by kevin, on October 26th, 2009
Image courtesy of Stephen Codrington. Planet Geography 3rd Edition (2005)
part 1 of 5
In a previous post – organizing sustainability – I recommended a framework for transitioning from industrial age to sustainable age design using a strategy framework to consider design decisions based on ecology, energy, society, and economy. The first step toward sustainability within ecology is resource preservation. That will be the focus of this and three following posts. According to the National Academy of Sciences, “human consumption surpassed the regenerative capacity of the planet around 1980, and we are now pushing its systems well beyond their ability to heal.” Many would read that with great pessimism and assume we’ve crossed over a threshold of no return. But I tend to view situations as glass half full, rather than half empty. But the time to do something is now. Spending another twenty or thirty years debating next steps would be irresponsible and imprudent.
Humans are wired to consider scarcity over abundance. It’s a vital survival instinct to routinely focus attention on the risk of supply shortage. I’ve seen Dr. David Suzuki present a number of times and a memorable part of his lectures is the idea that we are the only animal on the planet that understands time. In particular, we understand the concept of past, present, and future. Humans have the ability to plan for the future, where other animals live in the moment. Combine that survival skill with a predisposition toward seeing scarcity and you have a powerful predilection for worst case scenarios. But it’s those two skills we need to harness most when considering natural resources.
If the developing nations of the world – primarily China, India, and Brazil – were to consume resources at the same rate as the United States in their drive to achieve our standard of living, three additional planets would be required to supply their needs. If we were to look at income as just one measure of living standard, it took the United Kingdom more than one hundred years to double their income during the first industrial revolution. After it became industrialized, the US doubled income levels in fifty years. More recently South Korea did the same in twenty-five years, and China was able to do it in just nine. Advancing technology and an unstoppable human desire to advance will mean doubling at even faster rates in the future.
According to the UN, there’s a direct connection between standard of living and resource consumption. Eighty-six percent of natural resources are consumed by the world’s richest twenty percent, while four fifths of humanity only consume fourteen percent. The poorest nations with the lowest standard of living consume the least resources. The US represents less than five percent of global population, yet it consumes forty percent of all natural resources. It’s an issue of math. If a country like China, who represents twenty percent of global population, consumes at the same rate as the US, there’s likely to be extreme scarcity of vital resources. If India, Brazil, and many others strive to do the same, there exists a looming problem requiring immediate attention.
Assuming current global consumption, aluminum supply will likely last another one thousand years. That makes sense as it’s the third most plentiful element on Earth. Although plentiful, it requires seven times more energy to produce than steel. It’s embodied energy will be covered in a following post. There is nearly equal amounts of gold and platinum remaining, but gold supply may expire in approximately fifty years; platinum supply should last another three hundred years. Other industrial metals such as copper, silver, tin, nickel, and lead may see significantly diminished supply over the next fifty to eighty years. In other words, without a reduction in consumption, assuming global living standards stay constant, and global population stops growing, many resources we take for granted could be extinguished this century. On the plus side, current estimates are based on known reserves and it is possible that new sources are yet to be discovered.
When a resource becomes too scarce and expensive, that scarcity creates incentive to seek an abundant replacement, and demand shifts away from those in short supply to those with ample supply. Economies flow toward abundance. Materials that can be commoditized often are and become readily available and inexpensive. Abundance promotes greater use and increased consumption. Nowhere is this more visible than with oil. It’s abundance, availability, and low cost encouraged all manner of new uses. Over the past fifty years it has become one of the most prevalent substances consumed. It would be difficult to find an industry that doesn’t manipulate or utilize some variation of the hydro-carbon molecule provided by petroleum. It exists in virtually every aspect of our lives.
The Industrial Revolution changed mankind’s relationship with natural resources. The naval and military might of eighteenth century Britain, along with a century of global exploration prior to industrialization, gave rise to resource access in the distant lands of conquered or colonized civilizations. Extraction of materials and exploitation of labor became commonplace as they accelerated a cost decrease of material goods feeding a rapidly growing population with a steadily increasing standard of living and access to capital. A perfect storm of conditions – a growing labor pool, new economic tools, increased disposable income, new production mechanisms that exponentially increased productivity, global shipping infrastructure, and much more – brought about the fastest extended improvement of living conditions the world has ever seen. And it continues today. It’s understandable how the creation of such abundance and wealth disconnected from consequence has promoted a lingering perception that industrialization only generates positive outcome.
For two centuries, industrialization has overwhelmingly been the best route to increased living standards. But it has gradually separated consumers from consequences and impacts. More importantly, few of us have any idea what natural resources are consumed in the manufactured products we purchase, use, and discard. The highest expression of industrialization today is a disposable lifestyle most of us live in. Two hundred years of mass production has dramatically escalated the consumption of natural resources. They have not experienced the same exponential efficiency increases other aspects of production have.
It’s time we look seriously at natural resource use with an eye toward greater efficiency, alternative use, alternative supply, and overall sustainability. In a few days I’ll continue this discussion with a follow up post focused on preservation strategies. Please return for more.
This is part one of five about resource preservation. Part two is entitled resource preservation – criterion, part three is entitled resource preservation – strategy, part four is entitled resource preservation – sources, and part five is entitled resource preservation – design.
nice post. thanks.
[...] resource preservation – context [...]
[...] resource preservation – context [...]
[...] resource preservation – context [...]
[...] resource preservation – context [...]
[...] and those that are locally cultivated. We’ve posted about this subject several times (read here) so we won’t go into detail with this [...]