The recently released annual report from the Climate Living Index states that Australia has the sixth biggest footprint in terms of fossil fuel use and ecological damage. My only surprise at this is that we are sixth and not higher! At the top is the USA, followed by the United Arab Emirates, Finland, Canada then Kuwait. The demands we are making on the natural resources, and by we I mean everyone, not just Australians, is growing and could well lead to our own demise; at the very least, a radically different lifestyle, for fewer people, and possibly only marginally above subsistence level.

It is predicted that by 2050, 1.4 billion people will be living under water distress.

This all translates to a steep decline the in biodiversity of species, such as fresh water fish, mammals, birds, plants. These issues are serious. Although we seem to think, or hope, that it will not affect us or our lifestyles, it will. We rely on the earth for our survival, just as the birds, animals and plants do. In our busy, technological, well-fed and luxury replete lives, we tend to forget this.

Everything we eat, own, wear and use comes from the earth, not to mention the air we breathe.

There are naysayers everywhere. I see them on news forums, article sites, blogs and newspapers. I hear them on the radio. Some believe it is the scientists lying at worst and fudging at best just to get funding. Some believe it is in the hands of God, and not written about in the Bible so therefore doesn’t exist. Some believe it is the work of scaremongers, history is replete with people declaring the end is nigh – like the cave dwelling sect in Russia who believe the world will end this month. Some believe the scientists will find a way out. Some even believe the scientists and the multinationals already have the way out but are making what profit they can in the meantime.

I believe all these beliefs are either nonsense, pie-in-the-sky, ostrich head-in-the-sand, fearful, foolish or dangerous. It really does not matter if the climate change believers, whether scientist, politician or average citizen, are wrong.

It does matter if they are right.

If we work at reducing climate change, environmental destruction, biodiversity loss and take water saving measures, what do we have to lose? The usual answers to these questions are strong and immediate: Profits, Low Inflation, Jobs, Economic Security.

Yes, possibly. But, these are no more than problems to be overcome. Profits can be earned from energy, manufacturing and farming practices that do not ruin the environment. Low inflation can be maintained by governments ensuring sensible management of the budget, regardless of how a country earns its money. Jobs can be created, adapted and developed or maintained in clean industry. Even forestry workers can be employed in maintaining the forests in a sustainable manner rather than destroying our vital rain forests. Economic security is maintained and furthered by government policy, not by destroying the planet.

History shows that every great civilization has fallen, and ultimately through destroying their environment, e.g., the Maya, the Ancient Egyptians, the people of Easter Island. The monument of stone statues we know Easter Island by required all the forests to be cut down to move the stones, and irrevocably changed their environment to one which no longer sustained life.

If we continue to learn nothing from history, we will repeat it. The world will still be here. There will still be fauna and flora. There might even be a few humans, but probably not. The numbers will be decimated in all species, and life will not be the same until evolution allows adaptation once again to the changed environment, and that takes eons. It does not necessarily mean that humans will be able to survive in whatever new environment results.

If we don’t heed the warnings, we will perish. Perhaps, for the world itself, that’s not such a bad thing. I don’t want to experience it, but I especially don’t want my children or grandchildren to experience it – ‘it’ being food shortages, water shortages and foul air. Nor do I want them experiencing the inevitable fighting/wars that will occur over dwindling resources – which for a time will boost economies, but only for a short (sighted) time. Look at the deficit in the US because of war, and for what? A damaging fossil fuel. Securing oil is only delaying the inevitable and ensuring the decline of life will come more suddenly and profoundly.

Are there scientists scaremongering and securing grants? Probably. Are there politicians jumping on board for populist reasons? Definitely. Should we therefore poo-poo the fact that developed world lifestyles are destroying our own habitat? Definitely not. Added to the stress the world environment is already under, including acidity and heavy metal levels rising in the oceans, the developing world outnumbers the developed world in all ways. Without sustainable methods, the decline of the environment and biodiversity will escalate exponentially.

To ignore this, and to focus only on the short term, i.e. profits, elections, popularity, is to deserve what happens. In all things, the logical and sensible approach is to take the middle road: steady, certain changes with both short term and long term goals and strategies for a sustainable habitat. We are the species at ultimately most at risk.

If we keep soiling and over-using our habitat, we’ll be like that old Disney cartoon where Jiminy Cricket laughs at the ants preparing for the winter. Ants, the real ants, will survive but they won’t be taking us in. We’ll be outside on our own.

But not for long.

Author: Hannah Quinn
Article Source: EzineArticles.com
Provided by: Hybrid and Electric Cars