Crisis? What Crisis?
Cambridge-based The Scientific Alliance dismisses "scary" claims by the Global Footprint Network that the world is becoming ecologically bankrupt. An extract from the Alliance's newsletter follows
The www.euractiv.com website this week carried an interview with Mathis Wackernagel, director of the Global Footprint Network, which is an organisation "committed to fostering a world where all people have the opportunity to live satisfying lives within the means of Earth's ecological capacity". Their message is simple and superficially scary: we are using effectively more than the resources of one world, and have to change our ways if we are not to become "ecologically bankrupt".
Like all such exercises, the output of the Global Footprint Network's analysis depends on the assumptions made. The exercise is well-meaning but intrinsically flawed. Estimating consumption (of food, fuel etc) is relatively straightforward, as is measuring actual output of coal, oil, crops or other resources. The difficulty comes in knowing what the real limits on production or extraction are.
There are those who claim that "peak oil" is here or shortly will be, that further increased extraction will simply not be possible. They point to the fact that oil prices are historically high and look set to remain so, and yet production has not surged in response to the price signal. Of course, it's not as simple as that. Proven reserves continue to increase, particularly as higher prices change the economics, but bringing more reserves on stream is not just a question of turning a tap: more wells must be drilled and enormous investment in extraction and distribution networks is needed. Given more time, oil supplies will ease.
Equally, there are currently real concerns about food security because of large price rises of basic commodities. But the challenges of the 1970s were met, and billions of extra mouths fed without expanding the area of arable land. Supply crises concentrate minds, and solutions are found.
The difficulty lies in defining the realistic ultimate productivity of the Earth. The limiting factor ultimately is the amount of solar energy which reaches the surface and which can potentially be captured. There are lower limits, of course: land is finite, and crop productivity cannot be increased beyond a certain point. But we are well below that point at present. And, overriding all other arguments is the simple fact that development does not continue on some straight line or smooth curve. Technologies change, new energy sources are found, and the whole paradigm on which the ecological footprint is based becomes invalid.
So, we do need to be reminded to be aware of our environmental impact. We do need to be conscious that many resources are, in practical terms, finite. But we should not allow a concept such as the ecological footprint to blinker our vision.
The Scientific Alliance
St John's Innovation Centre, Cowley Road, Cambridge CB4 0WS
Tel: +44 1223 421242
