Changing light bulbs on the Titanic won’t make the iceberg go away.

I’ve just seen a video on YouTube that is an absolute must-see. Grab a cup of coffee and sit down to watch all 8 segments of “the Most Important Video You’ll Ever See”, otherwise known as “Arithmetic, Population and Energy”. In this incredibly compelling lecture, Dr. Albert Bartlett, Professor Emeritus of the Dept. of Physics, University of Colorado at Boulder, marches over any false optimism we might be clinging to as far as the earth’s ability to sustain its current pattern of population growth and energy usage. With chart after chart, he visually shows how even modest rates of growth produce a doubling of numbers in a very short time. When applied to current growth rates in population and energy use, the results promise devastating changes in our lifetime. It’s not that this information hasn’t been available for some time. I have a book that’s been sitting on my nightstand for about a year that explains it all in great detail. I’ve been avoiding it – it’s too depressing, too dry, and the problems described are seemingly impossible to solve. Somehow the new administration that promises to actually pay attention to science has given me hope that people might be persuaded to work together on this problem instead of hoping it will all go away.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-QA2rkpBSY&feature=PlayList&p=6A1FD147A45EF50D&index=0

Barlett briefly lists several factors currently are creating population growth, While developed countries may have lower birth rates than poor countries, they have lower death rates (due to factors such as good sanitation, improved medicine, peace, law and order, scientific agriculture, accident prevention, lowered pollution, lowered smoking rates). It is possible to ignore the problem, but as Dr. Barlett points out, zero population growth will eventually happen. We can choose to make it happen (through limiting family size), or natural and social factors will make it happen: disease, war, murder violence, famine, accidents, pollution. The failure to take action is still a decision, and the results will not be pleasant.

Zero population growth is a topic even the most ardent environmental advocate often fears broaching. To suggest responsible procreation, that takes into account the ability of the earth to sustain a reasonable quality of life, is seen as flying in the face of divine command to be “fruitful and fill the earth” and is often scorned as some kind of elitist genocide. Some of my favorite people have chosen to have more than two children, and calling for ZPG does not imply that I think some of these delightful people should not exist. I do, however, think these delightful people should have energy and food and medical care all their lives, and wanting to prevent distinct possibility that this might not be the case is hardly elitist or genocidal. Of course there is selfish concern on my part. I have one child and would dearly love to see her live her life and produce her own family in safety and with enough to eat. And since my family history indicates that it’s highly likely I will be around another 35 years or so, I worry that that in the absence of a lowered birth rate, the prospect for the elderly in the future might involve a forced encounter with Dr. Kevorikian or a Soylent Green facility. It’s a nice fantasy that here in the U.S. we might escape the effects of world turmoil, but fences on our borders and government bailouts will not keep out the world that all wants to live as well as we do and will not limit itself while we continue to use more than our share.

Current efforts to change our energy use and turn around global climate disruption are critical and must be increased. But no matter how much we change our energy use in the U.S., if the world’s population continues to rise, and the emerging middle classes of India and China continue their pattern of increased energy use, we will still be at our current state of affairs in spite of all our efforts. We will have replaced all the light bulbs on the Titanic with curly bulbs, filled up the recycling bins, and converted the engines to burn biodiesel, but there’s still an iceberg straight ahead.

So how do we create needed change without resorting to the Draconian measures of the Chinese government? Facing the problem is the first step. The most powerful way is one I don’t hear discussed much. Empowering women to take control over their own lives is highly linked with lower birth rates. Freedom from violence, reproductive control, access to education and employment, all break the cycle of large families struggling in poverty. These are all issues that have not been high on the past administration’s list of priorities. With our encouragement, they will be high on the agenda of the next administration, both at home and abroad. And dare we hope that responsible reproduction and stewardship of the earth might become religious values, replacing the current values that elevate the production of more church members as a woman’s highest calling? There’s no place in the Bible that says “go ahead and make a mess of the earth, I’ll fix it for you”.

The rise of technology has shown that humans can change and adapt rapidly. An equally swift and sweeping change of attitude and behavior will have to take place to prevent the disasters looming in our near future. Unlike the fated Titanic’s voyage, we do have people who can see the iceberg – we just have to listen to them and start steering. Now.

(This is a repost, transferred from my old blog. Original date Dec. 26, 2008)