Search Now:

These perceptive authors have been ignored by most people, often, no doubt, because most have been unwilling to open their minds to something challenging the common view. People have to be motivated to sit down and read these books and assimilate their message. It takes a lot of time and thinking to change one's mindset. I have been through that process, largely in the past decade. I find it disturbing that the education system continues to be steeped in the view that humans are in control of biosphere operations. The true biophysical reality is really very simple. There is no need for a complicated set of arguments. But people have to be prepared to change their mindset to think through and so appreciate this biophysical reality. I look forward to the slow awakening with some hope that some people will rise to the challenge of ameliorating the decline to a limited extent. But those who are prepared to confront biophysical reality now will be in a better position to face the future. I hope my views contribute to the necessary understanding.

Before I begin to present my view in some detail, I will point out that misleading terminology often clouds the issues. I do not use this misleading terminology below but I need to point it out so that you can more easily relate to what is being said.

It is common to see 'renewable energy' in articles on the evolving energy situation. Energy cannot be renewed. It always degrades to waste heat when used. That is an irreversible process, just like time passing. That is an immutable natural law that almost everyone does not think about. The use of the term 'renewable energy' obscures this fact. The Sun supplies almost all our energy. Some of this has been stored in the fossil fuels for eons. We draw down on this energy capital by extracting and using the fossil fuels. Some, including Georgescu-Roegen, prefer to call it 'store energy'. Sunshine continually provides our 'energy income' (or flow energy). Plants rely on this to drive their growth. We can harness some of this energy income directly (with PV cells) or indirectly (hydro, wind etc) but we have to use other natural resources to set up the system to accomplish this. This energy income is what is meant when the term 'renewable energy' is misleadingly used.

It is common to talk in terms of energy as though it exists in isolation. In fact most discussions of energy in the business world treat it as a commodity. This can also be misleading, as energy is an attribute of materials except when it is insolation (sunshine). It is the waste material that causes pollution from an energy process (like coal combustion that produces a number of greenhouse gases plus particular matter and slag). The energy itself becomes waste heat that does little harm. There is appreciable talk about 'clean energy' production methods. That is shorthand for using methods where attempts are made to remove the waste material from the process. And, of course, energy is not 'produced'. That word conveys the wrong impression again. It gives the impression that it is within the powers of humans to produce it. Using, for example, the chemical energy in coal producing steam to drive a turbine generates electrical energy. Or it can be generated by the kinetic energy in winds turning a turbine. In all these cases, there is a transformation of one form of energy to another with the ultimate destiny of being waste heat.

Now on to my view of what has happened. Many speculate on why human society has so wantonly used natural resources for its exuberant purposes, without considering the legacy they are leaving future generations - do without - and what they are doing to their life support system. We humans, a single species among millions, consume about forty percent of Earth's primary productivity, forty percent of all there is. Greedy lot, are we not. Basically we do this because we have been conditioned to believe that money is the deciding factor on what can be done. We would all like to be wealthy, even though it gives us more capability to consume irreplaceable natural resources.

It was and still is the grand delusion. Money is an abstraction we invented. We cannot eat money. We cannot use it as a fuel for our cars and planes. It is not a building material. Everything we do and use really does require the consumption of natural resources and the use of natural services. And we do not pay for that. Think about that. Even listening to music requires prior consumption of food and drink, courtesy of natural production systems even if abetted by human assistance using up energy resources. And we take it for granted that we are able to breathe as we listen to the music. Money can buy you goods and services only so long as nature can continue to supply the energy and material. And some, like oil globally and water in many regions, are becoming scarce.

It really is quite ironical. We know that time passes irreversibly. We are aware of our own mortality in spite of wishful thinking. Yet we collectively ignore the fact that we are using up many natural resources irreversibly. We would not spend our own capital thoughtlessly yet we deem it permissible to draw down on global natural capital. That is a much more serious matter as it affects everyone.

Some of the natural resources we use, like the air we breathe, are naturally recycling, albeit contaminated by the pollution our industries produce. It is one of the wonders of nature that photosynthesis in plants provides the supply of oxygen essential to our existence. We, with the other animals, reciprocate by providing some of the carbon dioxide the plants need to grow. We think so little of this natural wonder that we cut down the forests that largely drive this process so we can produce junk mail.

We also provide a surplus of carbon dioxide by burning fossil fuels to power our cars to save us from walking or riding. Gaia is showing a very limited ability to absorb this surplus of carbon dioxide. The oceans are absorbing some but this is affecting marine life. Many people are devastated by the prospect of the Great Barrier Reef dying. Yet these same people drive their cars or fly so they can enjoy this tourist delight - whilst it remains. The atmosphere also gives signs of being unable to cope. There are clear signs that the global climate is changing largely because of the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. The reduction of sea ice in the Arctic Ocean is just one sign amongst a multitude that are worrying climatologists - and thinking people. The indigenous people are often the most aware of what is happening. Some people, however, maintain that we are not causing this change. But the business people most concerned, the insurers, think other wise. And we will have to learn to cope with these changes because they are irreversible.

Other natural resources, like oil, are exhaustible. And we cannot replace them with our cleverness. We can produce partial substitutes, like fuel from coal, at ecological cost. There are also those resources that are slowly naturally replenishable, like forests, which we are using at an alarming rate. I need not go on as I am sure readers can think of many others in each category. In short, there are too many humans consuming too many resources. We are like a plague in that respect. Morrison entitled his book Plague Species with good reason. But we go further; we produce enormous amounts of gaseous, liquid and material wastes. Some of these wastes do little harm. They just fill dumps. Others, however, are devastating the environment and even changing the climate. Many are also harming our health in insidious fashion. Nature has a remarkable recycling capability but that does not extend to most of the waste our industrial system generates.

This brings up another misleading term. Many talk about how good we have become in 'recycling' our wastes. They ignore the ecological cost of this 'recycling' which is not really recycling but just extending the life of the waste. Nature does a good recycling job but we have failed lamentably to be able to emulate nature in this regard.

We are starting to understand another area in which we have unknowingly created many problems. Clever people have created chemically many products that supposedly add to our lives by easing tasks or augmenting capabilities or making us look better. Many of these are foreign to the natural systems, which are unable to cope. The dramatic increase in cancer is just one example of the deleterious impact of chemical products. There are even signs that our use of such products is changing the ratio between female and male births. The EU is belatedly introducing measures to ensure that companies establish that products they plan to put on the market are not harmful.

In summary then, we humans are each an ecological debit during our lifetime, some much more than others. My debt to the ecology would have been about average for those in developed countries. I thought it great, at the time, to drive many kilometers in Europe, North America as well as Australia. I gave no thought to the fact that I was using up more than my fair share of an irreplaceable natural resource. Those with splendid homes and many cars and other symbols of a luxuriant lifestyle have become even more indebted to Gaia, but they will not have to pay. But their grandchildren will. There is a general claim that market forces ensure the distribution of these goods and services. It is a pity that these forces act in the wrong direction. They drive consumption. They drive the destruction of the material foundations of society. They are killing civilization's body.

Today's wealthy people have enjoyed their free lunch and their descendents will belatedly abuse them for it. Contrast our ecological indebtedness with that of the kangaroo or the elephant or the lion or the whale. And what do we do to earn ecological credit - nothing. We may do things that human society value but we do not improve the environment. We invariably degrade it to satisfy our wants as well as our needs. The consequence of our exuberance is that the foundations our global society is dying. That is an immutable fact. It is dying more rapidly in some regions, like Africa, than in others but that is because developed countries have better developed their techniques of importing natural resources from other regions.

I find it quite disconcerting that so many knowledgeable people can be so selective about what they consider to be the worst symptom of the malaise that humans have inflicted on Gaia. There is appreciable uncertainty about when the peak rate of extraction of oil has or will occur. It will quite likely cause a major recession in due course. But so many are focused on the energy situation that it is likely that remedial action in that area will actually exacerbate the holistic problem.

There is little uncertainly that climate change is already underway. This is another major symptom and one we should already be using some of our remaining resources on mitigating operations. That will not be done until misleading terminology is cast aside and reality faced. Decreasing 'emissions' is really decreasing the 'rate of emissions', that is, decreasing the rate at which the level of greenhouse gases are increasing. When the people trying to tackle climate change realize that then they will be in a better position to adapt to this irreversible process. Yes, it is irreversible because natural processes cannot handle the current rate of increase in greenhouse gas levels. This rate is many hundred times any previous natural rate.

There are many other symptoms. The loss of fertile soil is having a significant effect in many regions globally. Our peak research organization, CSIRO, has carefully documented the damage that has been done in the two hundred years of European style agriculture in Australia. But the governments have encouraged little mitigating action. This probably because there is little that cab be done. Our problems in that regard pale by comparison with what is happening in China and elsewhere.

The draw down of aquifer water, de-forestation and desertfication are other symptoms. Concentrating on particular symptoms does not help to address the holistic problem. There is an urgent need to prioritize where we use the natural resources to the best effect - for Gaia and for us. This is particularly important with respect to oil. Oil has been the cheap source of concentrated energy that has powered industrialization and the Green revolution. It has enabled the explosive growth in the global population. Paul Ehrlich summed the situation up with "Giving society cheap abundant energy at this point would be equivalent to giving an idiot child a machine gun." And we have made good use of that machine gun.

I find it fascinating that most people are unable to come to grips with the fact that the operation of industrial society is unsustainable. The majority just don't get that fooling with Mother Nature has consequences - as in Newton's third law - "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction." They seem unable to comprehend that the draw down of natural capital cannot continue, even if the population and its consumption were to stop growing. This is incomprehensible, as most people are familiar with how a car operates. They know that fuel is being used, even if they are just cruising. Many are not used to thinking in terms of rate of fuel usage but they understand what is happening. Yet they do not liken the usage of oil to an emptying fuel tank. They are encouraged in this delusion by common terminology, like 'oil production'.

So our civilization is dying. That is a fact that needs to be faced so that as much as possible can be done to ease the pain. There is a real challenge in converting society from having to doing. Sharing the remaining exhaustible resources to get the most value is imperative. Providing the means to conserve the best of our culture will not be easy but it should be done. Reducing the rate of ecological devastation without using too many resources is a real challenge for our brightest. Understanding what our activities are doing to natural checks and balances, including those in our bodies, will provide a worthwhile career for many. But the biggest problem to be tackled is the reduction of the human population. It will occur, by natural means if no other.

Who knows what can be done to relieve the pain?

–  Denis Frith, Melbourne, Oz

Plague Species by Reg Morrison (New Holland ISBN 1876334916) appears to be out of print already, despite a 2003 publication date. Hassle the publishers enough and a reprint may be possible, assuming normal reasons for being unavailable: HEAD OFFICE New Holland Publishers (UK) Ltd Garfield House 86-88 Edgware Road London W2 2EA UK Tel: +44 (0) 20 7724 7773 Fax: +44 (0) 20 7724 6184 Email: enquiries@nhpub.co.uk See Ink News for a review.

---

| Back | Index | Soil, Minerals and Life Support |

---