will post about in the future). The clip shows a series of calculations made regarding providing energy to an increasing global population by 2035 by replacing fossil fuels. After watching, it soon becomes apparent that humankind has no other option expect to discover and utilise a brand new energy source. Dr Randell Mills and his team at Brilliant Light Power have discovered and harnessed that energy source in the form of ‘hydrino energy’, and the sooner both the worlds scientific community and the worlds Governments realise that it not only exists, but is ready to be distributed globally, the more likely we are in avoiding the eventual global energy crisis that looms over our civilisation.
Renewable energy and the Future (Some calculations)…
A number of experts and investigators have noted that the calculations regarding the energy input of ITER, the power amplifications stated and the deceptions involved, means that the project is the biggest waste of money and scientific minds in modern history. Essentially ITER is the biggest scientific scam in modern history, and will NOT lead to wither a breakthrough in scientific discovery or a new source of energy…
“The application of unlimited, unbounded energy are only constrained by human imagination, ingenuity and ambition” – Dr Randell Mills
Brilliant Light Power Terraforming Application Video
(The music! 😀 … No dolphins? 😦 )
“We need to start terraforming the planet in a positive and beneficial way for the sake of the survival of our species and all life on Earth… because at the moment we’re terraforming Earth like General Zod!… Take California for example, severe drought and water shortages, catastrophic wild fires… … although when those fires reached Rupert Murdoch’s home, I was privately thinking ‘swings and roundabouts!’… … but we could create a global paradise of abundance if we utilised this technology correctly”
Hydrino energy is high density, cheap, non- polluting, safe, and deployable anywhere in the world…
Obviously Brilliant Light Power and hydrino energy has the potential to eradicate the burning of ALL fossil fuels globally, thereby cutting global carbon emissions to ZERO!
Hydrino technology can also replace ‘renewable’ energy sources such as solar and wind farms, which would potentially take up millions of square miles of the Earths landmass to host. There is no radioactive or chemical waste, or any pollution of any kind.
But also Dr Mills and Brilliant Light Power envision a world where the use of ‘hydrino’ technologies will be used to transform the planets most inhospitable wastelands and arid regions into ‘lush, liveable, crop-producing expanses’ whilst ‘also preventing drought in already cultivated areas such as California.’
A recent article unveiled plans by scientists to transform areas of the Sahara into a lush rainfall region with abundant greenery. Although the plan utilises a combination of wind turbines and solar panels, it highlights the possible ways in which future clean technologies will be used to positively alter and transform the Earths landscape.
I believe much more research should be conducted and careful consideration taken into the idea of transforming certain regions of the Earth, using hydrino power only. As pointed out in following article, transforming such areas as the Sahara may have unintended consequences for other regions such as the Amazon rainforest, and Atlantic ocean marine life… 8 Craziest Mega-Engineering Projects That Could Rework Earth “For one, sand from the Sahara is carried into the air, across the Atlantic, and deposited in South America. The rich dust that falls from the sky, and the rain storms caused by that dust picking up moisture during it’s transoceanic journey both fertilize the Amazon rain forest. No desert, no dust. No dust, no rain forest. During that journey, the dust also feeds a variety of sea life.”
Brett Holverstott mentions in his talk, in regards to how hydrino energy has the potential to help alleviate, if not eradicate :-
Ice cap melting
The dying of marine life
Being deployable in the third world
The cutting down of the Amazon rainforest
Global city smog
Construction of river dams
… amongst numerous other potential environmental benefits.
I also believe our new understanding of atomic structure and molecular physics (Millsian), could pave the way for new cleaner technologies and sustainable materials in industries other than energy. These may include :-
– Plastics and materials
– Food and crop growth
– Fertilisers and agriculture
– Mining and mineral extraction
– Methods for cleaning up past environmental damage (plastics, carbon emissions, nuclear and toxic waste), essentially reversing the damage already caused by the Industrial Revolution.
“The application of unlimited, unbounded energy are only constrained by human imagination, ingenuity and ambition” – Dr Randell Mills
“Before we venture out into the stars, looking to terraform other planets… maybe we should take a look back at our own and try and reverse the damage we’ve done here” – Danny Hurley
Robert Senftleben: Terraforming Planet Earth
Large parts of the surface of our planet have been devastated by human activity. Terraforming on a human scale is needed to bring these landscapes back to life. The knowledge and technology is there, and you can learn how to use it and participate.
EXCELLENT TED TALK!
How to green the world’s deserts and reverse climate change | Allan Savory
“Desertification is a fancy word for land that is turning to desert,” begins Allan Savory in this quietly powerful talk. And terrifyingly, it’s happening to about two-thirds of the world’s grasslands, accelerating climate change and causing traditional grazing societies to descend into social chaos. Savory has devoted his life to stopping it. He now believes — and his work so far shows — that a surprising factor can protect grasslands and even reclaim degraded land that was once desert.
Update (13/09/2-18) ;D Gaia 2.0 (Timothy M. Lenton, Bruno Latour – University of Exeter)
“A time-honoured theory into why conditions on Earth have remained stable enough for life to evolve over billions of years has been given a new, innovative twist.
For around half a century, the ‘Gaia’ hypothesis has provided a unique way of understanding how life has persisted on Earth. It champions the idea that living organisms and their inorganic surroundings evolved together as a single, self-regulating system that has kept the planet habitable for life—despite threats such as a brightening Sun, volcanoes and meteorite strikes. However, Professor Tim Lenton from the University of Exeter and famed French sociologist of science Professor Bruno Latour are now arguing that humans have the potential to ‘upgrade’ this planetary operating system to create “Gaia 2.0”. They believe that the evolution of both humans and their technology could add a new level of “self-awareness” to Earth’s self-regulation, which is at the heart of the original Gaia theory. As humans become more aware of the global consequences of their actions, including climate change, a new kind of deliberate self-regulation becomes possible where we limit our impacts on the planet. Professors Lenton and Latour suggest that this “conscience choice” to self-regulate introduces a “fundamental new state of Gaia—which could help us achieve greater global sustainability in the future. However, such self-aware self-regulation relies on our ability to continually monitor and model the state of the planet and our effects upon it. Professor Lenton, Director of Exeter’s new Global Systems Institute, said: “If we are to create a better world for the growing human population this century then we need to regulate our impacts on our life support-system, and deliberately create a more circular economy that relies—like the biosphere—on the recycling of materials powered by sustainable energy.” The original Gaia Theory was developed in the late 1960’s by James Lovelock, a British scientist and inventor. It suggested that both the organic and inorganic components of Earth evolved together as one single, self-regulating system which can control global temperature and atmospheric composition to maintain its own habitability. The new perspective article is published in leading journal Science on September 14, 2018. It follows recent research, led by Professor Lenton, which offered a fresh solution to how the Gaia hypothesis works in real terms: Stability comes from “sequential selection” in which situations where life destabilises the environment tend to be short-lived and result in further change until a stable situation emerges, which then tends to persist. Once this happens, the system has more time to acquire further properties that help to stabilise and maintain it—a process known as “selection by survival alone”. Creating transformative solutions to the global changes that humans are now causing is a key focus of the University of Exeter’s new Global Systems Institute.”