The Irish Times, in an editorial on the 1/4/2014,
called for action on climate change.
This is not the first time the newspaper alluded to this subject nor
were the views of its correspondents and contributors over years any
different. However, the newspaper
fails to allude to or advise about the real solutions to environmental and
population problems. It underlines
the threat but it provides no practical means of a solution. The editorial was critical of our
government for its lack of action in dealing with matters which were a threat
to the environment and to the future of humanity but our government is no
different from the shortcomings of other world governments.
The Irish Times at least has the distinction that it
shows concern for the future of the planet and humanity unlike our other
leading newspapers who show little interest or sense of balance in the subject.
The same may be said about the leading British papers. No papers, British or Irish,
including the Irish Times, give any attention to human population which has
increased threefold during the last 70 years, a trend which shows no slowing or
stopping. Currently, according to the WHO and other sources the number of births among humans exceeds
deaths by 80 million annually. Added to the excessive birth rate we have the
remarkable and progressive increase in human longevity over the past hundred
years. There is no any evidence that this increase shows any tendency to slow
or reverse. Since 1980 to 2012, over a period of 32 years in the UK, male
longevity has increased from 71 to 79.5 years and female longevity has
increased from 77 to 83.2. This is confirmed by a WHO report. The Irish figures
are similar to those of the British. Increasing longevity exists worldwide and
adds to the effects of the excesss of births over death.
Sustainability is the magic word of the politicians
and most environmentalists who claim to be concerned about the ecology and the
threat to Nature. Sustainability I
presume refers to the earth’s natural resources which maintain the health and
wellbeing of nature in its widest sense but sustainability has its limitations
and the politicians have little insight into the real threat facing humanity
and our living world. I quote from
the Worldwatch Institute in 2013 about this magic word, sustainability, used by
the politicians which has
“…lost its meaning and impact. Worse, its frequent and inappropriate
use lulls us into the dreamy belief that all of us – everything we do,
everything we buy, everything we use – are able to go on forever, world without
end, amen.”
The failure to achieve any worthwhile progress in
protecting Nature and humanity during the many government summits during the
last 30 years or more is too obvious and no doubt the same results will prevail
following the next United Nations meeting fixed for France next year. And those of us who have been trained
in epidemiology, in the study of human and natural trends in the world, must
know that the continued expansion in the human population and its rapid depletion
of nature’s resources are leading to a disaster which is proceeding more
rapidly than we realise. Our
politicians and many of our organisations devoted to the environment and to the
welfare of humanity fail to provide solutions which might save us from
disaster. Nor does the public seem
overly concerned. The solutions
occasionally put forward for change are far removed from the fundamental
problems which are at the basis of the immediate threat to Nature and humanity,
and these problems need to be dealt with radically and promptly if we are to
survive the current crisis.
There should be a prohibition of unnecessary travel by
private car, plane and rail as long as they depend on fossil fuels. Energy in the form of domestic and
public heating must be curbed by means of clothing or other forms of protection
and energy must be sought from renewable sources only and for this we need sun,
wind and water. Progress in these
areas will not be easy but it is not beyond our ability to achieve solutions if
our commitment is strong. We
already have wind and water power and some solar power in the use of fridges,
lights, phones and heating devices.
We must revert to community living and we must provide
our food as much as possible from our immediate surroundings. The vegetable and fruit allotments will
be as essential to us as the very houses we live in. Household gardens which are currently non-productive can be
sources of food production. So can wasteland. Rainwater can be used and
utilised to a much greater extent as a response to our current water
extravagance. Surely every house
in the country should have a butt to collect rainwater. Big reductions in water can be
achieved by good husbandry in the home and the office and by commercial
organisations. The water tax
should be imposed and should be applied to all except under very unusual
circumstances.
people per km2 |
We need to reverse the current trend of adding more to
the population of our cities and towns, and reverting to community life and
living in the countryside. This trend may be unavoidable because of the
increasing rise of the ocean and the flooding of our coastal cities and
towns. Goods and luxuries which are
widely manufactured by commercial companies and which deplete our energy sources
are not necessary for our daily needs.
They should be curbed. We
also dispose of huge amounts of food in the more prosperous parts of the world,
and such waste should be fully conserved for domestic and other animals.
There is failure to understand, recognise and prevent
the rapid loss of plant and animal species. We have lost the elm and soon the
ash will be gone unless by some miracle it is saved – a disaster to our
countryside and our country. And other trees are threatened too. Minister of
State Tom Hayes, in his contribution to the All Ireland meeting of politicians
and silviculturists last May, had this to say
While chalara (the cause of the ash dieback) is the subject of
to-day’s conference, it is taking place at a time when it seems that Ireland’s
forests are under attack from a number of different sources, both biotic and
abiotic. The increase in the number of new findings of phytophthora ramorum is a serious concern. Since 2012 the
number of infected larch sites has increased from 16 to 30. P ramorum is an aggressive disease and is causing
significant damage to Japanese larch and is also infecting Noble fir, beech and
Spanish chestnut at a number of infected larch areas.
Added to this we must add the rapid loss of land and
ocean ice. The ocean’s rise in level, temperature and acidity, the drying up of
lakes and rivers and the rapid and critical rise in atmospheric CO2 are already
upon us. CO2 in the earth’s atmosphere is a greenhouse gas and its accumulation
leads to earth warming. It has
remained at the same level, under 300mgs per cent, for millions of years but
recently, since 1955, when it was measured at about 330mgs, it has now reached
400mgs and it is clear that this rise continues exponentially – which presages
the further gathering rise in greenhouse gases and therefore in the earth’s
temperature. The accumulation of
CO2 has been largely caused by the burning of fossil fuels. It is generally agreed by scientists
that this rise can be a serious threat to the earth and its inhabitants and
that at best it needs to be kept at or below a level of about 400 parts per
million.
Above all, there are too many people in the world,
with a population still advancing in numbers. Even in the most healthy and natural environment the good
God gave us, it is unlikely we can survive with such numbers of humans, now
about 7.2 billion. The population
in 1940 was estimated at 2.5 billion and the recent trebling is estimated to
increase further at a rate of 80 million every year. We will be close to 8 billion humans on the earth by the
year 2022 or 2023. There is no
doubt that we as a species are in complete denial about our future. Our lack of insight into our current
circumstances are beyond understanding and the threat to our future should be
obvious to our collective intelligence.
We might
understand that those who believe in God and a better world hereafter might be
less concerned about our future here on earth but the Godless at least should
be cognisant of our criminal neglect of Nature and the future of our children
and the natural world on which we depend for our existence. The only feasible
way we can avoid Nemesis is to return to a strict community life where we avoid
unnecessary luxuries and where we can, as far as it’s possible, depend solely
on our own needs and without the need for continuous fossil fuel loss. Perhaps
we also need keep our distance from the flora and fauna of distant and foreign
lands.
We might of course find some comfort and consolation
in humanity’s ability to face necessary problems with great ingenuity through
the internet, particularly in terms of communication and travel reduction. The internet might well provide the
means of humanity living tolerable and even better lives. Homo sapiens has an unlimited ability and ingenuity to
respond if the need is great. We
might survive at a community level through such changes as the abolition of the
private motorcar and flying, and by electronic forms of communication. By adopting community living we can
provide all capable households with allotments to grow much of their own
vegetables and fruit as a routine part of domesticity and we can adopt a public
policy aimed at reversing the growth of cities and towns. There is more land in most countries
for many small habitations and allotments and still leave enough land for
essential crops and for forests and hedgerow trees.
John Milton, in his Paradise Lost, quotes the Angel
Gabriel who said to Adam “Do not try to understand the stars”. Was this a warning that we might
destroy ourselves by our domination of the world and of Nature? Will the excessive and expanding human
population, based on humanity’s success in controlling its own destiny through
medical and scientific progress and the despoiling of our natural resources, be
at the basis of international political failure leading to catastrophic nuclear
war?
Every international environmental and climate summit
meeting during the last three decades or more has failed because politicians
and international governments have been dominated and kept in power by selfish
and commercially dominated interests and an indifferent and ever-demanding
public. No significant action has
ever been taken by such international meetings commensurate with our knowledge
of the certainty of catastrophic environmental change. Their mantra is sustainability but this
is an empty formula. Are there
still ways humanity might adapt to alter current behaviour? We cannot sustain the planets future
health if we do not maintain its limited resources. This is the simple fact of our dilemma.
The ultimate objective of a rational society should be
to live in harmony with Nature.
The great Russian physiologist Ivan Pavlov defined health as a state of
being in equilibrium with Nature.
Certainly the health of future generations is dependent on harmony with
Nature which should compel current generations to avoid Nemesis by ensuring
that we care for our natural surroundings as assiduously as we care for
ourselves. Humanity’s current
obsession with material acquisitions, its gross neglect of our natural
surroundings on which we depend on our welfare and survival, its waste of
Nature’s limited resources added, about all, to its burgeoning human
population, does not bode well for our immediate future, unless we are guided
and lead by our world leaders. And
who is there to lead us?
Could the next international meeting of our leaders be
an opportunity for Ireland to lead the world in protecting the planet and the
future of our children and children’s children by presenting the bald facts
about the population explosion and the CO2 climb and its causes?
Risteárd Mulcahy, MD.
Words: 2,030 (17/7/2014)
Addendum (6.1.2015)
On January 6th 2015 a lengthy editorial ‘’An Emerging Consensus’’ appeared in the Irish Times . It is a welcome addition to the subject of climate change and the future threat to Nature and to mankind but it is still just a masterly expression of sustainability and provides no hope of a practical answer to the threat to the world as we know it. The editorial’s lack of realism can be summed up by its penultimate paragraph. When speaking of Ireland’s role as envisaged by our Minister for Energy, Alex White, the minister is quoting as saying
It was playing an active part in meeting collective EU targets and global aspirations, for reduced carbon emissions through energy efficiency, renewable energy, re-forestation, improved agricultural practices and financial support for developing countries.
I must have some doubts about the extent of the minister’s aspirations but my real concern is that the editor fails to comment on the annual 80 million increase in population in the world. We are already aware of the trebling of the human population during the last 70 years and the effects this is having on population pressures in many parts of the world, not to mention the gradual and extensive loss of flora and fauna, the destruction of which may lead to a planet uninhabitable for all living things.
On January 6th 2015 a lengthy editorial ‘’An Emerging Consensus’’ appeared in the Irish Times . It is a welcome addition to the subject of climate change and the future threat to Nature and to mankind but it is still just a masterly expression of sustainability and provides no hope of a practical answer to the threat to the world as we know it. The editorial’s lack of realism can be summed up by its penultimate paragraph. When speaking of Ireland’s role as envisaged by our Minister for Energy, Alex White, the minister is quoting as saying
It was playing an active part in meeting collective EU targets and global aspirations, for reduced carbon emissions through energy efficiency, renewable energy, re-forestation, improved agricultural practices and financial support for developing countries.
I must have some doubts about the extent of the minister’s aspirations but my real concern is that the editor fails to comment on the annual 80 million increase in population in the world. We are already aware of the trebling of the human population during the last 70 years and the effects this is having on population pressures in many parts of the world, not to mention the gradual and extensive loss of flora and fauna, the destruction of which may lead to a planet uninhabitable for all living things.
Risteárd, I share your concerns, which you have so well expressed. The population explosion is already impacting on Europe; the influx of refugees is coming from countries that have had enormous increases in population in a matter of decades, they are not only fleeing war, but overcrowding and poverty too. We welcome them so that we can pay for social welfare and pensions for an ageing population which wants to maintain its unsustainable living standards. If there are political solutions, will the politicians survive the unpalatable truths? Robert Myerscough
ReplyDelete