Collapse: What it might look like. And how we might respond.

This post attempts to briefly sketch out why and how our civilisation might collapse over the next couple of centuries.  It’s mainly guesswork, but much of it is likely to be true.

Civilisation stands on the brink of collapse.  And what is scary is that so many people appear to be unaware of this.

Seeing the signs:

The signs are clear enough. Most people are aware that we are running out of oil, and that we’re a civilisation that is addicted to oil.  And most of us are now aware that climate change is upon us. And yet, since 1990 (when we became aware of its seriousness) CO2 emissions have increased by almost 50%. The global community has made no dent in the inexorable rise in emissions. At some stage the global community will have to respond, and that will have significant impacts.  And the machine of perpetual economic growth is near its end.  The 2007 financial crash might just have taken us into a world of the flatline. And food?  Surely most us must be aware that the combined Oil, Climate Change, and Financial crises will lead to food shortages?

But what about those ecological and social crises that don’t reach the daily news?  The biodiversity crisis - for example - that threatens our survival. 200 species disappear every day; we are in the midst of our planet’s 6^th Mass Extinction event. The first such extinction that has been caused by an individual species; us.  Another story is provided by the fact that antibiotics, which our health service relies upon, are increasingly becoming ineffective.  This coupled with the deterioration in human auto-immunity suggests that a future epidemic could lead to millions of people falling ill, and swamping our hospitals.  But this might provide respite for another dilemma; overpopulation.  Global population is set to rise to 10 billion well before the end of this century.

I could have mentioned many other crises; the Energy Crisis, the Debt Crisis, the Arms Trade Crisis, the Soil Depletion Crisis, the Security Crisis, the Corruption Crisis, the Income Gap Crisis, the Poverty Crisis, the Computer Virus Crisis, the Fisheries Crisis.  And I’m sure you will now call to mind a few others that I haven’t mentioned, because I am confident by now that you have got the picture. 

Resources decline:

But I have left the most significant predicament to last.  The Resources Crisis.  We are running out of all the resources that this society has exploited so remorselessly and cheaply in the past to build the current edifice that we ironically call civilisation. In essence, all the raw materials like oil, gas, coal, iron, aluminium, copper, tin, silver, nickel, phosphorus, silica, and rare earth minerals etc. will be become unavailable to us at some point in the future.  The resources might still be under the ground, but they will be in such small concentrations that we will not have the energy or the machines to extract them. And even if we did no-one would have the money to finance it.

"Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist"
... Kenneth Boulding.

The following chart is from the New Scientist, a few years back…

Larger version here: http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/archive/2605/26051202.jpg

The civilisation that we know today will cease to exist at some stage in the middle of this century.  But we will start to see clearly the slow decline within the next 2 decades. 

The slow decline:

It’s unlikely that civilisation will collapse like a house of cards.  There is still some resilience in this civilisation. But it will be rocked by successive events from which it will partially recover, only to be hit again.  It is difficult to predict the next crisis; it might be financial, it might be energy or climate related. These big events might happen only once every 5 years or so. But within 20 years, it should be clear to most of us that a pattern is developing, and it is unlikely that we will return to the easy comforts we experienced in that period from 1980 to 2005.

At a guess the slow decline will end sometime in the latter half of this century.  During this period we can expect to see shortages in fuel, food, medicines and consumer items, increasing queues at shops for essential items, the end of the car, public transport breakdowns, brownouts, blackouts, breakdown in gas and water supplies, mass unemployment, hyperinflation, the collapse of national governmental bodies and the increasing insignificance of money.  The National Grid will become unreliable and break down. Computers and mobile phones will stop working. Such technologies will be available only to the super-rich.   Even renewable energy will fail to work without essential rare earth metals.

And all this against a social background of mounting confusion, anger, lawlessness and violence.

Many of us who campaign for a fairer and more sustainable world have realised by now that the collapse will have a good outcome in that the pressure on unstable ecosystems will diminish.  Civilisation cannot be changed for the better, but its damaging progress can be blunted, and if that saves just a few species it will be worthwhile.  A simple way that anyone can contribute to the slow decline is to stop buying anything that is not essential. If 10% of us can do this, then civilisation will collapse a little bit sooner.  But most importantly we will be learning how to live more frugally, which will be very useful in the times to come.

Many people (me included) will rejoice at the decline of this civilisation, as we recognise that it has bought us the luxuries of a comfortable life only at the expense of huge unjustified destruction.  But those that enjoy the lifestyle that civilisation brings will be reluctant to change, and will hang on to its exploitative nature for as long as possible.  And this will sadly result in lawless violence, as times become even harder.  Our society must anticipate and prepare for this. If people know what is on the horizon, they are less likely to resort to the knee-jerk gang culture.

"We act as though comfort and luxury were the chief requirements of life, when all that we need to make us really happy is something to be enthusiastic about".

.... Charles Kingsley.

The age of salvage:

Well before the end of the 21^st century, a new kind of economy will emerge.  Some of the products of civilisation will survive and remain useful for many years.  Hammers, garden forks and other hand tools, if looked after, will last for a century or so.  Glass will be treasured for its passive solar effect. And there will always be wood and simple tools to cut and shape it. Traveling quickly will require the bicycle or the horse. And that limitation of travel will strengthen communities. For many centuries it might be possible to eke out a peaceful way of living not unlike the American Indians used to enjoy before the coming of the white man.

How to respond positively to this:

“Let us put our minds together to see what life we can make for our children”.
... Chief Sitting Bull

Preparation work for the collapse to come cannot start too soon.  We do not advocate the survivalist mentality of taking to the hills and stockpiling essential commodities.  Quite the opposite.  The most important thing is to be fully engaged in the communities where we live.  As national institutions break down, local forms of organisation will become crucial.  Initially local authorities will be able to play a useful transitional role in ensuring that people don’t go hungry, and are secure. And friendly police forces might be needed to deal with the increasing possibility of violence and lawlessness. 

We will need to focus on those things that are essential:

1. Wholesome Food.
2. Clean Air and Water.
3. Shelter.
4. Warmth.
5. Friends and Conviviality.
6. Music and dance.
7. Love.
8. A Mission.

We will need to acclimatise to a world without non-essential luxuries.  How long will it take us to realise that we can live quite well without the mobile phone?

Most of us will need to learn new skills, as specialist hi tech jobs become redundant and pointless.  There are obvious skills like gardening, cooking, sewing, knitting, basic building, mechanical engineering, caring and the ability to make rudimentary energy.  We will need to recover our ability for story-telling, because as the old civilisation collapses, we will want to invent and tell new stories in order to educate ourselves about the new civilisation to come.  We need some guidebooks for the future.

The Gift Economy will ultimately replace our reliance on Money.  Cohesion in our society will inevitably rely on generosity. The gift economy is about using what gifts we have for the well-being of our friends in the community.

There are some things we need to plan for now.  In the immediate future, there will be no cheap fossil fuels. In the long term, even hi tech renewable energy will not be an option.  The energy future is wood for warmth, intermediate technology and 12 volt electricity.  We need to plant millions of trees now, so that they will be ready for burning in 50 years when we need them.

Prophesy of Doom?

Of course many people will react to this prognosis with the view that this is just doom-mongering. But I feel like the doctor who knows that the patient has got cancer, and believe it’s the responsible choice to tell the patient the truth, so that he can prepare for the rest of his life better informed.

The awesome destructiveness of the smartphone

A recent business article in the Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/jan/06/smartphone-sales-1bn-2013) suggested that 1 billion smartphones will be manufactured in 2013.  Indeed they say that 2013 will be the “year of the smartphone”. This will add to the 1.2 billion smartphones already in existence.  Considering that the implementation of this technology is only 5 years old, this is a meteoric rise.

It might be as well to start looking at the implications of this, as we would not want to go blundering into a potential problem without considering the pitfalls.  Amazingly no-one appears to be aware of the horrendous problems caused by smartphones.  We need to lift the lid on this destructive gadget.

A good place to start is to look at the component materials that go to make up a smartphone.  The list is long, but some of the materials require deeper investigation.  For example Indium and Gallium; Rare earth metals that enable the touchscreen to work so sexily that they give the smartphone its unique selling proposition.  Without rare earths, I’m sure the smartphone revolution would not be taking place right now.

Indium and Gallium:

Indium and Gallium might be termed rare earth elements but they are not that rare and can be found in many places on the planet.  But there is one catch, they exist only in very small concentrations (hence rare), and the amount of rock that has to be extracted and blasted to get to the Indium and Gallium is huge.  And thus starts the inventory of environmental damage…

·         Huge amounts of energy being expended (and that is principally fossil fuel energy);

·         Ecosystems being destroyed, stripping of forests, and creation of mining wastelands;

·         Disruption and subjugation of the local population and indigenous peoples who very often just happen to be in the way. Sometimes this involves covert slaughter of these people.

·         Disposal of huge volumes of mine “tailings”;

·         Pollution of river courses;

·         Pollution of the sea.

A further problem is that the mines are always located in countries that have an appalling record in environmental protection.

At the moment China accounts for 97% of global output of these precious rare earth minerals, with two-thirds produced in the remote region of Inner Mongolia.

The picture on the left shows a toxic lake, 10 sq km in size, near the town of Baotou, where there is a smelting plant which produces hundreds of chemicals that are used to process the 17 most sought after rare earths. No fish or algae will survive in this lake, and the shore line is covered with a black crust that is so thick it can be walked on.

The lake also contains radioactive elements like Thorium which can cause cancers of the pancreas and lungs as well as leukaemia.  Since 1958, when the smelting plant was built the area has been devastated.  There used to be farms here where watermelons, aubergines and tomatoes were grown.  Not any more.  Local  people now have to inhale solvent vapour, particularly sulphuric acid, as well as coal dust, clearly visible in the air.  The population of the nearby village of Xinguang Sancun has fallen from 2,000 to 300 as the farmers have moved out.

Tin:

Indium is mixed with Tin to form Indium Tin Oxide (ITO); a principal component of touchscreens.  More recently Gallium has been used for touchscreens, in this case mixed with Arsenic to form Gallium Arsenide.

Tin appears to be an innocuous material, but isn’t.  Research from Friends of the Earth has unearthed the ghastly environmental impact of Tin mining on the tiny island of Bangka in Indonesia, where much of the world’s tin comes from. Their investigations found “shocking evidence of: dangerous conditions in the unregulated unofficial mining sector, with police figures showing that an average of one miner died a week in 2011; destruction of lush forests and farmland and little restoration of mined land, leaving soil in which it is difficult to grow crops and craters filled with mosquito-attracting stagnant water; and uncontrolled offshore dredging destroying local fishermen's livelihoods, killing coral and the sea grass eaten by turtles”.  Tin from Bangka is found in Samsung and Apple smartphones.

Lithium:

Smartphone batteries are most likely to be made of lithium, a toxic substance that shouldn't be thrown out with the rubbish.  But sadly this happens a lot, as many people are not aware of the WEEE Regulations. Almost every landfill is packed with discarded lithium batteries. But it doesn’t stop there, because the battery will need to be recharged daily, thus consuming massive amounts of principally coal-generated electricity.  (More on this later when we look at the carbon impact of smartphones).

Tantalum:

Tantalum is another rare earth mineral which is used in the integrated circuits of smartphones.  Most people will know of this through the name “Coltan” (or Columbite-tantalite).  Wherever mining occurs, there are always huge environment and social problems that stem the political nature of the beast.  And in this case the story of mining Coltan in the Democratic Republic of Congo is sadly no exception.

It is clear that the presence of large Coltan reserves in the Congo is fuelling the bitter war between militias from Congo, Ruanda, Burundi and Uganda.

The United Nations noted in its 2001 report on the Illegal Exploitation of Natural Resources in the Congo that "The consequences of illegal exploitation has been twofold: (a) massive availability of financial resources for the Rwandan Patriotic Army, and the individual enrichment of top Ugandan military commanders and civilians; (b) the emergence of illegal networks headed by either top military officers or businessmen."

The working conditions for the workers are atrocious.  Coltan is laborious to mine, as it takes about three days for the workers to march into the forests to scratch out the ore with hand tools and pan it.  The mining process is lawless and uncontrolled. The health and safety of the workers is non-existent, but the tragedy is that casualties are not recorded because of the warring militias which create a climate of fear.

Because of uncontrolled mining in the Congo, the land is being eroded and is polluting lakes and rivers, affecting the ecology of the region.  Miners are far from food sources and have been hunting gorillas. The Eastern Mountain Gorilla's population has diminished and is critically endangered.

Copper:

Nothing electrical can survive without copper.  There is no other substance on the planet which conducts electricity like copper.  But the mining of copper is associated with probably the most heart wrenching environmental and social damage of all.  One of the world’s largest Copper mines is located in the mountainous rainforest of West Papua.  Operated by jointly by Freeport and Rio Tinto, the mine is located in the mountain of Jaya Wijaya (the mountain where the souls of the dead find their rest).  Even though it is remote, it is clearly visible using Google Earth.  The mine has ripped the heart out of the sacred mountain of the West Papuan tribe’s people.  The removal of the indigenous tribes from this area of West Papua has entailed the killing of about 200,000 people over a period of 30 years.  The mining security firms, aided and abetted by the Indonesian Army which absorbed West Papua into Indonesia in 1969, have been responsible for clearing the huge area not only of the rainforest, but the people living there.

Further investigation of Google Earth will show the course of the mining tailings; an orange sludge that travels south down the now toxic river to the Arafura Sea.

Sustainability: Peak Indium, Peak Gallium, Peak Copper and Peak Everything:

Mining the precious minerals that go into smartphones is just not sustainable, by any definition of that word.

The Brundtland definition of sustainability is "Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”

The Aalborg definition is “the rate at which we consume renewable and non-renewable material, water and energy resources should not exceed the rate at which the natural systems can replenish them”.

Either way it is clear that we are extracting these materials at a grossly unsustainable rate.

As a result Peak Indium and Peak Gallium will occur before 2030, Peak Copper about 2040, and the vast majority of most materials on the planet will be economically exhausted before the end of the century.

Radio Frequency (RF) Radiation:

As smartphones rise through the technological spectrum; 2G to 3G to 4G, so the resultant electromagnetic flux increases.

In the words of Spanish biologist Alfonso Balmori of the Institute for the Environment (Consejería de Medio Ambiente) in Castilla y León “the electromagnetic field is a perfect secret agent: you cannot see it, you cannot smell it, you cannot hear it, you cannot feel it, and its effects are slow but relentless”.

Very few people die from the electromagnetic flux caused by smartphones and their transmission equipment, but the health of everyone inside the electromagnetic field will deteriorate inexorably.

Climate Impact:

It is the climate impact of smartphones, where the scale of the problem becomes starkly clear.

According to WattzOn the embedded lifecycle energy of a typical smartphone (in this case an iPhone) is about 219kWh. In order to calculate the CO2 emissions we need to apply an emissions factor.

It seems sensible to assume the emissions factor for China where the smartphone is likely to come from and where most of the constituent materials come from.  This is 0.764 kgCO2/kWh.

This calculates as 167kg CO2 per smartphone.  (219 * 0.764)

Multiply this by a billion (1,000,000,000) for the mobile phones to be manufactured in 2013, and the total carbon cost of this single technology works out as 167 million tonnes of CO2 per annum. 

To make it clear, this is equivalent to the annual emissions of the Netherlands.   Let’s make this clearer.  In the short space of 5 years humanity has invented a new technology that is now adding the equivalent carbon emissions of a country the size of the Netherlands.  And that carbon burden is growing at an exponential rate, because the replacement rate of smartphones is of the order of two years, (for some it is an annual upgrade) and increasingly people have more than one smartphone.  And in addition to that we are adding even more intensive technological gizmos, like Kindles and Tablets.

But let’s put this in a more frightening context:  In order to avoid dangerous climate change we need to limit global temperatures rising above the 2 degrees C threshold, humanity needs to start reducing all greenhouse gas emissions, by about 3% every year.  For Western nations like the UK, that reduction needs to be sharper; somewhere between 5% and 10% per year. 

That is a year-on-year reduction. Even in a world-wide recession greenhouse gas emissions are still relentlessly rising.  Smartphones are simply not compatible with the immediate endeavour to avoid dangerous climate change.

So what can we do?

Clearly we need an immediate world-wide ban of smartphones and similar gizmos.  I really can’t see this happening anytime soon. But as individuals we have a choice. We can reject the technology, and make the decision not to purchase a smartphone.  For some this will be a hard decision.  Others have already made that commitment.

But I want to make this decision unequivocal.  Can you openly buy a smartphone if – having read the above article – you now have a full understanding of the awesome destructiveness that this gizmo inflicts on our world and our future?

Real Sustainability

Humanity's use of planetary non renewable resources should be between 600,000 and 9 million times less than current usage, if we are serious about our use of the word “sustainability”.

Our current society-view of sustainability (and the oxymoronic “sustainable development”) is coloured by the desire to maintain the myth of progress.

This is why the often quoted Brundtland definition has been so popular:
“Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. ... Pretty woolly eh?

One definition I like - which is clearer than the Brundtland Definition - is ...

“Real sustainability is when we use up no more resources than are naturally replenished by the earth. And we throw away no more waste than is naturally absorbed by the earth.”

Even this definition begs the question; “does the human species have an inalienable right to exploit these resources in any case”?

The key question is; “how do we measure the resources that we can use up under the rubric of real sustainability”? It will of course be different for each resource, but we could start off by looking at fossil fuels about which we know quite a lot.

The coal, oil and gas that we are using up now was created by the crushing of animals and plants laid down mainly during the Carboniferous Period, between 354 million and 290 million years ago.

We have been exploiting coal, oil and gas significantly for about 250 years ago. The easily extracted fossil fuels have now been used up. We have - if we are lucky - about another 250 years worth of the fossil fuels left under the ground, although the future exploitation period is very much dependent upon the energy cost and monetary cost of extraction.

To summarise then - in just 500 years we will have used up all the fossil fuel resources created over at least a 300 million year period. It could be argued therefore that we are using up fossil fuels at a rate 600,000 times faster that we should do, in order to meet our requirement of “using up no more resources than are naturally replenished by the earth”.

So - to be truly sustainable - our use of fossil fuels should be 600,000 times less.

But what about other minerals; bauxite, iron ore, molybdenum, gold, diamonds, copper etc?

Well, amazingly, we will see all these materials disappear over the same 500 year period that fossil fuels will be used up. However, these materials were naturally created over a period way before the carboniferous period, stretching back to when the planet was first formed; 4.54 billion years ago. Fossil fuels are the most recently formed resources.

Therefore the sustainability overuse ranges between 600,000 and 9 million.

Thus we need to use non renewable resources between 600,000 and 9 million times less, if we are really serious about our use of the word “sustainability”.

i.e. our use should be virtually zero. ... Now that’s what I call real sustainability!