Nothing lasts forever. Except perhaps time, but I'm no Stephen Hawking so I won't dwell on the longevity of time. But certainly the current status quo cannot last forever as The Colonel has so accurately pointed out. So does this mean that civilisation is doomed to crumble. That our reliance on dwindling supplies of oil will eventually lead to a collapse in the chain of supply and a starving population. Or will humanity, with its unique ability to consciously (epiphenomenalism not withstanding) modify the environment to its own benefit, come up with a solution to halt our seemingly inevitable decline.
Human civilisation currently exists in the finite space known as the Earth. There isn't much chance of this changing in the near future, we might get a monkey on Mars in twenty years or so but we are hardly conquering new frontiers in space travel. So the Earth is all we've got to work with for the moment. As with all closed systems the Earth has a finite, if variable, carrying capacity. The carrying capacity of an ecosystem is the maximum population that can be supported without a reduction in its capacity to support that population in the future. So, before we can make any predictions about our future prospects, we need to determine the carrying capacity of the Earth. I'm sorry this is sounding a bit like an essay but I'm trying to treat the Colonels queries seriously, I'm doing research and everything.
I'm not going to attempt to calculate the carrying capacity of the Earth myself, because I can't be bothered, but I will consider a few, well one, of the variables that would influence the calculation. Oh, and before I get into this I'd just like to say I don't hold with all this Save the Earth nonsense. The Earth will be just fine thank you very much, it's been around for about 4.5 billion years surviving asteroid hits, super volcanoes, global warming, global cooling, the Osmonds and Coldplay and several mass extinctions. The carbon dioxide fart of humanity would be a tiny blip in its history and make not one jot of difference to its survival, or the survival of its life for that matter. And anyway, without humanity to witness these catastrophes they cease to be catastrophic and become merely unwitnessed events, a bit like the X Factor would be if we lived in a properly civilised society (In memory of Giles Cobler and trees in woods). The extinction of humanity would cease to be a problem at the precise moment that the last conscious mind blinked out of existence. All I'm saying is I'll start giving them a fiver a month when they change their name to Save the Humans, a much more achievable (hopefully) and realistic aim.
So what is the one variable that is crucial to our survival? Well that's blindingly obvious - resources. If we haven't got anything to eat, drink, breathe, build with or plug in we won't get off square one, or indeed on square one to begin with. We'll have no dice to roll, we won't pass go and collect £200, we'll have no cheese/wedge/pie to put in one of the six holes and no questions to answer anyway, there will be no study in which to find the non existent lead pipe, no ladder to climb and no snakes to slide down, the game won't be over because it won't have started. See what I mean, obvious, resources.
There are two types of resource, and our capitilisation (such an appropriate word) of these two resource types is key to our success in the future. The clues are all there to see, a dead giveaway, but for some reason we just don't, won't or can't see what's right before our eyes.
Renewable Resources. These are the ones that are renewable, that means if they're properly managed they'll last, effectively, for ever. It's all there in the word renewable, these are the resources on which the carrying capacity of our ecosystem depends. The earth has been managing pretty well on renewable resources for quite some time now. Incredibly efficient recycling policies have evolved and the whole system has kept itself going and put us on the map, giving me the opportunity to bore you with this blog. Managing our renewables is the crucial element in the survival of humanity.
Non-Renewable Resources. These are the ones that are going to run out and fossil fuels are the biggies. Fossil fuels are the resources that have simultaneously propelled humanity to it's current state of development and into a bit of a pickle. The developed world no longer exists in a natural environment, instead we now exist in a technological world created on the back of a huge pile of free energy in the form of oil and coal and perhaps latterly, uranium. These are all going to run out sooner or later, even uranium, the supposed solution to our greenhouse gas reduction targets, is not in infinite supply.
To steal a little from an excellent essay by Kurt Vonnegut this huge pile of free energy is no more that huge pile of premium grade heroin and the developed nations of the world are a bunch of junkies riding a hundred year high. The supply is starting to run dry. And we all know what happens when a junkie can't afford his next hit. He gets desperate, he does a bit of shoplifting, maybe burgles a few houses, and as the desperation increases he mugs a few grannies. Blinded by his need for a fix he kills to get it. Does any of this sound familiar?
But enough of this now, back to vegetables, and maybe animal husbandry just for the colonel.
The Colonel wrote...
Thank you SuperDave. I assume that the photograph accompanying your latest blog is a joke at my expense. Don’t worry though I have a good sense of humour and so do you. Quite a few people think that we are crackpots at first.
I enjoyed reading your work but think you need to consider a wider view than the “green brigades” argument.
You are correct that fossil fuels etc are finite but ultimately I believe man will either adapt or overcome their demise. In the short term however the shortage of such fuels could lead to an increase in local and global conflict. You only have to consider the current war for oil in Iraq to see that future. In this nuclear age it is these conflicts that really threaten our so called civilisation.
Our analysts suggest that whilst fossil fuels will start to disappear in the next forty or fifty years, the danger is more imminent due to human folly. Unsurprisingly, the most likely flashpoint is the Middle East. Obviously the martial zeal of the Zionists is well known. This coupled with the increasing militancy of the Islamists and the spread of nuclear capability makes a nuclear event in that regions almost inevitable. The consequences are obvious. If Israel used a nuclear strike against an Arab nation, then all would retailiate. Escalation would lead to large tracts of the Middle East being devastated and left uninhabitable for generations. What happens to the survivors? Do they go towards Sub-Saharan Africa, to lands of starvation and drought. No. Do they go East? How far could they go? If Iran is part of the devastation. Pakistan? And what if Pakistan becomes involved as surely it must to protect the Muslim brotherhood. India? Would India accept a huge Islamic migration. Not voluntarily. And so India too becomes a battleground. So where do the migrants go. Of course, they go to Europe. Can you imagine? The population of Egypt alone is over 70 million. Our analysts suggest that assuming, there is migration from the major centres such as Cairo as the crisis escalates that over 50 million will survive but as the fallout spreads, they will need a new land. And what will these people be. Malnutrition and squalor will produce disease and plague. And that plague will be marching towards Europe. The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse will truly have arrived.
Excuse me SuperDave we do not need to discuss these details here, I am becoming carried away again. Of more practical concerns are where you stand on animal husbandry. In particular should a small community of say 100 souls, concentrate on crop production solely. Or do you consider animal products essential to a balanced diet?. Think not only of the balance of the nutritional aspects but also in the short term of animals as vectors of disease.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Col.
*******************************************
SuperDave replies.....
Thank you for your observations Colonel. I fear I may be stepping out of my remit somewhat with the direction my blog is currently taking but I will attempt a brief reply.
The unrest in the Middle east is, I believe, largely a response to the ongoing interference of the western nations, primarily the USA but also Europe, Japan and the former Soviet Union states. Basically they have something we want, oil. We are happy to sell them something we have, weapons, in order to fuel the unrest and keep their eyes off the ball. They're sitting on huge reserves of oil which we want to buy for as low a price as possible. It is in the interest of the west to keep the Middle East undemocratic. If we had to deal with a bunch of well informed democracies the price of a oil would be considerably greater than it is now and the West would suffer as a result. Much better to deal with a few privileged oligarchs than a nation of millions that might decide to take the oil under state control and use it to benefit themselves (Just look at the fuss Venezuela is causing, using their nations resources to benefit the poor and underprivileged, the US really doesn't like Hugo for that, democratic or not). Perhaps they'd tax it at the well rather than it getting all the way to a western petrol pump before a western nation imposes a tax to benefit its own populace. Taxed at the well oil would, could be more efficiently and respectfully harvested and we would pay a price for the resource that had at least some relation to it's relative abundance or scarcity. Perhaps we'd live in a less developed world but maybe it would be more peaceful.
Anyway, I haven't got the time to do the research this topic (Chomsky has something interesting to say about this lack of time) requires so I will leave it there for now except for this...
Are we, as sentient beings of free will in control of our planet and our civilisation, or is it in control of us. Do we have a choice in any of this, if so we appear to be making a lot of wrong decisions.
Posted by: The Colonel | March 8, 2007 10:21 PM