The human race is just 0.01% of all life on our planet but a study finds our tiny, infinitesimal presence has been responsible for eradicating most other living things. The results can be jarring:
farmed poultry today makes up 70% of all birds on the planet, with just 30% being wild. The picture is even more stark for mammals – 60% of all mammals on Earth are livestock, mostly cattle and pigs, 36% are human and just 4% are wild animals.
...The destruction of wild habitat for farming, logging and development has resulted in the start of what many scientists consider the sixth mass extinction of life to occur in the Earth’s four billion year history. About half the Earth’s animals are thought to have been lost in the last 50 years.
But comparison of the new estimates with those for the time before humans became farmers and the industrial revolution began reveal the full extent of the huge decline. Just one-sixth of wild mammals, from mice to elephants, remain, surprising even the scientists. In the oceans, three centuries of whaling has left just a fifth of marine mammals in the oceans.What does this mean? To me, it corroborates what I've been arguing for years, namely that climate change, existential as it is, is not the disease but just one symptom of a greater and far more dangerous problem that has a variety of urgent symptoms including overpopulation and rapacious overconsumption of our planet's finite resources. That means the only viable solution lies in shrinking humanity's ecological footprint and all of our economic activity safely within the limits of our global environment.
Here's the thing. It's hard to imagine how we, as a species, will ever again live in sustainable harmony with our ecosystem, our biosphere, Spaceship Earth. There are some difficult facts we have to face and they're brutal. One of them is that mankind hasn't lived within the boundaries of our global ecology since the early 70s when our population hit 3 billion.
We're now at 7.5 billion heading, according to the UN, for 10 billion by 2050. Over the course of the last half-century we have also changed as individuals. We live longer now and, on a per capita basis, our individual consumption which defines our per capita footprint, has increased substantially. Humanity has become the "triple threat" to its own survival and that of every other species as well.
We are now so far into "overshoot" that we would need 1.7 planet Earths to meet human consumption. That multiple is increasing fairly rapidly, year upon year.
The other, even more problematic aspect of overshoot, is that the worse it becomes the more rapidly it degrades the planet's ecological carrying capacity. In the early 70s the planet could support a population of 3 billion. In the meantime we've degraded Earth's systems and resources. The latest research I've come across suggests that, today, our planet might be able to sustain a maximum of 2 billion people, far less than the combined population of China and India.
So, our challenge is to decarbonize our societies and economies, virtually overnight; slash our per capita and overall consumption by more than half, probably much more; and get our overall numbers well below 2 billion and in short order.
How do we tell people they're going to have to make do with about a third as much stuff as they've come to enjoy and expect? How do we tell them to surrender their gas guzzlers? How do we convince them that vacations are now stay-cations? Even if we were somehow brilliant enough to do all of those things, how are we going to trim the roster by almost three out of four people currently on Earth? How do we orchestrate this mass die-off? Who decides who gets a ticket on the lifeboat and who doesn't?
When I see humpback whales cavorting in the Salish Sea or mega pods of white sided dolphins in our harbours, I'm looking at creatures that have fled en masse from an unsustainable world. They're the harbingers of what is coming our way and not in the distant future either.
Meanwhile we have a prime minister whose overarching priority is to pimp high-carbon, toxin-laden bitumen onto the world energy market. Brilliant.
Yes, our PM is pimping tar sands. Meanwhile, our Premier is trying, in a relatively small way, to protect the environment, and is getting pilloried for it. Therein lies part of the problem. Politicians know that they will be crucified if they try to curtail our dependence on oil in any meaningful way. Hence, nothing gets done. Hopefully, history will be kind to Mr. Horgan, but I fear he will be out at the next election and it will be full steam ahead again at pimping hydrocarbons.
In reality Horgan probably wouldn't be fighting the Trans Mountain pipeline if it wasn't for the Greens holding the balance of power. That, and an electoral reform referendum, was Andrew Weaver's price for supporting the NDP.
Remember, the BC NDP has a spotty record on the environment. Among other things they strongly opposed Campbell's original carbon tax initiative. And Horgan has backed the Site C dam fiasco. He's not nearly as green as you seem to imagine.
The most important issue here is ensuring BC's electoral system is fixed by the next election. That way the neocon/neolib party won't be "more equal" than their opposition. They will need 50% support to form the government. (They call it "democracy" in the rest of the world.)
It's completely ridiculous in Ontario. More than 65% of the electorate has to be opposed to Doug Ford or he forms the government. If anyone has ever come across anything more senseless than this, please let me know, I'd love to hear it!
If Horgan puts his thumb on the scale in favor of PR, it will make up for the two previous designed-to-fail referendums in BC, which were absurdly corrupt.
If Canada was a democracy we would be more like centrist Germany than the right-wing US when compared to other Western countries. (We're second-bottom of the class.) Better public benefits. Better environmental policies. Stronger, more-prosperous economy.
Both Minister of Environment and Climate Change & Prime Minister have three kids each, while Horgan has only two.
Priorities of environmental protection at work?
"The most important issue here is ensuring BC's electoral system is fixed by the next election."
I support electoral reform. PR plus ranked ballots. I hope they KISS and get it passed this time in BC.
But don't go thinking that will be enough. All the strategy of voting (and the corporate media narratives) can change to 'accommodate' the new system.
In NZ a single right wing party gets approximately 50% of the raw vote. They won and ran the gov't for a decade.
Jacinda managed to squeak in this time (2017) cause they dropped to 47%.
As long as we have a solumnent electoral listening to the MSM lullaby, a PR system is just a single small step in the right direction ...
Post a Comment