Time For A Rebellion

On Sunday I preached what I think was my most important sermon.   At least I think I said what was most heartfelt.   The future (at least in the coming decades and perhaps the next couple of centuries) looks to be very rough for humanity.   If you wonder why I say that, I refer you to a common theme on this blog, the problem with "growth".   

Here is a film that captures in 34 minutes the basics of the problem.  It is produced by Incubate Pictures in cooperation with The Post-Carbon Institute.  It is your midnight movie.

The next couple of centuries will be rough. We are currently at the beginning but in the zone of this major change, which is overshoot due to exponential growth. Whatever happens to me is no big deal. I plan on dying. That is a darn good plan since I will die at some point regardless of my plans.

Given death, or to put a positive spin on it, given that one day I will enter The Great Peace, I would like to live this life in a way that matters. I would like to be, in the words of Nancy Abrams, an "honorable" ancestor.

I am not completely sure what "honorable" might mean. I have no idea what I should do or what I should say. I think at least I should care. The best epitaph I can think of for my tombstone is:

Well, at least he gave a shit.

I do care. I care about the twenty-somethings and younger who will inherit this mess in the immediate future and will have to roll with the crumbling of industrial civilization however that cookie happens to crumble. Their offspring will be born into a very different world than the one most of us know today.

I care that human beings will somehow manage to survive all the catastrophes ahead and preserve enough knowledge and hope to keep eating, breeding, and surviving, so that a remnant may start again in a few centuries and be the green shoot that will flourish for millions of years.

Joel Primack and Nancy Ellen Abrams who will be my guests on an upcoming radio program compare this burst of human growth in the last two centuries with cosmic inflation in the first second of the universe. It is an analogy of course. But the idea is that after the cosmic inflation, the universe grew steadily and slowly. In alike manner, after this industrial inflation in which the human population shot up from a billion to seven billion (and growing), it too, will settle into a long, slow period of growth.

I don't know. I find that interesting and hopeful.

What I think is my task, and perhaps you have thought along similar lines, is to encourage each other to talk about that which we don't talk about much, our future, our long-term future, our thousands of generations in the future future. Not only talk about it, but imagine it. And then, maybe get our politicians to imagine it. 

Fossil-fuel powered growth is a dead end.  A. literal. dead. literal. end.   They talk incessantly about continuing it.   Not one tells us the truth.   Let us tell the truth they cannot yet tell.

It is time for everyone, the whole world, to care about our long-term future and to plan together for it. This past Sunday I used this passage from the book written by Nancy Ellen Abrams and Joel Primack, The New Universe and the Human Future. I found it inspiring. Maybe you will as well.

Here is a hypothetical fragment of an origin story from the distant future.

“Everyone in the Galaxy came from one little planet called Earth. The cooperative genius of a small group of ancient earthlings made them rebel against the robotic march to death that the majority was on—to use up the planet with no plan for the future. It was the acquisition in the early twenty-first century of the ability to see into the cosmically distant past and thus project far into the future that allowed the rebels to grasp the meaning of their own evolution from the first available scientifically cosmic perspective. The rebels saw the implications of what a few scientists were already suggesting but had not yet fully appreciated: that intelligent beings on Planet Earth were cosmically central, living at a pivotal moment in time, and had a potential destiny as vast as the cosmic past if they would only protect it. This awakening led to the great conversion from short-term fragmented identities to the first serious long-term species identity. Those early rebels changed the course of history and led to the Galactic community of our time.”

Let’s keep that story possible.

Be a rebel.

Time in a Bottle

In this segment, Dr. Albert Bartlett uses an illustration from the Boulder, Colorado city council to show how steady growth leads to catastrophic outcomes.

When he was making this video (1999), city council members were discussing what would be an acceptable population growth rate. One figure considered was 5% per year. 70/5% means that the population would double every 14 years. If that growth rate were to continue, Boulder, in one lifetime would be about the size of Los Angeles.

As he points out, you couldn't fit LA into the Boulder valley. Obviously, Boulder's growth will stop.

The only question is will we be able to stop it while there's still some open space or will we wait until it is wall to wall people and we're all choking to death?

He put up this interesting headline from the Denver Post:

Colorado has a three percent growth rate...that's like a third world country with no birth control.

Dr. Bartlett says:

We send foreign aid--family planning assistance--to countries that have smaller population growth rates than Colorado has.

Dr. Bartlett uses this example to show how short-sighted we are in regards to growth and how even city council members do not understand basic arithmetic. Then Dr. Bartlett talks about bacteria.

Imagine bacteria growing steadily in a bottle. They double in number every minute. At 11:00 a.m. there is one bacterium in the bottle. At 12:00 noon the bottle is full.

It has a doubling time of one minute. It is in a finite environment of one bottle. He asks three questions:

1) What time was the bottle half full?

Answer: 11:59.

The bacteria double every minute. Second question:

2) If you were an average bacterium in the bottle at what time would first realize that you were running out of space?

Before he gives the answer he reminds us that this type of steady growth is the centerpiece of the entire global economy.

To answer question two, he provides this table:

Table II. The last minutes in the bottle.
11:54 a.m.	1/64 full (1.5%)	63/64 empty
11:55 a.m.	1/32 full (3%)	31/32 empty
11:56 a.m.	1/16 full (6%)	15/16 empty
11:57 a.m.	1/8 full (12%)	7/8 empty
11:58 a.m.	1/4 full (25%)	3/4 empty
11:59 a.m.	1/2 full (50%)	1/2 empty
12:00 noon	full (100%)	0% empty

He returns to the Boulder argument. Someone wrote a letter saying that growth in Boulder is not a problem because there is 15 times the amount of space that Boulder has already used.

So what time is it in Boulder? The answer? Four minutes before 12, when the bottle is 1/16 full.

Suppose that at 11:58 some of the bacteria realize they are running out of space. So they launch a great search for new bottles. They search offshore on the outer continental shelf, in the overthrust belt and in the arctic, and they find three new bottles.

This is an amazing find. They have four times as many bottles. Surely, this will give them a sustainable society, says Bartlett. Right? Question 3:

3) How long can the growth continue as a result of the discovery of three new bottles; this quadrupling of the proven resource?

Answer:

At 11:59 the bottle is half-full.
At 12:00 the bottle is full.
At 12:01 two bottles are full.
At 12:02 all four bottles are full.

Game over. Dr. Bartlett tells us that we don't need any more arithmetic than that to address what we hear from the experts that we can go on growing and increasing our consumption of fossil fuels because we will discover new resources to meet the requirements.

Turning to energy, Bartlett quotes former energy secretary, James Schlesinger:

In the energy crisis, "we have a classic case of exponential growth against a finite resource." (Time Magazine, April 25, 1977).

How much oil is there? When do we use it? In the 1960s and 1970s the consumption was 7 percent per year. Doubling time = 10 years.

This percent growth did not continue because OPEC raised its prices. But say it did continue. How long would 7% consumption last?

In 1973 we consumed 20.4 billion barrels of oil. 334 billion barrels since oil was discovered approximately 100 years before that, leaving us with 1765 billion barrels. That is data. The rest is projection of 7% per year.

Year	Barrels Produced	Cumulative Use	Amount Left
1973	20.4	334	1765
1981*	35.1	559	1540
1991*	69.1	1078 (half gone)	1022
2001*	135.9	2100	0

Had we continued at 7%, in 1981 we would have had three times as much left in reserve than we would have used in all of history. A lot of oil. From our bacteria in a bottle example, what time is it when you have three times as much reserve compared to what was used? Two minutes before twelve.


Doubling usage every ten years (7% increase in production per year) would have depleted the oil in two decades.

The segment concludes at this point. We will pick this up next time.



Questions for discussion:
1) Where are we now in real numbers of barrels of oil?
2) What is our percentage rate of growth?
3) What time is it?

Zero Population Growth Will Happen

In this next installment, Dr. Bartlett continues with examples of the exponential function. He talks about world population.

On July 7, 1986, the news reports indicated that the world population had reached 5 billion people growing at a rate of 1.7% per year.

That doesn't sound like much. You calculate the doubling time 70/1.7% = 41 years.

In 1999, the world population had reached 6 billion, but growing at 1.3% per year. Doubling time = 53 years. However, Earth adds 80 million new humans every year.

Dr. Bartlett extrapolates this modest 1.3% per year growth to the future.

If this modest 1.3% per year could continue, the world population would reach a density of one person per square meter on the dry-land surface of the earth in 780 years. And the mass of people would equal the mass of the earth in just 2400 years.

Dr. Bartlett points out that we smile at that. We know that won't happen. Why? Because, eventually zero population growth is going to happen. We can debate whether or not we like it. Regardless, it will happen. Today's high birth rates will drop and low death rates will rise far sooner than 780 years.

Then he asks, "What sort of options are available if we want to address the problem?" He offered this

Table of Options

Increase Populations Decrease Populations

Procreation	Abstention
Motherhood	Contraception Abortion
Large Families	Small Families
Immigration	Stopping Immigration
Medicine Public Health Sanitation	Disease
Peace	War
Law and Order	Murder Violence
Scientific Agriculture	Famine
Accident Prevention	Accidents
Clean Air	Pollution (smoking)
Ignorance of the Problem

The items on the left are the good things we do that lower the death rate. But anything we do that lowers the death rate makes the problem worse. The things on the right are those things that are going to solve the problem. We have a dilemma. Those things on the left we regard as good and sacred. Those things on the right (murder, war, famine, disease) we do not want.

Now, the point. We eventually are going to reach zero population growth. Nature will choose from those items on the right. Dr. Bartlett says:

We don't have to do anything except be prepared to live with whatever nature chooses from that right hand list. Or we can exercise the one option that is open to us: choose something from the right hand list that we can go out and campaign for.

Nature is already choosing. AIDS is one example. Famine and war are others. He asks an interesting question: where is education on this table? Is it on the right hand column or left? He thinks that so far, it is on the left. Education has not addressed this problem.

He doesn't mention religion, but I'll let you be the judge.

It appears to me that the best item on the right would involve decreasing birth rates. It seems that we ought to be campaigning for contraception and family planning and reorient our values so that every child born is a wanted child.

Or we can let nature take its course. And it will.