Geology Reference
In-Depth Information
a complex environment in which to move and act. The only thermodynamically
possible way for human beings to survive indefinitely is to live on the sun's radiation
(or from other allogeneic sources such as fusion energy). In addition, although
dispersed materials could, in theory, be concentrated by the sun, they are not
5
.
The removal of materials or the occupation of the living space of other neigh-
bouring creatures cannot be therefore unlimited, independently of the knowledge
acquired in undertaking a sound management of resources. Growth must be con-
fined and thus is not and must never be seen as the only means of survival. This is
because demanding even a “modest” growth of 2% annually, means that within 35
years society will be claiming double than it does today. And, if this exponential
rate continues, an eight-fold extraction will occur in just over a century (105 years).
Even in the slightly better scenario of a stabilised demand, there is a second
exponential relationship to consider: the declining ore grades in geological deposits,
represented by degradation curves. Here, every subsequently extracted tonne re-
quires more energy and causes a far greater environmental impact than the previous
one. Again, if the energy required to extract a particular mineral also grew by 2%
annually, after 35 years that quantity would duplicate. The same applies to water
consumption or the sociological impact of extraction (which could include wars and
conflicts). Opportunely, there is a hope that technology could mitigate some of
these effects, at least to some undetermined degree. Notwithstanding, any tech-
nological advances (depicted by the technological learning curves) need to develop
quickly in order to compensate the combined exponential effect of lowering ore
grades and increased consumption. Yet given the fact that the mining sector has
not changed much since the Industrial Revolution, the authors cannot foresee the
radically sought after improvements.
Any decisions affecting the environment must thus be based on the management
of scarce physical resources. In this respect, some questions arise: who is to account
for non-renewable resource consumption or the purifying of air or water? How
to establish national and global accounting systems with which to evaluate and
manage environmental degradation: the dispersion of minerals or the burning of
fossil fuels? How to assign monetary units to replace, with current technology, the
biotic and abiotic materials which are taken? The simple answer is that no amount
of money can ever bring back that which was plundered. Yet with each progressive
generation an increase in knowledge should help facilitate a (more alike) e
cient
and conservative use of resources. Money is generated out of a sense of debt which
someone agrees to pay at the expense of revenues for future work. But Nature knows
nothing of money, only of action and reaction. So, one can only use money to pay a
person to restore, to the best of their ability, everything that has been destroyed. If
such work entails an average ecological footprint, it follows that each acquired debt
has an ecological rucksack as certain as the commitment needed to pay back the
5
If dispersed materials were solely recycled with the external power of the sun, life on Earth
would thermodynamically be feasible, at least until the end of the star.
Search WWH ::
Custom Search