Life on Earth v Humans

“We act for Life on Earth,” the email began.? “Our client has taken out a suit against Humans for causing the ecological disaster that is killing us, and wishes to engage you as an expert witness to provide an opinion on whether Humans owe a duty of care to Life on Earth and whether Humans have breached this duty.”?

The Case Against Humans

4.5 billion years ago, the Earth was formed.?

Evidence suggests that Life on Earth emerged 3.7 billion years ago.

Around 2.4 billion years ago, the Great Oxidation Event caused the first mass extinction.? Geological evidence suggests that oxygen was first produced somewhere around 2.7 to 2.8 billion years ago by ancestors of cyanobacteria which evolved to be able to get energy through photosynthesis, giving out oxygen as a waste product.? As the Earth’s atmosphere became an oxidizing atmosphere, oxygen combined with methane to form carbon dioxide, a less effective greenhouse gas, triggering an ice age which caused almost all life on Earth to go extinct.

The Earth has seen five mass extinction events in the past 500 million years, in which 75% to 95% of species disappeared.? Scientists generally agree that these mass extinction events were related to climate change.? Each time, it opened the planet up for new forms of life to emerge.

At present, the rate of extinction of species is estimated at 100 to 1,000 times higher than the background extinction rate (the historically typical rate of extinction).? Scientists believe we are seeing the beginning of the sixth mass extinction.? This time, it is caused by Humans [1].

Planetary Boundaries

In 2009, a group of scientists proposed the nine planetary boundaries concept is an attempt to consolidate the often difficult to understand data from scientists into a simple framework that informs us of the life-giving qualities of the planet [2]. The aim is to define the environmental limits within which Humans can safely operate without harming Life on Earth. At the time, only three boundaries had been crossed. As of 2023, six boundaries have been exceeded and we are in the high-risk zone for four out of the six boundaries, and on the way to exceeding a seventh boundary [3].

But in Our Defence…

As I read through the Humans’ defence, I could not help but notice that Humans are by and large ignorant about the planetary boundaries.? The focus is skewed towards climate change and climate mitigation measures such as the reduction of carbon emissions and the endeavour to reach a global consensus to commit to net zero targets.? In particular, Humans put economic growth above all else.? Humans seem to believe that infinite growth is possible on a finite planet, and we just need to invest in high-tech solutions like “renewable energy” and carbon capture technology to let us have our cake and eat it too.

Humans’ efforts certainly look impressive – as early as in 1965, scientists warned of the impact of pollution, melting ice caps, rising sea levels, acidification of water sources and more [4].? This was followed by numerous international agreements over the past 50 to 60 years, including the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 1994 [5], the Paris Agreement in 2015 where Humans agreed to limit global warming to not more than 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels [6], and the annual Conference of the Parties (COP) where tens of thousands of important Humans consume fossil fuels, the primary source of carbon emissions, to fly to various cities around the world to talk about the UN Sustainable Development Goals [7] and to monitor whether we are meeting the Paris Agreement target.? At the most recent COP28 in Dubai in December 2023, Humans even talked about phasing out the use of fossil fuels [8].

Are We on the Right Track?

According to The Climate Action Tracker [9], not one single country in the world is on track to meet the 1.5°C Paris Agreement target, not even Bhutan.

In its Sixth Assessment Report, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) tells us, among other things, that we are already 1.1°C warmer and global warming of 1.5°C will be exceeded in the near term unless we significantly reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions now [10].

In reality, carbon emissions continue to rise despite the treaties and agreements, or maybe because of them – could it be that they are distracting Humans from what must really be done?

Climate action and the net zero narrative reveal that Humans fail to understand that the root of the problem is not carbon but our failure to understand natural limits and natural cycles.? This is in no small part due to the energy bonanza delivered by fossil fuels over the last two centuries, which has given us the illusion of invincibility and the power to control Nature.? Humans attribute progress and technological advancement to human prowess and ingenuity without understanding that the availability of energy is what enabled us to mine natural resources to make the machines and ubiquitous gadgets we have today.? Such machines and gadgets extend Humans’ muscle power to the extent that just by moving a few fingers, we can cut down and turn a tree that took decades to grow into mulch in just 15 seconds [12].? Our current energy demand is so excessive that within 7 seconds, we consume fossil fuel energy that the Earth took an entire year to produce [13].

Living systems use energy in food to rearrange carbon, hydrogen and other elements to build and maintain the components of a functional body, and then use that body to interact with and intervene in the world.? Similarly, social systems act as super-organisms that also use energy to rearrange materials into living support structures, and then use those structures to modify the environment.? Both animals and economies literally have “metabolisms” – both consume, transform, and allocate energy to maintain complex adaptive systems.? The main difference is that social systems use more types of energy sources (e.g. food, biomass, fossil fuels, electricity), through a broader set of prime movers (e.g. people, gas turbines, tools, vehicles, computers, etc.) to rearrange a wider set of materials (e.g. biomass, rocks, minerals, etc.) into the components of a functional society (e.g. people, products, buildings, infrastructure, etc.).?

Our increasing energy demand faces a fundamental problem that cannot be solved merely by energy substitution with low-carbon energy sources – higher energy demand requires more materials to be rearranged from otherwise healthy ecosystems into social structures such as firms, cities and governments, and into goods such as furniture, buildings, electronics, food, etc.? Current projections of population and energy use require unsustainable levels of material stocks from the environment.? Limits to energy consumption are needed, regardless of the energy mix, to stabilize human intervention in the biosphere [14].? A study conducted in Australia found that to be sustainable, per-capita resource consumption rates in the rich world probably need to be reduced by 90%, and heavy cuts in resource consumption cannot be made without extreme change in economic, political, settlement and cultural systems [15].

Duty of Care

Do Humans owe a duty of care to Life on Earth?

The various warnings from scientists over the last 50-60 years show that Humans know that human actions affect Life on Earth.

Is there a breach of that duty?

There is evidence that Humans prioritise economic growth despite its negative effects on Life on Earth.

Did Life on Earth suffer damage?

There is evidence that the current extinction rate is 100 to 1,000 times higher than the background extinction rate, leading scientists to warn that this is the beginning of the sixth mass extinction.

Did Humans directly cause the damage, i.e. but for our actions Life on Earth would not have suffered the damage??

There is growing evidence that Human activities are the primary cause of the planetary boundaries being exceeded, and the consequential effect on Life on Earth.

It would seem that the answer to each of the questions above would be “Yes”, and hence Life on Earth would have a strong case against Humans.? However, in Human systems, Life on Earth does not get a seat at the table hence its claim in tort would fail.

Conclusion

Humans have always tried to alter our environment to make ourselves safer and more comfortable.? In fact, many species do so as well – birds build nests, termites make mounds, beavers build dams, just to name a few.? Even microorganisms have an effect on the environment, as we have seen with the Great Oxidation Event.? It is born of the instinct to survive.

The ancestors of cyanobacteria did not have scientists to warn them that they were polluting their own environment and causing their own demise.? Humans have had ample warning.

More significantly, Humans have failed to understand that we are part of Life on Earth.? We are not on opposing sides.? When we harm Life on Earth, we harm ourselves.

Fortunately, there is a small minority of Humans who do or did understand our role in the web of life – the farming communities in the Amazon Basin who lived between 450 BCE and 950 BCE and created terra preta, a type of dark, fertile soil that regenerates itself and sequesters carbon[16]; the 18th century physiocrats who understood that all wealth springs from nature, who were the first to attempt to define an all-encompassing abstract vision of the economy, inspired by physiology [17]; permaculture design, regenerative agriculture, syntropic farming and other techniques that seek to meet human needs whilst creating healthy ecosystems for Life on Earth.

The seeds for change exist.?

Humans need to take a holistic approach to find common ground with Life on Earth so that we can come to a mutually beneficial settlement.

? Catherine Loke , Singapore, 27 September 2024 (updated)

An earlier version of this article was first published in the Asia Pacific Institute of Experts (APIEx) Newsletter August 2024 Issue.

Notes

1. William J. Ripple, Christopher Wolf, Thomas M. Newsome, Mauro Galetti, Mohammed Alamgir, Eileen Crist, Mahmoud I. Mahmoud, William F. Laurance, 15,364 scientist signatories from 184 countries, “World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity: A Second Notice”, BioScience, Volume 67, Issue 12, December 2017, Pages 1026-1028, published on 13 November 2017.? The notice asserts that, among other things, "we have unleashed a mass extinction event, the sixth in roughly 540 million years, wherein many current life forms could be annihilated or at least committed to extinction by the end of this century." The full notice can be read here https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/67/12/1026/4605229
2. Will Steffen, Katherine Richardson, Johan Rockstr?m, Sarah E. Cornell, Ingo Fetzer, Elena M. Bennett, Reinette Biggs, Stephen R. Carpenter, Wim De Vries, Cynthia A. De Wit, Carl Folke, Dieter Gerten, Jens Heinke, Georgina M. Mace, Linn M. Persson, Veerabhadran Ramanathan, Belinda Reyers, And Sverker S?rlin, Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet, Science, Vol 347, Issue 6223, 15 Jan 2015 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1259855
3. Katherine Richardson, Will Steffen, Wolfgang Lucht, J?rgen Bendtsen, Sarah E. Cornell, Jonathan F. Donges, Markus Drüke, Ingo Fetzer, Govindasamy Bala, Werner Von Bloh, Georg Feulner, Stephanie Fiedler, Dieter Gerten, Tom Gleeson, Matthias Hofmann, Willem Huiskamp, Matti Kummu, Chinchu Mohan, David Nogués-Bravo, Stefan Petri, Miina Porkka, Stefan Rahmstorf, Sibyll Schaphoff, Kirsten Thonicke, Arne Tobian, Vili Virkki, Lan Wang-Erlandsson, Lisa Weber, and Johan Rockstr?m, Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries, Science, Vol. 9, No. 37, 13 Sep 2023 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adh2458 ??
4. 1965 President’s Science Advisory Committee Report on Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide, Climate Files https://www.climatefiles.com/climate-change-evidence/presidents-report-atmospher-carbon-dioxide/
5. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Framework_Convention_on_Climate_Change The UNFCCC aims to prevent “dangerous” human interference with the climate system, and set a specific goal to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations “within a time-frame sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change, to ensure that food production is not threatened, and to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner.” The 197 countries that have ratified the Convention are called Parties to the Convention.?
6. The Paris Agreement https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement
7. United Nations – 17 Sustainable Development Goals https://sdgs.un.org/goals
8. COP28 – The UAE Consensus https://cop28.com/UAEconsensus
9. The Climate Action Tracker https://climateactiontracker.org/about/
10. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, AR6 Synthesis Report – Climate Change 2023 https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/
11. N.J. Hagens, Economics for the future – Beyond the superorganism, 20 November 2019 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800919310067
12. Excavator mulchers - Land clearing equipment - Forestry mulcher - DENISCIMAF.com https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYKg0gbRFns&t=104s
13. Drivers behind our success: energy and natural resources https://www.energyandstuff.org/en/drivers-behind-our-success-energy-and-natural-resources
14. Benjamin Leiva, John R. Schramski, On the rules of life and Kleiber's law: the macroscopic relationship between materials and energy, Heliyon, Volume 8, Issue 6, June 2022 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844022009355
15. Ted Trainer, Remaking settlements for sustainability: the Simpler Way, April 2019 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332647013_Remaking_settlements_for_sustainability_the_Simpler_Way
16. Terra preta https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terra_preta
17. Physiocracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physiocracy