Ten percent CO2 reduction per year is very easy

We can far exceed 10 percent in one year CO2 reduction (the aim of a new Irish website www.1010.ie/ and the steps taken will both cost us and save us money (in the long-run we save far more). A recent While Governments are trying to reach agreement in Copenhagen, the political agreement may fall well short of what is actually requried, so it falls to us all as individuals to reduce our consumption.  I will quantify later but I can highlight how to prioritise energy consumption.

I will outline the main areas where we can make a big impact.

1. Transport is bullet we find hardest to bite, but individual car (along with deomestic) usage are the biggest contributors to CO2 (and other greenhouse gas) emissions we have control over. There are a number of solutions which involve lifestyle changes.  These include walking (journeys of less than 2Km are often quicker by foot), cycling (definitely quicker in many urban areas), public transport (more efficient), car pooling or sharing.  The school run is the source of many emissions as once seated in the car, the driver continues to use the car for the rest of the day.  Options here are walking children to school, cycling them (with add-on seating to adult bikes), dedicated adults walking the children on their street to school. Benefits are improved health for both adult and child and saved money on petrol/diesel.  Difficulties include safety (personal and road) which can be managed by the above solutions and weather (where some compromise on using cars may be necessary).  Campaigning for cycle facilities for teenagers to cycle longer distances to school is also a solution worth pursuing (timeline will be longer than 1 year for that but a prompt start means infrastructure is available sooner).  For long trips, take the train or coach as these make up a good % of many people’s annual mileage.
2. Domestic: The greatest enegy use here is to heat (and in hot countries) to cool the home.  The best things we can do to improve our home comfort is to super insulate the house (walls & attic) and draught-proof ing also saves quite a bit of CO2 and money.  There are oil-based products like beads and fibreglass wool and natural products like cellulose, sheep’s wool and soy-based foam insulation.  Most popular are the oil-based ones but even they save far more oil within a short few years than the oil that goes into them.    How much?  Attic should be 300mm insulating wool (thermal conductivity 0.04) or half that depth if using insulating board (with thermal conductivity 0.023 or less).  Wall cavities can be pumped with insulating beads for < €1000.  These 2 measures will reduce domestic energy consumption by about 50% (probably more tha 15% of total energy consumption).  You can also save more by replacing an older boiler (many of these are only 70% efficient and at best 85%).  options here include the best condensing boilers – 97%, gas condensing 91.5% but saves quite a bit of CO2 and also a cheaper fuel, heat pumps (air source is easiest for retrofit) but ensure you’re hooked up to the most renewable energy provider, and best of all is wood fuelled providing the wood is being replanted.  Another simple measure is to replace lighting to LED (for downlighters) or CFL for regular bulbs – LED will soon be much better than CFL for regular bulbs as well.  Showering is a significant CO2 contributor and if you’ve an electric shower, for most of your time in the shower use it at the lowest pump setting (which uses less than half the power) or the middle setting may be needed in winter which is just over half the power.  If you change the boiler, having a separate circuit for space and water heating is a good thing to do although it can be expensive.
3. In work usually nobody takes ownership of energy issues.  Obvious saving includes not using air conditioning in temperate climates (where outside temperature is near 19C (66F) so a cross flow from windows open at opposite sides of the room will keep a room at ideal room temperature.  Other tasks is to ask maintenance department to reduce hot water temperature and power (these are often excessive in factories).  Lighting could be on IR sensors which turn off when no one is present.

Doing all of steps 1 and 2 will probably reduce our personal CO2 emissions by up to 50%.  Step 2 involves money spent (although probably not much for insulation and payback time is short) and step 1 probably involves money saved. Step 3 is no cost and probably saves your workplace money.  10% a year for up to 5 years is easy, it gets harder after that but new sustainable energy sources may help by then.

What might the world look like in 2050

Many of us won’t be alive then, but to achieve sustainability one our the tasks is to envision a sustainable society where the world will be in 2050 (when hydrocarbon inputs to our energy economy have been phased down to a fraction of present day).

The scenarios below are the positive case ones where we’ve globally worked out the problems and acted accordingly:

1. Per capita, we will be less affluent; people’s income will have dropped to a fraction of what it is today.
2. Global population will have reduced to under 6 billion and perhaps as low as 5 billion.
3. Quality of life may also have dropped but not by nearly as much as income – because our understanding of how to live efficiently and sustainably will be strong.
4. Domestic energy consumption will have dropped perhaps by as much as 90% because even renewable energy as a proportion of people’s income will be high. Home energy use will be very low because many people will have retrofitted their homes to consume far less.
5. Our ways of getting around will have moved away from private vehicle ownership to a variety of solutions based on demographics. E.g. urban dwellers will have integrated public transport (powered by sustainable energy) and won’t drive or even need a car most of the year – they will e.g. hire (sustainably powered) vehicles for the final legs of more awkward journeys. Rural dwellers will have car pooling and sharing schemes to reduce costs. Far more people will be walking and cycling.  Newer vehicles will be running off electric power or compressed air and cars will be designed for disassembly and will be more modular (greater standardisation) and existing fossil fuelled cars may be retrofitted as electric or compressed air.
6. The renewable energy economy will have grown massively. The world might not have one dominant source of renewable energy but a range of complimentary inputs based on geographical advantages e.g. biomass from highly forested areas, wave & tidal from NW Europe, wind power from windy climates and solar power from sunny climates like the Sahara. Energy storage techniques will also have matured and we may have large global grids to better manage power around the planet. Hybrid technologies merging the advantages of several of today’s renewable solutions will have emerged.
7. Carbon sequestration projects will be well underway. Biochar (which also replenishes soil fertility) will be a mature solution and a source of income for a percentage of rural dwellers and will have increased the land area available. Growing algae may have evolved to maturity as a means of sequestering carbon and providing energy.
8. Large poly tunnels (some of these multi-storey) will be producing much more food on smaller land footprints in climate controlled conditions.
9. Unsustainable packaging will be eliminated.  Many of today’s advertising techniques will be redundant as people (living off  tighter budgeting constraints) will understand their needs basic much better. As the costs of waste management will be high compared to incomes, motivation will not be a problem.
10. Supermarkets will be mainly replaced by local community supported agriculture markets supplying mostly local produce.
11. The world will contain significantly more forest as a source for home heating, biofuel (cellulose converted to ethanol) and as an income via carbon credits.  Food sourced biofuel will be mostly discarded as a solution apart from only the most efficient and sustainable food sources.
12. Lighting efficiency in domestic, commercial and industrial will have exceeded 150 lumens per watt and will generally be switched on and off by detection sensors rather than switches.  However, street lighting might still be used much more sparingly with increased police surveillance cameras to compensate for reduced security.
13. We will be eating far less meat having recognised that the energy and land footprint will be too large (e.g. 10 times greater for beef) to sustain the planet’s population. We will be growing more protein rich vegetables on land previously used for meat production.  Farming will have made a great resurgence and many more people will be farming but the sources of farmers income will have changed.  Urban farms will also be more popular, replacing lawns in suburbia and flat rooftops in inner cities (presently popular in Cuba).
14. We will have moved away from intensive pesticide use towards permaculture, row-cropping, intercropping and strong local food production.
15. Countries will be sharing water resources. Those with surplus rainwater will be exporting it via pipeline to areas  (within a few thousand Km) where water shortages for food production and drinking water exist. This will increase income in the water depleted countries thereby increasing regional trade and regional food security.  Water management will become much more efficient; waste water for reprocessing and drinking water will be separated.  International agreements will exist to control the waste of water resources.
16. We will be separating and reprocessing human waste. Urine as a source of fertilizers and faeces will also be used as a resource to produce fertilizers, humus and possibly biogas.  We will not be pouring present-day household chemicals into human waste systems, understanding that these contaminate this human resource processing.
17. Food will cost a much larger percentage of income, but it will also bring in a much larger percentage of money into economies than it does today.
18. Plane transport will be a fraction of what it is today and far fewer people will be flying on foreign holidays several times a year.  Plane transport may be allocated on a priority activity basis (e.g. conferences to address global problems and certain freight requirements).  Newer and slower more efficient forms of air transport e.g. airships for freight may become popular.
19. The money system will have broken down at least once the repaired version will be in a far simpler form. The stock market will no longer exist as it understood serves no useful sustainable purpose.
20. The political system will have reformed dramatically such that we have effective organisation from the global to the most local level.  People will be participating far more in decision-making rather than electing politicians and leaving them to it. Town Hall style meetings will be much more commonplace (possibly weekly).
21. The world’s poorest and most indebted countries will have the burden removed. Presently richer Countries will realize the benefit of empowering other global citizens so we can co-operate on mutual solutions and that debt is preventing this.  The poor will no longer be growing the cash crops dictated by organisations such as the IMF and World bank.  The WTO will have been abolished and will be replaced by a more wide ranging global decision making body (one which understands sustainability).
22. We will be paying a carbon subsidy to rainforest regions (especially Brazil and Indonesia) to maintain and restore their rainforest (in recognition of their importance in keeping climate change at bay).  The subsidy would be used to employ people in the work required.  These subsidies will be corruption proofed so that citizens rather than Governments benefit.
23. Patenting of seeds and lifeforms will be made irrelevant as ownership rights of our food sources and also medicines are understood to threaten our existence.  The organisation replacing the WTO will have changed patent laws away from ownership of essential food and medicines.
24. Most important of all many more innovations that haven’t yet been conceived will improve our quality of life and this will balance against many of the things we have to sacrifice to survive.

The population issue is most controversial, but with understanding of sustainability it’s easily recognised that there is no chance of humans exceeding 9 billion as suggested by many organisations. Sustainability and resource issues mean will have hit one (or many) walls long before then. The challenges are to understand sustainability and to minimise all the constraints as best we can and to develop solutions.  Disclaimer: these solutions will not work without global co-operation.

Pesticide spraying by Councils

In May 2006 I was alarmed bright orange colour of roundabouts, grass verges and underneath trees all around Galway City where I live.  I contacted the local Parks Department in City Hall to find out exactly what sprays they were using and at the 2nd time of asking they provided me with information on the chemicals and their components.

These are Casoron G (Dichlobenil), Greenway-simm Flex (simmazine & Glyphosate), Gly-flex (glyphosate), Roundup Biacative (glyphosate), Nomix Total (glyphosate & diuron). As a concerned citizen, I decided to research these products on receipt of the information. Not surprisingly, there are health concerns with many pesticide / herbicide products, since they are designed to kill living organisms.

Glyphosate (which seems the most common) is a chemical over which there is much concern. Symptoms detailed in the research on exposure to glyphosate formulations include swollen eyes, face and joints, facial numbness, burning and/or itching skin; blisters; rapid heart rate, elevated blood pressure, chest pains, congestion; coughing; headache; and nausea. There is general concern over organochlorines effect on the reproductive system and on cancer. Use of Glyphosate directly impacts a variety of nontarget animals including insects, earthworms, and fish, and indirectly impacts birds and small mammals. A study conducted by the International Organization for Biological Control found that exposure to Roundup killed over 50 percent of three species of beneficial insects (a parasitoid wasp, a lacewing and a ladybug). Repeated applications of glyphosate significantly affected the growth and survival of earthworms.

Studies have also shown that glyphosate, and in particular the “inert” ingredients in the formulation of Roundup are acutely toxic to fish. Many ingredients (known as inerts) contained in these sprays are trade secrets. However, inerts known to be included in glyphosate products include ammonium sulfate, benziothiazolone, 3-iodo-2-propynl butylcarbamate (IPBC), isobutane, methyl pyrrolidinone, pelargonic acid, sodium sulfite, sorbic acid, and isopropylamine. All of these chemicals are associated with skin irritation, gastric and respiratory problems. I raised concerns saying I hoped that stringent health and safety procedures are being used by the Council to protect any staff who are spraying.

The most recent data (1998) from California’s Department of Pesticide Regulation finds that glyphosate ranks first among herbicides as the highest causes of pesticide-induced illness or injury to people in California. A campaign called Beyond Pesticides’ pesticide incident reporting system has received numerous reports of people poisoned by exposure to glyphosate from around the US. These victims of pesticide exposure suffered from eye soreness, headaches, diarrhea, and other flu-like symptoms.

I informed the local community in Galway about the spraying of our roundabouts and verges via letters to three local newspapers.

Another chemical of great concern is 2-4-D (although I’m not sure if this is used by our local Council).

A summary of environmental Health Effects of various pesticides are listed on beyondpesticides.org.

For more information visit the pesticides and harmful chemicals links page.

No doubt similar chemicals are being sprayed by City and County Councils all over the world and by people around their homes, golf courses etc.  Often knowing they’re toxic and wearing a mask while spraying is perceived as the correct action to take, but trying to understand what it is we’re spraying is far more important.

Car pollution

Because of the focus on Climate Change, the other things being emitted by cars is often overlooked.

A short list of the likely pathogens in car exhaust:

• Carbon Monoxide
• Nitrogen dioxide
• Sulphur dioxide
• Suspended particles, PM-10 particles less than 10 microns in size.
• Benzene
• Formaldehyde
• Polycyclic hydrocarbons

These affect humans, the wider environment.  Some of these and their persistance in the environment are seen by clicking on the graphic above:

Relevant links are provided below for more background:

1. Car Exhaust – Air Pollutants
2. Automotive Exhaust Chemicals: disease causing effects -
3. Cars, Air Pollution and Health
4. Cars, Trucks, & Air Pollution

Endocrine disruption description

This is very much in lay person’s terms as the author has no medical background.

Some medical drugs (e.g. cancer supressing) cause deliberate hormone disruption in order to prevent illness of concern.

However of more concern are environmental pollutants which are not known to people having an effect such as toxic heavy metals, pesticides (which are designed to kill animals and plants) and a range of chemicals known as persistant organic pollutants (abbreviated POPs in many references) which have the effect of either blocking or mimicing what cells and by extension the body expects to happen.  Hormone mimics cause a natural response form the body to something which is not actually the real thing.  Hormone blockers block a natural response from the body from ever happening (because the blocker is in the way).

This picture from ourstolenfuture.org gives describes one type of hormone disruption (hormone blocker).

and here’s another.

And here’s one of a hormone mimic

Although in isolation, this might not have much impact (as we have so many cells), the concerns are that significant interferance by accumulative pollution in the body can cause many illness and diseases (neurological, cancer, embryo development etc.) and impacts on fertility.  Sometimes the impacts are secondary (e.g. in conjunction with other factors impacting on the body, health problems can be triggered).

For more information, see my previous related link on biomagnigication in the food chain and my relevant links page.

Solutions (agriculture) – Permaculture

Permaculture is a big part of the way forward but it involves a major shift from current (unsustainable) agriculture practices.

There are several descriptions of permaculture.  A good feel for the subject can be got in the many permaculture websites. One description is permanent agriculture. It involves the waste from some processes being used as inputs to other process, designed and zoned land use for maximum benefit and many common-sense approaches used through the times humans have been cultivating land, but bringing the understanding and implementtion together.

For me its’ simply abour efficient use of land in a way that is sustainable and in harmony with nature.

A few pictures are included to try to give a picture of different approaches to and concepts of permaculture (clicking on these goes to the source page.

Defining Sustainable jobs

Politicians are struggling to deal with the current global economic crisis and haven’t focussed on jobs.  Many of the jobs they assume will be generated and are trying  to support (if economy recovers) are simply renewing of same old jobs (e.g. the car scappage scheme to ecourage people to buy more unsustainable cars); the jobs that disappeared during the down cycle. The assumption is that once the economy is kickstarted things will return to normal. This may happen to an extent and could last for a few years, but failure to distinguish between sustainable and unsustainable economics will lead us completely in the wrong direction on jobs and back into crisis very quickly. So let’s define:
Sustainable jobs are the jobs likely to last a long time, preferably intergenerational.  They are jobs which work within  the constraints of the planet we’re living on.  Place the word sustainable before each of the following:

1. Agriculture and food production
2. Water services and quality
3. Forestry
4. Alternative sources of energy
5. Hybrid energy solutions
6. Transport (mass transit)
7. Distribution
8. Education
9. Medical
10. Waste management (including human and farm animal waste)

Sustainable distribution means a move towards localisation, particularly in food (in order to combat the inefficiency that is food miles).  With Peak Oil upon us, we can no longer sustain food miles for much longer and the cost  of doing so will become prohibitive.

Sustainable agriculture is required because at present between 10 and 20 calories are consumed in external energy sources for every 1 calorie consumed on our plates.  To address this we need to:

• Replace artificial fertilizers with natural techniques (permaculture, intercropping, row cropping etc., using animal and human waste products) as natural gas is the main source of nitrates and rock phosphates become a limited resource.
• Phase out the use of pesticides (these poisons which affect the the food chain, understanding that we’re interconnected with all plants and animals). These will be replaced by natural pest control techniques based on knowledge from around the world.
• Develop natural climate (e.g Greenhouses) food production.
• Incentivise sustainable agriculture understanding that the alternative is reacting to food crises as fertilizers and water run out.

Sustainable waste management means converting waste back to resources with preferably as little transformation and energy loss as possible.  Re-use is considered better than recycling.  Waste separation is the starting point for all this. Todays waste is tomorrow’s wealth, so better to start separating and generating that wealth now.

Sustainable education means we transfer the emphasis of all levels of education to a strong understanding of sustainability, and towards sustainable jobs.  Third level institutions are partly funded by big business many of whose interest focuses on the unsustainable economy.

Sustainable medical means we keep costs down by focussing on prevention more so than the cure.  Knowledge of medicine has increased greatly and this can be passed on.  Medicine needs to be affordable for all and access needs to be fair.

Sustainable transport means lots of things but most of all (efficiency) getting away from single vehicle occupancy to mass transit and being powered by sustainable energy.

Sustainable water management means reducing the chemical inputs to our water, managing biological concerns and separating drinking water from e.g laundry and cleaning water. It also means moving away from many of the chemicals we use in the present day.

Sustainable forestry means as far as possible growing trees suitable to a region’s climate and mainly trees which are native to the region. Very importantly it also means moving away from monocluture pesticide based management which pollutes our ground and water.

Sustainable and hybrid enegy solutions is one area that a lot of work is going into.  Understanding of the potential of each solution is important here so that money is spent wisely.

Men are stupid

…   at least if said men live in London, UK.

According to a YouGov poll of 500 Londoners, men care less about the environment than their female counterparts (four times less if this poll is to be believed).

On the poll, Gloria Moss, Research Fellow, University of Glamorgan Moss concludes: “Moreover there is a cross-cultural research that shows men may act in a more individualistic way than women, and women with a greater eye for the collective good. Following from this asking people to take action for the greater good of mankind, rather than for the good of the individual, may have more appeal to women than men. This may be an additional factor in the greater interest shown by women in environmental issues as reflected in this survey.”

Although there are many men involved in environmentalism, it does raise talking points:

1. Men are more inclined to go to war and fight over resources.
2. Until recently men were more inclined to drive big cars. The number of SUVs and jeeps on the school run driven primarily driven by women indicates a change in the female mindset (although the motivation may be different).
3. Is it something to do with living in a big City with all its hustle and bustle that makes it harder for men to focus on the environment?  Perhaps there is a greater physical disconnect with nature. London has some nice parks, but maybe there are more women using them than men.  More agressive male traits may come out in the more urban environment in contrast to people surrounded by nature which calms us down.

If men are worse, the reason is difficult to identify. It’s possible the survey is flawed or biaised.

What the statement “men are stupid”identifies is that if we are to educate people to change, experts in psychology are required to help us understand motivation; education in its own right is probably not enough. We live in an age of information overload. Understanding of motivation and effective communication is required to encourage people to change for the better – as the alternative is change being forced upon us.

Solutions – Motor Cars #3 (ownership and lifestyle)

As the peak oil issue is expected by some analysts to get  to crisis point again by 2012. Whenever this happens many drivers will see their vehicle occupancy numbers and fuel efficiency as much more important.  Even in rural areas without much access to public transport, people will be looking for alternative lifestyle solutions.

There are a number of approaches:

1. Community lobbying for mass transit – e.g. minibuses in rural areas and a range of integretated transport options in larger urban areas. If the community has lobbied for something, it is more likely to avail of it when delivered. Of course this depends on the Community wanting to change.
2. Car pool and split the costs.
3. Take public transport where available and set up car rental systems like the zipcar system to join the dots.
4. Community transport co-ops (villages or streets decide to get a specific number of cars of different sizes and tax / insure collectively). People can avail of small light economic vehicles for single passenger journeys and larger vehicles for more passengers and goods. The system can be as flexible as people want it to be.
5. Shared school runs.  A lot of money and time is wasted on the school run, and the very environment we’re supposed to be protecting for our children is being damaged. As people economise in recessionary times there will be a natural tendency to pool resources, but a big push is needed to make shared school runs the dominant culture.

The bottom line is commuting patterns are very likely to change dramatically not necessarily by choice in a relatively short period of time.  We have an opportunity to adapt systems which are more environmentally friendly and reduce resource depletion, and reduce the loss of money from our pockets.

We need to address air pollution from combustion engine waste as with Climate Change being seen as the environmental threat we tend to overlook lots of other environmental problems. There is also a balance between wasting more resources to build new eco cars (see posts 1 & 2 on motor car solutions) versus retro fitting existing cars with eco engines.  Therefore ownership and lifestyle habits have a big part to play so long as a spirit of co-operation can be fostered (no doubt some will see the benefit, but for others the individualism of the affluent era may be a more difficult corner to turn).  Lets hope the co-operative approach becomes the dominant one.

How long will we last (human causes)

Unsustainable living practices means most of mankind will be lucky to survive this Century – probably the ultimate challenge for mankind. Most of the human race faces mass poverty and population collapse unless the situation is adequately understood by the masses and unless adequate action takes place an a number of broad fronts.

Jared Diamond on a recent video on TED, says there are a dozen or more great problems all with different “time fuses”. The correct apprpoach should not be to deal with one or two but to deal with all of them.

Many of the problems are interlinked by failed thought processes, but conversely comprehensive understanding combined with corrective action can fix several problems at the same time.  By focussing on  timelines the urgency of the need for prompt action becomes aparrent.

Major issues impacting us and some discussion on timeline and associated population decline are as follows:

1. Man-made global warming which we all know about. Timeline – 1 to 10 decades. The positive feedback scenarios accelerating its impact include melting ice, inability of the oceans to adsorb any more CO2, thawing Tundra and evaporating deep ocean methane hydrates (both release large amounts of methane which is over 20 times more potent than CO2), and destruction of rain forest. Despite its seriousness there is a danger of over focussing on just this one problem, because we miss the even bigger picture.  More impacts are loss of arable land, (fresh) water depletion and sea level rise.  A few degrees higher and a huge proportion of the Amazonian rainforest could go up in flames, another great resource will be lost there’s also a large knock on affect on global and local population. Allowing it to happen is like allowing limbs to be severed.  Methane release from melting Tundra could also accelerate the positive feedback system very quickly. The population imact will vary according to the severity.
2. Resource depletion – about 0-150 years. “Peak oil” and gas are the most talked about but many natural resources are being depleted. Regular oil already peaked in 2007 and is oil production expected to becomes a crisis before 2012. Gas is expected to peak in the next 10-25 years.  Rock phosphate is incredibly important as we use it for fertilizer (estimates vary as to how quickly it will deplete from around 60 to 150 years). Land based Uranium has a few decades of consumption available if its use continues to increase. Coal has a few Centuries at currrent depletion levels and clean coal seems a bit unlikely.  Nature’s gifts are being squandered by massive wastage (poor building designs, grossly inefficient transport, food miles etc. etc.).  Our perception throughout the 20th Century of fossil fuel was that supplies were infinite. Energy alternatives developed only take up a small percentage of our requirements to date.  These will increase, but it’s presently at a reactive rather than proactive rate.  Few of us know how to grow our own food or secure our own water or be in any way self-sufficient – we have “un-learned” these skills and are totally dependent on industrialised farming and production. Note, oil & gas = fertilizers + plastics + clothes + food production + irrigation + raw material for a large percentage of our consumer products. Without a “peak oil plan”, we can expect the population depletion curve to closely resemble the oil& gas depletion curve – possibly the greatest population decline of all the threats.  The oil Companies involved in exploration have scaled down their activities at present due to declining profits; not a bad thing if sustainable energy were to fill the void, but that’s also being scaled down in the last 12-18 months.
3. Peak water – essential for life, water is depleting but the time line is very difficult to predict. Three Countries which produce the most food (US, India & China) are heavily dependent on irrigated land. [ Check out any works of Lester Brown and David Pimental ]. Many large populations are living in otherwise inhospitable locations e.g. Las Vegas, Saudi Arabia.  Take away air conditioning and you have a huge quality of life issue, when the water goes, people will have to relocate to survive, leading to likely conflict (see point 9).
4. Water quality – perhaps a few generations unless addressed. Even in water abundant countries water quality is becoming a serious problem and although biological threats can be reduced, chemical contamination (e.g. household detergents) and chemical control (Chlorination) and unwanted dental protection (Flouridation) and a range of pollutants (see previous post on water) are thought to have human health problems which we can expect to worsen as some chemical pollution bioaccumulates in each subsequent generation and others which don’t last as long in our systems may still have a genetic legacy. This could be addressed by separating drinking water from recycled waste water or by household rainwater collaction in appropriate climates.
5. Loss of biodiversity. Timeline – less than a Century. Fish stocks, forests (legal & illegal timber trade), following agri-giants who endorse just a few varieties – in short the rapid /rabid human encroachment on nature. The rate of extinction in nature is estimated at 100 times the background level by the UN. One of Asia’s rice producing Countries has reduced the varieties of rice grown from hundreds to just four.
6. Death of bees (following on from biodiversity above). In terms of our short term extinction (as bees pollinate so many plants on which we ultimately depend) – this is the most critical issue of all at present but it is not getting much attention. See the earlier post on Colony Collapse Disorder.  If the bees disappear, about a third of pollination goes rougly probably translates to a third of humans.  Timeline – perhaps 4 years from crisis point if we don’t address it.
7. Pollution – worst case is what is known as “persistent organic pollution” (POPs). These stay for a long time in the environment, many have endocrine disrupting properties and some are mutagen’s (genetic altering). They bio-magnify in the food chain and accumulate over generations (mothers also pass them on in the womb and in breast milk). The growing waste mountain means land, water and air are increasingly polluted. Incineration is seen as a solution for some, but if this were e.g. 90% effective in preventing air pollution, that 90% is landfilled as toxic ash in a landfill that will eventually leak to our water systems. We’re leaving a massive toxic legacy which also includes nuclear waste and trusting future generations to have the wherewithal to manage it.  The Earth, water and the atmosphere are also victims of industrial, transport and domestic pollution as we fail to see the atmosphere as finite.  houshholders make a significant contribution by their use of energy and choice of household and personal cleaning agents.  Although regulation is limiting somewhat (rather than eliminating) the many forms of pollution, this is also being offset by the ever increasing number of people on the planet.  Timeline – a few generations as some forms of pollution bioaccumulate.
8. Genetically modified foods – are as much about giant agri-business attempting (with significant success) to patent life, dominate ownership of all the food we eat, dictate what pesticides we use (killing biodiversity and harming our health (although it is claimed less so than predominant industrial farming practices)).  The aim seems to be more about power and making a lot of money than any claims to feed the poor. The public is by and large oblivious to this threat (we’re passengers of a vehicle being driven by a dangerous driver rather than taking the wheel ourselves). The science also needs to be examined  because an enormous ammount of scientific validation needs to take place before spreading GM seeds around the planet. If genetic modification fails on any one essential food source leading to extinction risk for all those dependent. Land grabbing is taking place, particularly in Africa.  Our dormant society needs to wake up to the power game.
9. Conflict.  This is unpredictable, but the probems listed above are all likely to lead to increased conflict unless we learn from conflict resolution techniques which are already out there but haven’t been adequtely put to use. Spirituality has taken a big hit in the consumer boom just ended.  A global peaceful mindset is required – leaders have their work cut out but a big role to play.
10. Population.   The planet cannot cope with anything close to the current population once unsustainable agriculture comes to end with the demise of natural gas fertilizers followed by rock phosphate, along with the arable land reduction through pollution, destruction, overproduction and climate change.  The predicted 9 or 10 billion is unthinkable in terms of a sustainability.  The global population was hundreds of millions before the Industrial Revolution and at times regions suffered hugely.  We have more knowledge and skills now, but there are more than 10 times more of us now than historically. Spiritual leaders need to be persuaded about the importance that family sizes need to be small for the sake of these very same families.
11. Economic failure.  Timeline uncertain.  Creating overcomplicated systems and then trying to adjust them with a magic spanner or by adding a new component is unlikely to work.  THe more elaborate and complicated a system is, the more prone it is to failure. A current example is banks current reluctance to lend, and a drop in the number of Wind Turbine orders since the 2nd half or 2008. Following a drop in prices, Oil and Coal Companies have also cut back on their spending – good for humanity but indicative how the economic system is failing them.  Of course these situations could reverse if the economy turns, but the problem will repeatedly be revisited unless economics systems which actually work are developed.

Conclusion:

Our impact on the planet is more a case of a collective failure to learn from past mistakes such as Easter Island and for political reasons a failure to dicuss beyond the sort and medium term. The end result (including focus on simply fixing the economic crisis) is self-destruction. A great effort is needed to deal with the problems and reverse them, but with recognition and action, many problems can be solved (and the effort involved creates much work).  Public opini$on needs to change (as politicians tend to respond to this more than to lead any unpopular but necessary action).