A fork in the road to environmental catastrophe

We learned that three of the nine supposed “planetary thresholds” leading to environmental catastrophe have been passed already, with another two thresholds on their way. And from the UN we learned that population-growth forecasts have been revised upward, to 9.6 billion by 2050 and almost 11 billion by the end of the century. Those, by the way, are “median” forecasts – the UN has a high-growth scenario as well, just in case. 

How many rhinos, pangolins, Siam rosewood trees and fish in the sea do we think will survive that? We don’t expect our national leaders to care about these trivialities, obsessed as they are with “important” things like short-term economic growth and the next election – fewer people means lower GDP. We don’t expect religious leaders to care either – fewer people means fewer devotees. 

But why is it that every prophesy of doom, every forecast of what life will be like on the planet 10, 20 and 50 years from now, where energy will come from, how we will feed ourselves, etc, takes these population forecasts as a fait accompli? Why can’t they conclude by saying the blatantly obvious – This Must Not Be Allowed to Happen? And sadder still, out of the relatively small numbers of comments that such news articles generate, why are so many of them cynical or flippant? 

There are two ways this problem can be solved. Humans can start getting serious and take steps, starting now, to reverse population growth in a managed and dignified way. Alternatively, Nature will do the job for us, but it will not be managed or dignified. It is likely to be rather messy. 

Nigel Pike