Article View: ca.environment
Article #8110Main Impediment to Survival
From: Jon Roland
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1992 06:57
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1992 06:57
104 lines
6879 bytes
6879 bytes
There is a need to discuss population and its relationship to ecological and economic problems in somewhat different terms than is usually done. It is beyond the scope of this posting to try to cover the subject adequately. I am writing a book that will treat the subject at greater length. However, a few points should be considered: (1) We need to distinguish between the natural ecosystem, the geosystem, and the life-support system for humanity and its civilization. The first two overlap, but although the third now largely coincides with the first two, it can in principle be separated from them entirely. (2) As hunter-gatherers, the world population of humanity was probably between 4 and 100 million, and the latter figure is probably also the carrying capacity of the natural ecosystem for humanity. During most of that period, not much more exploitation of the geosystem (minerals) was done than that done by other lifeforms. With the advent of agriculture and mining, that changed rapidly. The invention of herding alone was sufficient to eventually enable humanity to destroy the natural ecosystem, and given only a few thousand years, even a technology of stone axes would have destroyed all the world's forests after humanity discovered the rudiments of sanitation, nutrition, and disease control. The development of political organizations larger than the village was the most important factor, however, because it led to the breakdown of traditional population control measures that had held populations well below carrying capacity. (3) The present world population of 5.5 billion is sustained only by the consumption of geosystem resources. If present trends continue, they will approach exhaustion, and we can expect world population to drop to below the then carrying-capacity of the natural ecosystem, which, because of the ways we have and will have degraded it, will be much less than 100 million -- perhaps less than 1 million -- worldwide. This will not happen overnight. It may take several hundred years. In the process, humanity will return to the stone age. Along the way, as civilization collapses in fits of upheaval, tragic events will occur. Almost all of the social and political turmoil of recent years are examples of this kind of thing. Earth will be reduced to a barren wasteland. Space resources are not a solution for Earth. If consumed as terrestrial resources are now, they will only result in toxic metal contamination on a scale that will render the surface unhabitable. (4) The real cost of geosystem and ecosystem resources are already beginning to impair economic growth, despite new technology. We may have, in fact, already begun to peak out and may now be beginning a long decline, punctuated by several rapid collapses along the way. We may have already passed the point where it is politically possible to adopt the kinds of measures that would avoid catastrophe. (5) The main obstacle to avoiding economic and ecological catastrophe is our commitment to living in scattered cities, towns, suburbs and farms. Such an infrastructure is fundamentally unsustainable, no matter what conservation regime may be imposed. The only alternative is to begin to build cities designed and operated like multigeneration starships, intended to carry their inhabitants into a distant future using only the resources they carry with them -- compact, sealed, recycling all resources, even air -- and moving everyone into them and off the surface of the planet, except perhaps for occasional visits under strictly controlled circumstances. (6) We could, in principle, build a million such cities, each holding a million inhabitants, on Earth, with footprints totaling less than 1 percent of the Earth's land surface, and maintain humanity in civilized comfort for not only the 500 million years that the surface of Earth is expected to remain habitable until increase solar radiation triggers a runaway greenhouse effect, but, underground, for the entire 5 billion years remaining until an expanding sun destroys the planet. The natural ecosystem could be restored to some semblance (7) There is no viable alternative between such starship cities and descent to a new stone age, except, perhaps, to build such starship cities in space and later return to Earth to restore it after the humans left behind destroy their civilization and the natural ecosystem. (8) Such starship cities can be build with near-term technology, but they will not be cheap. We can probably not afford to build more than one a year, for the next hundred years, by which time the political situation outside of them will become desperate and the cities will need to be self-sufficient and defensible. They are, therefore, a solution for only a few million people. There is no solution for most of the present 5.5 billion people on Earth or for their descendants -- they won't have any. (9) Present discussions of measures to limit pollution and increase recycling efforts are exercises in futility, and miss the most important point. Development, along present lines, is not even an option, even if we totally dismiss the interests of future generations. The imperatives of our time are the survival of human civilization and the natural ecosystem. Social, economic, and political justice are not options for our age. All we can hope to do is lay the foundation for a distant future in which these values may become realizable. (10) It is left as an exercise for the reader to estimate the orders of magnitude of the numbers of people who may live under each of these alternatives over the time remaining to Earth, and to reflect on our moral responsibility to them given that the choice among those alternatives will be made by our generation. These points are discussed in more detail in an upcoming article in The Futurist, a publication of the World Future Society. They are based on rigorous input-output analyses and computer modeling of the systems involved over geologic time spans. --- starflt@uunet.uu.net, jdr@starflight.corp.sun.com Jon Roland Starflight Corporation, 1755 E Bayshore Rd #9A, Redwood City, CA 94063-4142, 415/361-8141
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<l2jii3INNpft@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!sun-barr!news2me.ebay.sun.com!jethro.Corp.Sun.COM!starflight!jdrShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 10df74,eff51e6dd52de140,start X-Google-Attributes: gid10df74,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1992-05-31 16:19:28 PST Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!sun-barr!news2me.ebay.sun.com!jethro.Corp.Sun.COM!starflight!jdr From: jdr@starflight.Corp.Sun.COM (Jon Roland) Newsgroups: ca.environment Subject: Main Impediment to Survival Date: 1 Jun 1992 06:57:07 GMT Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. Lines: 105 Distribution: ca Message-ID: <l2jii3INNpft@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM> Reply-To: jdr@starflight.Corp.Sun.COM NNTP-Posting-Host: starflight.corp.sun.com