Genius Now

Looking regionally at the emerging present is useful, but it is too broad. Trends towards greater urbanization aren't likely to change. A great deal of thought has been given to the urbanization trend, and what it implies in terms of economies and social organization. The combination of urbanisation and national political gridlock is leading to the emergence of "megaregions" - highly urbanised landscapes and their immediately supporting rural landscapes. If this resembles the city-state model to you, you're not alone in seeing that. The Brookings Institute (and others) have already seen this, and are presenting the model to selected groups of business and civic leaders. Not surprisingly, they started their presentations in the Bay Area.

Higher densities reduce energy costs and create competitive advantages. Globalisation favors urban centers with high per capita gdp and high cultural spending. Sustainability favors local -region agriculture and high-value regional exports with low per-unit environmental costs. Resiliency favors distributed systems, an active civic sphere, and a broadly-educated population. The extent to which a city-state can meet those criteria adds substantially to its' ability to thrive regionally and globally.

Which is to say, the new American city-states are not emerging equal. The best-prepared cities for climate-change (San Francisco, Seattle, Portland) will be among the least affected by it. The lowest cost of energy as percent of gdp and highest productivity of energy usage are in the same places. So is the potential for reinvigorated local agriculture.

What the data tells us is that Dixie will be the hardest hit by climate change and is the least prepared for it. The South will also be hardest hit by energy cost increases and supply reductions, and the least prepared for that. Infrastructure will be increasingly stressed regionally by FEMA classified events, and lower tax revenues make maintenance and replacement more difficult. Utility company executives already see aging infrastructure as their biggest issue in the short term, and are confident that energy costs (and prices) will continue to rise significantly. For the most part they continue to place their bets on natural gas and nuclear energy. 

Disaster-level events affect agriculture, utilities and transportation dispropotionately.With their regional economies far more dependent on utilites and transportation than most of the country, the Southern cities are starting this phase of their history in a deep competitve hole. They are already net recipients, rather than contributors, to the Federal budget. Continued shortfalls and budgetcutting on the Federal level will reduce the inflow of Federal funds, and at the same time raise property insurance costs in the region. Fewer dollars and deteriorating infrastructure will lead to increased pressure to sell community assets - water systems and roads in particular. Privatization of natural monopolies leads to  private monopolies, and reduced regulation gives those monopolies little incentive to change a short-term profit model, which operates at the expense of infrastructure maintenance and development.

This is not to say that other regional megacities don't have their own issues - in the Southwest and Mountains states the Front Range, Arizona, and Southern California conurbations are all particularly susceptible to water shortages and regional agricultural shortfalls. Despite this, these areas (for the most part) have higher per capita gdp and income. Reductions in Federal taxation can conceivably be met with raised local and regional taxation, as well as a greater local investment pool. This increases the capacity of these areas to respond to environmental and energy threats. This capacity is greatly reduced for the Southern cities.

Finally, there are the issues of competition and conflict. Miami has an identified enemy in Cuba. Dallas and Houston have Venezuala. The perception of enemies leads to increasingly insular behavior. At the same time it promotes adventurist interventions regionally, placing these cities in an increasingly disadvantaged resource allocation position. This climate of hostility supports incarceration over education, and calls for an increasing percentage of regional (or national) gdp devoted to security and military spending, which are extremely inefficient for general economic development.

You may note that this discussion omits race, religion, and political affiliations. They are largely unnecessary to an understanding of the situation from this perspective, and are not the determining factors for this scenario. Certainly they require discussion when creating strategies for dealing with this reality, but starting from those tired (and blame oriented) approaches leads to focus on externalities, rather than achievable goals.

Imposing solutions from outside the region is not likely to achieve long term positive results. To the extent that Dixie's issues can be turned around within the constraints outined here, the turnaround has to start in Dixie. To think otherwise is hubris, and plays directly into the resistance factors already in play.

We're stressed across the board. Climate, economy, healthcare, energy, education, geopolitics - you name it, it's stressing us. There are directions and approaches we can take to all of these things, but we're hampered by two things: resistance to change,and a media surface that has very little to do with the actual world.

If we frame the issues regionally (and there are very good reasons to do that), something stands out. Across the board, almost everything is worse in Dixie. While the distribution of issues vary, the amount of overlap in the southern United States is clear and unmistakeable. This isn't new - Dixie has lagged in almost every way since the Civil War (or War of Northern Aggression, depending on where you are). At the same time, most of the votes to block significant social legislation at the Federal level comes from the same region. That's not likely to change in the near future, no matter how much liberal theorists wish it would.

At the same time, the grassroots social movements and social businesses, the ideas and organizations that are routing around the current system, are clustered (for the most pat) on the east and west coasts. Civic preparation for climate change is further along. Investment capital flows in greater amounts. People live longer, and have (generally) better health care. They use less energy, and generate more of their own.

Rich people want to live in these places, and they want to visit them. This is increasingly important to regional economies. We mask them as tourism and real estate, but what we're talking about is where the more affluent folks want to be. Given our currently whacked income distribution, the percentage of truly affluent in your region determines how healthy your regional economy can be. Like the political gridlock, this won't change overnight.

The Great Sort is slowing - inter-regional migration has slowed with energy prices and the economy. As energy prices continue to rise, the areas that use the most will be hardest hit. Your chances of physical mobility to another part of the country are decreasing. Which means your ability to actually thrive is ever-more dependent on where you are.

These are facts. It seems to me that if you accept them, and you live in a region with the characteristics of Dixie, you have two choices: leave, or adapt. For most of you, adapting will be preferable, but the question remains: what can you do to increase the viability and resilience of your community when the odds are so heavily stacked against you?

A couple of suggestions: The first step is to stop trying to fix the past. It hasn't worked. The second step is to realize that this is a strategic issue, and to think asymmetrically. In economics they call part of it leverage, but that's only one concept in asymmetrical thinking.

Very cool stuff on the robot music front. Musical automata have been around for centuries, if not decades, but the opportunities to make meaningful sounds in strange and surreal ways just grow every day.

The students used junkyard salvage and traditional instruments to create the bots.

In addition to vinyl decks and mixing boards, the ensemble also features three entirely new musical instruments, including NotomotoN, a dual-head drum with twelve beaters and a mallet orchestra.

via Robot Orchestra Built From Junkyard Scrap [VIDEOS].

 Climate change is occurring, is very likely caused primarily by the emission of greenhouse gases from human activities, and poses significant risks for a range of human and natural systems. Emissions continue to increase, which will result in further change and greater risks. Responding to these risks is a crucial challenge facing the United States and the world today and for many decades to come.

-- National Academy of Sciences, America's Climate Choices

So we know all this, and it's not a surpise. The maps to the left show two scenarios, and it's important to note that even with lower emissions, things are still gonna change. They just wont be as bad.