In another class, I was assigned to
read Erle C. Ellis’ New York Times article “Overpopulation Is Not the
Problem” (1) as part of our discussion of environmental health and the
ever-present concern that our planet will not be able to sustain an
ever-growing population. I was
first taken aback by Ellis’ bluntness when he wrote, “Disaster looms as humans
exceed the earth’s natural carrying capacity. Clearly, this could not be sustainable. This is nonsense” (1). He goes on to write that with the
development of technology, the planet has been able to go from a carrying
capacity of ~100 million prehistoric hunter-gatherers to ~3 billion farmers “in
poverty or near-vegetarian diets” (1).
Today, the world’s population is estimated to be just shy of 7.2 billion
people and counting (2), thanks to the technological advances we as the human
race have developed (1).
I agree with his argument that
“humans are niche creators [and that we] transform ecosystems to sustain
ourselves,” however, one aspect I feel he fails to address is our use/depletion
of natural resources at a rate that is exponentially faster than the rate of
replenishment of those resources.
Natural gas and oil were not created in a day (and I will add a girl’s
best friend(s), diamonds, although they are more a luxury than a source of
energy). Although we know the
process of how Mother Nature has created these, we do not have control over
time. As we tap into more and more
wells, digging further and deeper in to the Earth, we are not only depleting
the stores we had, but we are also changing the ecosystem that originally
created those resources. Of
course, there are some areas of Earth that have not been “disturbed,” but in
our capitalist world, where materialistic possessions are becoming greater and
greater, the demand for gasoline and coal is increasing as we observe
developing countries try to adopt developed countries’ habits (take for example
the smog cloud in Beijing, China, which is visible from outer space (3)). Developed countries are making efforts
to develop alternative energy sources (through tax breaks mainly) but I don't believe that our
progress is meeting the demand, partly due to the slow progress of research
or the cost ineffectiveness of the new methods. I remember when I was looking at buying a car, a hybrid
seemed like a great choice, and although they would save gasoline costs over
the years, hybrid vehicles were at least $5000 more expensive than “gas
guzzlers.” Additionally, replacing
and recycling of the batteries in those vehicles is costly and in recent news,
there is a risk of fires in the over $75000 Tesla vehicles (4). Costs involved in being “green” are
extensive and it would require everyone to switch to hybrid vehicles, to bring
costs down. Until then, those who
cannot afford it (i.e. developed
countries, people of lower socio-economic status) will still drive their
high-emission vehicles, so as a planet, we need to address these issues
together because we share the air and our environment – country borders are
completely irrelevant which calls for global attention.
I think it's important to recognize as well that the continued depletion of our ecosystems and global environment is effecting the entire global community, not just those that have embraced new technologies and industrialization. I was fortunate enough this past summer to spend time in the Brazilian Amazon in the protected Kayapo Indigenous Territory. The particular village we stayed in (A'Ukre) can be reached only by boat or a 45 minute plane ride from the nearby border town of Tucuma. The Kayapo have been largely successful in preserving one of the largest contiguous areas of rain forest in the world (their land is roughly the size of South Korea), and this ecosystem is crucial to the maintenance of of the global environment, particularly in the reduction of CO2 emissions. Many of the land rights they have came as a result of the public outreach of tribal elders in the 1980s and 1990s in response to the proposed building of damns that would flood their ancestral lands. However, the sheer size of their land makes it logistically difficult (if not impossible) to patrol and protect all borders at all times. While we were there, the Kayapo were fighting the intrusion of gold miners, rubber tappers, and ranchers (as they have since the 1950s) who are illegally breaching border zones with few repercussions. The impact of these industries is strikingly clear when you fly over- you can literally see a line that demarcates previously exploited land from Kayapo territory. Furthermore, the land is again being threatened by the proposed building of a damn just north of their territory; although the damn would be built outside of their land, the resulting flood plain would necessitate the relocation of thousands of individuals and severely impact delicate ecosystems. In the last couple of months, indigenous groups from all over Brazil have united to protest the proposed changes in legislation that would remove some of the land protections and rights that they have maintained since the 1980s. Unfortunately in Brazil, as in so many other places worldwide, the potential for income generation for a relative few (most of whom have already decimated their own land) threatens to take precedence over an irreplaceable ecosystem.
ReplyDelete