Environmentalism 2.0 by Alex Shenderov

Preamble Environmental movement has failed to achieve its stated goals. Despite all environmentalists’ efforts of the past several decades, the much-maligned fossils still provide 82% of the energy we use, whereas much-lauded solar gives us only 1.5% of that energy. Global military expenses outstrip environmental commitments 24:1. None of the previously declared environmental crises have been averted, or even substantially mitigated. There appears to be a fundamental reason why Environmentalism 1.0 has failed. If so, continuation of environmentalism-as-usual is futile. One shouldn’t do the same thing over and over again and expect different results. A radically different outcome requires a radically different approach. This document suggests such an approach. Humanity and Nature The old paradigm Environmentalist movement has been so far closely associated with a certain worldview, specifically Malthusianism. According to Thomas Malthus and his modern followers, Humanity and Nature are in a one-sided relationship: Humanity is seen as Nature’s parasite. Nature provides what Humanity consumes, without getting anything in return. If the resources provided by Nature are consumed faster than their maximum replenishment rate (“carrying capacity”), crises ensue. Hence Environmentalism 1.0 is focused on limiting the consumption rate. The declared limits are then disproportionately used up by the global North, where Environmentalism 1.0 has originated and is still largely centered. Hence the global South views environmental movement with suspicion – as an instrument of perpetuating the North’s economic dominance. Recent half-hearted attempts to alleviate these suspicions have cost environmentalists dearly in the North (see e.g. the Greens’ disastrous performance at the last EU elections), while the South’s doubts about environmentalism’s true motives could hardly be relieved when the (allegedly environmentally-minded) Northern leaders pressure the South to reduce production of electric vehicles and solar panels. Environmentalism is in a global crisis of its own: crisis of credibility. This crisis cannot be resolved without a clear and decisive departure from Malthusianism and from its inevitable consequence – the zero-sum-game mindset. If all we ever get to negotiate is who gets what portion of an allegedly fixed limit, there is no basis for cooperation or trust – only mutual sabotage and resource hoarding. The Malthusian mental trap of seeing humans as Nature’s competing parasites is a dangerous self-fulfilling prophecy. The adversarial mentality of Malthusian world has failed to offer any actionable global environmental solutions over the last 6 decades, and there is no evidence to suggest that it ever will. This paradigm has to be replaced (specifically, reversed) for environmentalism to produce constructive action on the appropriate scale. The new paradigm Fortunately, Humanity has proven Malthus wrong. It has done so through imagination, ingenuity and cooperation. When faced with resource shortage, humans develop a new resource. A dung beetle population is indeed constrained by availability of dung; but humans (who used to use dung for fuel, and to be constrained by its availability) have replaced dung with other energy sources. This ability to imagine, innovate and cooperate is unique to our civilization-building species. With it, we got from the caves to the Moon, created the Sphinx and the relativity theory and the World Wide Web, and dreamed of planting seeds from our beautiful home across the Universe. The “finite resources” Humanity uses now were worthless dirt until humans converted them into resources through innovation and collaboration. Human history is a story of learning to engage progressively bigger, more diverse groups of people in solving bigger, more challenging problems. That’s how we got from the caves to the Moon landings and the World Wide Web. Through its ability to imagine, innovate and cooperate, Humanity is emerging as a prominent force in the evolution of planet Earth and its biosphere. Humans are the only known species capable of sustained deliberate activities on increasingly large scale (i.e. building a civilization). An ambitious civilization can be viewed as an evolutionary adaptation of a biosphere to long-term survival in the shooting gallery of the Cosmos. One cosmic catastrophe or another would eventually wipe out any biosphere that fails to produce a civilization that protects it from cosmic catastrophes (and plants its offspring elsewhere as a backup in case protection fails). This self-image of Humanity can enable Environmentalism 2.0, the win-win environmentalism that gets things actually done to everyone's benefit. This work has already started. The International Asteroid Warning Network is in place, and the first successful asteroid deflection test has been conducted. 1,700 gene banks are in operation around the planet, including the Svalbard Global Seed Vault; another one is planned to be built on the Moon. Dozens of terrestrial species have travelled outside Earth atmosphere on human-built rockets. Several species from Earth have reproduced in space. Terrestrial plants have sprouted on the Moon. Humanity is beginning to learn the job of terrestrial guardian - and extraterrestrial gardener. Planetary Stewardship Responsibility and Authority Humanity increasingly holds itself responsible for the condition of the planet Earth and its biosphere. Such a daunting responsibility cannot be discharged without appropriate authority. Therefore, we humans of planet Earth must claim the authority to make collective decisions about maintenance of our habitat - this planet. We must also acknowledge that decisions about the future are based on incomplete information about that future, and are therefore imperfect in principle. Hence, we must also claim the authority and responsibility to monitor the outcomes of those decisions; to evaluate these outcomes; and, when we decide this to be necessary, to amend these decisions. This is the only way we humans know to be deliberate about the future. This is how we can, and should, assume responsibility for it. Declaration of Planetary Emergence Human civilization having become a planetary force through human ingenuity and collaboration, it has become desirable to re-affirm these evident truths: ? That Humanity and its civilization are inseparable parts of the natural biospheric processes of planet Earth ? That a biosphere of a planet is subject to cosmic cataclysms, which will eventually make this planet unsuitable for life ? That a technological civilization may protect its home biosphere from some of said cosmic cataclysms ? That a technological civilization may also plant copies of its home biosphere away from its home planet, providing continuity even if protection fails ? That for Gaia, the Earth biosphere, human civilization is currently emerging as such nascent technological civilization Therefore, we humans of planet Earth solemnly resolve: ? To treasure our home planet and act as its responsible stewards to the best of our ability ? To regard sustained development of human civilization as central to Earth’s sustainability ? To regard every global problem as an opportunity for a creative collaborative solution ? To use our abilities to innovate and cooperate for the benefit of our home planet and its biosphere, including Humanity Immediate Practical Steps (Examples) ? Averting Global Thermonuclear Resource War A global thermonuclear resource war would likely terminate both human civilization and life on the planet as we know it. It is, therefore, in the interest of Earth biosphere, including Humanity, to avert this existential risk. This can be achieved by reallocating resources, - financial, material, and, first and foremost, human talent, - to removal of the resource scarcity leading to adversity and conflict. All practical measures described below are parts of an integral approach to shifting resource allocation - from sliding into an unwinnable war to preventing it in the first place. Defense and related industries have mobilized enormous power, know-how and organizational expertise – most of which can be pivoted to global collaborative projects benefitting all mankind and hence fulfilling the armed forces’ role: to secure peace. A win-win solution would be to repurpose the resource flows through the existing defense structures and related industries. ? Securing Sustainable Energy Supply via Global Power Grid The failure of the efforts to date to transfer to sustainable energy sources is especially scandalous given their abundance. Our planet receives 10,000 times more energy from the Sun than its human civilization is currently using. If we wrap the Earth in a global power grid, those on the illuminated side of the Earth would sell excess power to those on the dark side – and 12 hours later they’ll trade places, the sellers becoming buyers and vice versa. There is no need to build the incredibly expensive (both financially and environmentally) local storage infrastructure to deal with intermittency of solar. Developing global power grid can, using only available resources and established technologies, bring humanity to 100% renewable energy in 20 years. This would, besides resolving the energy and climate crises, catalyze massive investment of finance and technology in the global South, produce a productive and profitable outlet for the capital and know-how of the global North, create billions of well-paid jobs throughout the world, and give geopolitical rivals better things to do than sabotage (or shoot at) each other. ? Securing Fresh Water Supply 87% of aquifers in a recent worldwide study had declining water levels. On our blue planet, mostly covered with water, only 0.3% of that water is available to humans, our symbiotic species, and other terrestrial life. Billions of people already suffer from limited availability of fresh water. Abundant and affordable sustainable energy (see the bullet above) would enable desalination and transportation of water whenever and wherever it’s needed, increasing the availability of this resource up to 300 times. ? Environmental Cleanup A large proportion of Humanity’s environmental footprint is preventable pollution. About 95% of the 430 MT of plastics produced annually worldwide is discarded rather than recycled; almost none of it is biodegradable. Most of these fossil-fuel-derived plastic items (by mass) can be replaced by alternatives made from sustainably sourced raw material stock and designed for biodegradability. Bioplastics/biopolymers market, currently at 2% of traditional plastics market, grows 6 times faster (24% vs. 4%); there is ample opportunity for human ingenuity and entrepreneurship in this space. Similarly, there is ample opportunity for improvement in fertilizer management. Both nitrate and phosphate fertilizers are overused in some areas, resulting in runoff and eutrophication. In other areas, insufficient availability of these nutrients reduces the productivity of agriculture, necessitating annexation of wildlife habitats for food production. While nitrate can be synthetized in practically unlimited quantities, phosphate is derived from a concentrated phosphate rock. Terrestrial phosphate rock supply estimates vary, with some experts warning about imminent shortages while others suggesting that improvement in mining and utilization techniques can stretch that resource to last another 300 to 500 years. These vital improvements should be introduced immediately - and complemented by actively seeking new sources of phosphate (see below). ? Mineral Resource Security Access to fossil fuels has long been the source of adversity and conflict. As the remaining oil and gas become harder and harder to extract, this situation only worsens. Phosphate rock, lithium, helium, gallium, indium, rare earths and other resources follow the same trajectory: geopolitics-as-usual largely consists of sabotaging each other’s access to valuable minerals and other natural resources. While replacement of fossil fuels with solar energy is discussed above, the other mineral resources’ utility is defined by their chemical composition rather than energy content. Hence, besides recycling approaches, new sources of these elements need to be secured. There are two ways to tackle this, both relying on human ingenuity and cooperation. The first is using nuclear chemistry, transmutation. We know since 1934 how to transform one element into another. For example, to produce phosphorus, one has to irradiate silicon with neutrons – and silicon is, fortunately, very abundant and inexpensive. Once sufficiently powerful and affordable neutron sources are developed, phosphorus can be produced in quantity. The other way is to take advantage of extraterrestrial resources. Despite our knowledge of asteroid composition still being very limited, many of the elements whose terrestrial availability is in rapid decline have been detected in asteroids. Development of these resources will require a two-pronged approach. First, geological survey of Solar system has to be initiated using available technology. Second, to exploit the resources found, high-throughput reliable, affordable access to Space has to be developed (see below). To mitigate the financial and environmental costs of chemical rockets and their limited weight capacity, the non-rocket space launch technologies proposed in 1970s and 80s have to mature. ? Space Access With Space rich in both energy (from the Sun) and waste heat absorption capacity, harvesting solar energy and, eventually, also most of energy utilization for industrial and agricultural purposes will be transferred to Space – leaving much of Earth as Nature preserve. Our current way of accessing Space is woefully inadequate for this transition. Rocket equation limits the energy efficiency of chemical rockets to less than 7% to low Earth orbit, and even less to more remote destinations. While adequate for occasional exploratory missions, routine access to Space has to be far more effective than this. Fortunately, there are numerous alternatives to chemical rockets at different stages of development. The most mature of non-rocket launch technologies, the SpinLaunch centrifuge, has undergone successful testing and is nearing commercial availability. While its capacity is extremely limited compared to other non-rocket space launch technologies, it may be well suited to solving an immediate problem threatening Space access already: space debris. Accumulation of debris in orbit is becoming such an acute problem that most of the launch insurance companies have left the business. Affordable orbital cleanup may be the first opportunity for non-rocket space launch technology to demonstrate its utility. However, SpinLaunch centrifuges have limited weight capacity and require hardened payloads – the acceleration there is extremely violent. To limit the acceleration to that comfortably survivable by humans, the payload has to accumulate its kinetic energy over distances of thousands of kilometers. Hence construction of the structures capable of supporting this operation (e.g. Lofstrom loops) inherently requires international cooperation. International consortia for developing these technologies can start operating immediately, to start harvesting solar energy in Space in 20-30 years. This will prevent terrestrial solar farms from ousting wildlife habitats and producing other negative environmental effects when Humanity’s energy demand grows as global South reaches the living standards of global North. ? Climate Maintenance Recognition of Humanity as the collective guardian of planet Earth enables collective decision-making on issues of global impact, including deliberate climate modification measures. Such measures include albedo-modification techniques such as carbon sequestration (direct atmospheric capture, afforestation, ocean seeding), cloud seeding, and reflector-based technologies (with the reflectors either within atmosphere or outside it). The risks of some of these approaches, labelled “geoengineering”, have been pointed out; however, those risks cannot be rationally compared to the risks of refusal to deliberately control climate. The data for such comparison can only be accumulated experimentally, and conducting such experiments requires forming an international governing body to determine a safe yet meaningful scope of those experiments, optimal siting for conducting them, and criteria and schedule for monitoring their conduct and outcome. The other aspect of Climate Maintenance is that, like any deliberate action (e.g. manufacturing of goods or food production), it will have both desirable and undesirable consequences. Both of these will likely be distributed unequally. Therefore, we’ll need to develop collective decision-making mechanisms on what measures to undertake, when, to what extent, and how to compensate people living in the areas where the effects of these measures are overall negative (at the expense of the majority that benefits from them). Methods of World Wide Web-mediated polling of global public opinion may have to be developed for this purpose (they might be extremely useful for many other items on this list as well). ? Prevention of Population Collapse It is unlikely that the peak of human ambition in 1960s and 70s (Moon landings, establishment of ARPANET – early predecessor of World Wide Web, etc.) coincided with peak of human population growth merely by chance. It is also unlikely that current slump in human ambition (decline in college applications, rise in popularity of “lying flatism” and other anti-nativist cults, public figures depicting humanity as “plague”, “cancer” or swarm of locusts, worshiping “inherently superior” artificial intelligence, etc.) coincides with declines in marriages and fertility merely by chance. Depopulation is already significant and persistent in many countries throughout the world. Consequently, these countries face serious problems, from economic and financial imbalances to challenges in sustaining their national cultures and educational systems. This, however, is still on a local scale; there is no precedent to a worldwide population decline from the current advanced stage of civilization. Lacking experimental data, we can only refer to models; and the models, e.g. one ominously titled “Empty Planet”, do not support the belief that population collapse, once started globally, has any built-in mechanism to halt at some support level. The prediction, instead, is that the population will continue to decline all the way to zero, with all aspects of human civilization – economy, science, education, social organization – disappearing when the last humans die off. Population collapse would be the civilization collapse. It is at least possible that revival of human ambition by adopting the role of Earth guardians will reverse the current trend and avert population collapse before depopulation spreads and becomes irreversible. Humans tend to feel better about themselves when they are needed and valued; they are more interested in education, forming families, having children, participating in all aspects of society. The program outlined above has the “side benefit” of keeping billions of people busy for decades, centuries, and possibly longer – doing noble, meaningful work and feeling good about themselves, each other, and future generations. Implementing the program outlined above will require a massive effort in restoring Humanity’s positive self-image. This, in turn, must rely on collaboration with influence industries: mass media and education. Since both of these are struggling to keep customers and revenue, they might be receptive to clear alternatives to business-as-usual. Environmentalism 2.0 may be the alternative they need to stay in business – along with the rest of human civilization.