The following is my take on a selection from Environmental Studies, by Thomas Easton. This is it in a nutshell, tried to get the just of what the author was saying. Please leave a comment of your take on these issues.
Every year, roughly the equivalent of the population of Germany is being added to the global population. It will perhaps take thirty to fifty of this equivalence before the Earth will not be able to sustain its population.
There are many risks to think about when dealing with a sustainable population for our environment and future. Restrictions and guidelines may not be the solution to our population problem. Also the claims that there is no connection between these environmental problems and population are inaccurate.
The main concern should be about how much resources we take from the Earth before it can no longer renew those that we depend on, and is permanently damaged. This idea is represented by the equation I=PAT[i]. This takes into account the size of our population (P), multiplied by the amount of resources we consume per person (A), multiplied by the damage created to extract resources with the given technologies in use at the time (T); these variables will equal the environmental impact we have on the Earth. The AT variables of the equation are also referred to as the amount of high energy we use. Examples of this high energy are things like production and use of vehicles, heating and powering of our homes and cutting down or mining for resources; all of which if not carefully planned to be sustainable are harmful to the planet. As result as our population increases, so does our impact on Earth.
Although we use this energy in our societies, some forms of energy are more efficient than others. For instance, it is hard to measure the actual impacts of say cutting down trees for fire wood to heat homes, to that of plugging in your electric car. Both use energy, but some are better for the environment than others.
Our impacts can be said to be due to our increasing population, and the harmful impacts that it has on our planet. Impacts include actions such as deforestation, polluting the air and water, and destroying our fertile land, all of which can be seen as the ending to these natural cycles that naturally replenish themselves, while provide us with the resources we need. Destroying these systems not only diminishes the amount of resources on society, but also deprives us of the free services they provide; such as clean air, water and fertile land.
The misconception that out of control birthrates of developing nations are to blame for our over population and environmental issues is exactly the opposite of what is really happening. It is in fact the developed nations are at fault, as they consume more resources than developing nations.
If we continue to attack the Earth like this; taking more than we put back, we will be left with a large population that has no resources to support itself or future generations.
The fact that most of us want elaborate commodities, spacious homes and room to get away, leads us to a sustainable population of about one third of our current population i of approximately two billion people. This number is based on the amount of energy we use, roughly thirteen terawatts globally. This means if we want a larger population sustainably, we either need to cut back on the things we want, or improved technology to produce these commodities.
When looking at necessities, there are three resources that should be at the top of the list; topsoil, ground water, and biodiversity. Today however, we are using up these resources at an unnatural replacement rate.
We are pumping out ground water for irrigation faster than it can replenish itself, putting our and future generations at risk of water shortages.
Top soil is eroding at inches per decade, alarming because it usually grows at inches per millennium.
The most import of these three factors is the loss of biodiversity. Too many species and organisms are being taken or killed off, damaging the systems that keep our planets ecosystems working. Species diversity is diminishing at an alarming rate compared to the natural extinction rate that occurs over time. This type of extinction hasn’t occurred since the extermination of the dinosaurs, some sixty five million years ago. i
At the rate we are going, our energy use is not sustainable in the long run, we are digging ourselves a deeper hole with every increase in population. Antics claim that technology will save us but at a thirteen terawatt addiction to power, based on limited fossil fuels, technology can only do so much. If we hope to be sustainable the number needs to be four to six terawatts, living comfortably.
Our population won’t stop expanding until it levels off at about ten billion, leaving the condition of our environment uncertain. There is no humane way of reducing the number of humans alive; we can only hope to reduce the population by means of birthrate regulation.
To be sustainable, total fertility rates (TFR) will need to be reduced and regulated if we hope to live sustainable with the environment. However countries like China, have populations so enormous, that even if we capped birthrates and reduces TFR, their population would still grow by about half a billion before levelling off.
Governments around the world will have to own up to their countries responsibility, regulating and maintaining low TFR, by promoting good family practices that lower overall population to a sustainable level.
Lower populations with good resource management will be needed for future generations to flourish.
No comments:
Post a Comment