Environmental Meltdown Demands WWII-Scale Response
In a 2008 essay on desirables in a congressional leader, I identified Six Emergencies that have been backburnered for so long by our political culture of deception that they're like a fire in the kitchen: tend to them now, or they'll burn the house down. The absolute, top-of-the-list action item, despite ongoing financial turmoil, remains the combined Environmental Emergency, because ultimately the meltdown in the Arctic overshadows the one on Wall Street. Since I wrote that essay, a Manhattan-sized chunk broke off the northern polar icecap, and this week, scientists warned that Antarctica is melting much faster than previously modeled, and we only have a few years to start reducing greenhouse gas levels. I use the phrase "environmental emergency" because it encompasses more than global warming or its more politically expedient cousin, "energy."
The need for environmental leadership in government has never been more pressing. Consider these simultaneous crises of climate, population, water, forests, desertification, oceans, and food:
Climate. Scientific opinion is overwhelming. The climate crisis is real, and real scary. As Elizabeth Kolbert says, climate scientists "are very, very doubtful about the future of life on this planet." That's heavy language. The Obama and 2008 Democratic platforms gave the issue more attention than any predecessors ever, warning of cataclysms from crop failures to coastal flooding, but neither the party nor most of its standard-bearers regularly highlight it, or draw the conclusions that logically flow from this dire assessment.
Population. Global population took until 1830 to reach one billion, but only 150 more years to reach 5 billion. At current trends, even with declining Western birthrates, in 30-40 years we'll top 9 billion humans. U.S. population in the last 25 years grew more than in the previous 75. Northeastern Illinois may add 2 million people by 2025.
This is not sustainable. U.N. experts say that at current consumption patterns the world already has more people than it can handle. Not "will have" -- "already has." Scientists say we'll soon be using up the equivalent of 1.6 Planet Earths.
If we're about to come up a half-planet short of necessities, the math gets ugly quick. Surging worldwide demand for basics like fuel, food, and water will hike prices of most everything. Population migrations, unrest, social upheaval, and even resource wars threaten.
Yet there is a viral silence on this issue. Population not only isn't front-burner, it's not on the stove. It's buried in the pantry somewhere. Try and find it on a candidate website or in speeches. The words "population" and "consumption" didn't appear in the 2004 Democratic platform; the 2008 version had one peripheral allusion. The Republicans seem even less concerned. Even the national Green platform avoided the issue.
The avoidance is political. Fear of offending constituencies, or being branded an anti-growth Malthusian, silences what should be a healthy debate if not a clanging alarm.
Water. Global water use increased six-fold in the 20th century due to population growth, lifestyle change, and urbanization. Irrigation for industrialized agriculture has drained aquifers and reduced mighty rivers to trickles. Invasive species are taking over lakes and tributaries. Although water is cleaner in many areas of the U.S., worldwide, sedimentation and pollution have degraded water quality for both drinking and wildlife.
All these threats imperil freshwater resources, which directly support much of the world's population. A billion people worldwide lack access to safe water. Longterm, glacier shrinkage threatens supply for billions more.
Many activists and scientists warn that water could be the oil of the coming century, in terms of supply-demand problems. Over 250 rivers are shared by more than one country, creating potential flashpoints for conflict.
Five years ago Nature termed water a "forgotten crisis" that was worsening. Congress in 2005 passed the Water for the Poor Act but has cynically and shamefully failed to fund it. This is a true emergency of global security dimensions.
Deforestation. Half of the earth's forests have now been chopped down. Only 20% remain undisturbed. One fourth of the timber harvest goes to the building industry; Americans, only 5% of world population, use up 27% of the planet's wood. Forests sequester enormous carbon dioxide, and prevent evaporation, so logging not only destroys habitat, but accelerates climate crisis and land degradation.
Desertification. Of Earth's 13 billion acres of agricultural drylands, 70% are already either degraded or threatened by desertification. The Sahara, even taking into account historical fluctuation, expands southward roughly 5 miles annually. Every year, 1,300 square miles of Nigeria disappear into desert. In China, roughly 2,000 square miles become desertified annually; the resulting huge sand storms, visible from space, affect human health and machinery in Korea, Japan, and even our west coast. Rapid desertification is also occurring in our own southwest and Mexico. Climate change threatens to turn this creeping problem into a raging one, reducing rainfall and river flows in already-parched regions.
The main causes, worldwide, are manmade: shortsighted agriculture, overgrazing, and deforestation. Increasing water use and lowered aquifers also contribute. But the drivers of all these are growth in population and consumption. Although billions of people are threatened directly or indirectly by desertification, the UN terms it a "neglected crisis." SOS-Sahel, which works with sub-Saharan Africa, terms it "a forgotten emergency."
Oceans. The Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network estimates that 25% of the planet's reefs are already dead or severely damaged, with another 1/3 threatened. In northern Jamaica, nearly every reef is either dead or degraded, with fish stocks so depleted that fishermen harvest larvae for soup. Oceanic destruction is largely due to fisheries practices and trade, including greedy and wasteful factory fishing with unprecedented capacity to scour large portions of the ocean, but is also due to overpopulation in coastal regions. Sea temperature rises and invasive species now compound overfishing's damage by wreaking havoc on lower levels of the food chain, such as corals and krill. This environmental problem too, is attributed to the lack of "political will" to make necessary changes.
Food. In 2008, the number of people facing food shortages will increase by approximately 100 million from 2007. Global food demand will likely double by 2030. Approximately 20% of that is due to population growth, and the other 80% due to economically developing nations' increased demand.
Further inflating world food prices are high fuel costs, crop conversion to biofuels, and the damage to arable land and fisheries from ecological and weather catastrophes. A 2001 study showed that deforestation, poor farming practices, overgrazing, and climate change had damaged the agricultural potential of half of South Asia. By 2025, Africa's ability to feed itself may be diminished by 2/3 from its 1990 capacity, shrunken to enough for only 25% of all Africans. During the same period, South America will lose 1/3 of its arable land.
This crisis hits hardest on the poor and the sick, women and children, and those in already-marginal economies.
Confronting the Combined Emergency. The good news is that the causes of these problems are not unknown, and for many, we already know a lot of the answers. We'd also have the funds, were we not pouring them into Iraq or panicky financial bailouts. But we need, now, leaders with the political will to frankly confront what Americans and the world face. Recycling is not enough. Changing light bulbs is not enough. Baby steps won't stop environmental disasters that threaten the entire planet. Even putting a man on the moon, or the Manhattan Project, aren't the right analogies: the solution requires more than one agency with a limited budget.
Addressing this global challenge means, first, courage and candor in assessing and publicizing its gravity. Second, it requires a response on the scale of the United States' approach to WWII: total societal commitment by the public sector, the private sector, and the public itself. President-elect Obama's incorporation of green jobs and alt-energy infrastructure into an economic rescue is a good example of what we need to do in every aspect of policy.
The environmental emergency, and our necessary response, will impact most other policy areas. The effort will require massive budget reprioritizing, unprecedented international cooperation, and taking proposals such as Gore's Challenge to Repower America as necessity, not fantasy. The US can't go it alone, especially as awareness grows of America's relative resource consumption.
The required total commitment demands candidates and elected officials willing to lead on the issue. Following polls that marginalize environmental concern just won't cut it, because if you don't campaign on it, it's tough to sell it to the electorate as afterthought once in office.
So, to bring this full circle, Illinois needs leaders with the guts and foresight to bring this eco-catastrophe front and center now, as the number one issue of our time, even though it's not polling as a top popular concern. To do less is not just a failure of leadership, it's an abdication of leadership.
Adapted from a diary originally published on Prairie State Blue, Nov. 15, 2008.
Back to Environment
