Earth has its own limits. But human desire, it seems, is not limited. The Global Footprint Network (GFN) is evaluating how much of Earth's resources we use, from fresh to clean air, and the day a year exceeds the annual self-replication potential of the planet. This crystal.
Humans have surpassed this year's natural "budget" since the early 1970s, and each year that "extra day" is a bit earlier. By 2018, the number is 1/8.
Every minute that passes from 'over' is equivalent to 'capital deficits' rather than 'living on a profit'. "One year is not enough to replicate the annual human needs of the planet, including using data sets with caution," GFN reported.
To account for that over-abundance, GFN divides the planet's biological capacity (renewable ecological resources) on the total demand for human resources. They use 15,000 data points collected from the United Nations for each country since 1961, classified into four main categories: How much we consume, how do we make good , population, and productivity of nature. You can explore the complete dataset here
By 2018, we will use 1.7 times as much Earth to serve human civilization. At the current pace, two new earths will be sufficient for the year 2030. The current degradation is evident in deforestation, fisheries collapse, droughts, and greenhouse gas emissions, causing disturbance. Great economic losses and species extinction across the planet.
The GFN estimates that 86% of countries are living in excess of their own resources, creating so-called ecological deficits. Some countries are worse off than others. If the world consumes resources at the level of the United States, excess days will fall on ... 15/3 (only five countries are worse than the United States)
But bright spots also appear. If we all live in Vietnam or Morocco, the day may exceed mid-December. Meanwhile, in many countries, economic development is separating itself from energy consumption and consumption. Human raw materials are diversified from steel to ... cardboard. In recent years, European and American nations are continuing to grow economically while using less energy (although international trade contributes to this improvement). Partly thanks to changes in lifestyle in rich countries. Power train wins. Renewable fuel is competitive, or cheaper, than petroleum. Population is saturated, even declining, while poverty levels decline the fastest in human history.
According to GFN's Amanda Diep, reducing the use of natural resources does not mean a reduction in living standards. "Everybody can live well with what is available on this earth."Where will we go, this question will be the battle between "The Prophet and the Witch." In the book, Charles C. Mann uses these terms to describe the bipolar scenario of our future: believers can revolutionize the way we use them. their resources through science and technology, and those who believe that crossing that boundary will cause catastrophes (the Prophet). Yet we seem to be trapped in the debate about choosing a scenario based on the complete negation of the remaining perspective. "There may be both, but it does not seem to happen," he said. The reason is because, this is a debate about value.
Mann points out the tension between the community and freedom. For example, if we address the issue of climate change, do we support renewable energy and dump nuclear energy, or do we use "patched" technologies on a global scale? C02 emissions or geo-engineering?
The first option matches the value of the Prophet: distribution solution, effective within the limits of nature and communities. The second option is to match the Witch, seeking answers to the environmental problem by optimizing the freedom of thought of individuals, even if it does not reflect the limits of nature.
There are no physical laws that say you can not have both, "Mann asserted." But it's hard because these value questions lie at the heart of the problem. "
