2022 (21 page)

The bad news and the reason I am including
this example is that it took thirty-five years to put a solution in
place for a relatively straightforward problem. For the potential
issues we have now, even after we process the data and really
understand the issue, it will take decades to get global agreement
and solutions in place.

World Population

There are many forecasts out there for this
planet’s population and one of the lowest I could find is that we
will have about another billion people on this planet by the year
2050 (current population as of March 2015 is 7.3 billion).

If
any
of the potential problems with
a timeframe of less than a few hundred years to solve are real,
then this population growth is a very significant problem. As the
population increases, the timeframes that we are given to solve
potential problems decreases.

Can we take the risk that climate change,
pollution, mass extinction, peak resources and several other issues
all
are either completely false or for the ones that are
real that
all
have a timeframe of more than a few hundred
years to solve?

The 6
^th
Mass
Extinction

Though not unstoppable, it appears that this
planet is well on track to witness the 6
^th
mass
extinction of at least amphibians, fish and mammals within the next
few hundred years. There are some estimates that show that most
commercial fish species could be gone as early as 2050. Some of the
major drivers behind this are pollution, over-fishing and hunting,
destruction of habitats and rapid climate change.

As species disappear the ecosystem that they
were part of changes. If we allow this mass extinction to continue,
the ecosystem that we live in and rely upon for food, clean water,
fresh air and a host of other essential components will change
drastically.

We have at least some measure of control over
all of the causes for this extinction event, such as slowing down
the amount of plastics that are put into our oceans. I have seen
recent estimates that we are putting at least 5 million metric
tonnes of plastic into the ocean each year. Did you know that when
you wash your clothes that are made from nylon and other synthetic
textiles, you are contributing to this through the micro fibers
that come loose during the wash cycle? These micro fibers are then
consumed by small marine life, either harming them or entering our
own food supply.

The key question here is do we have enough
runway left along with sufficient global willpower to slow down
this event in time before changes occur that seriously impact
us.

Jobs, Income, and Wealth Inequality

There are many issues in the area of
economics and the global economy, but I feel that one of the
biggest challenges for us and our children will be finding good
jobs. With the advances in technology our individual productivity
is going up, requiring fewer people to produce the same amount of
goods. Combine this with globalization, where many jobs can be now
done from anywhere in the world and competition for good jobs will
be stiffer than ever.

The key here is “good” jobs. In my opinion,
unemployment numbers are masking the fact that more and more people
are working either part-time jobs or working at lower paying
jobs.

At the same time that the majority of the
population is struggling to find good jobs, there is the increasing
trend of inequality for both income and wealth. In other words, the
rich keep getting richer. In 1979, the richest 0.1 percent of the
population controlled 7 percent of the wealth in the U.S., and by
2012 this number had increased to 22 percent. The flip side of this
is that as the rich are getting richer, the rest of us are getting
poorer. Overall, poverty is on the rise. Combine this with the
point above about jobs and the future does not look that great for
our children.

If these trends continue, the timeline here
is less than a few generations before we devolve back to a society
comprised mostly of peasants with a few ultra-rich and powerful
ruling over them.

Greenhouse Gases, Ocean Acidification, and
Global Climate Change

The “great debate” that is currently going on
is ‘if” we are witnessing dramatic global climate change and ‘if”
we are the reason behind it because of the fossil fuels that we are
burning.

Some key points:

• If there were no humans on this planet, the
climate, CO2 levels, and the acidity of the oceans would not stay
constant. There are natural cycles that this planet goes through
that impact these areas.

• When looking at the whole carbon cycle, the amount
of carbon that we are putting into the atmosphere by burning fossil
fuels is not insignificant (we are putting roughly 30 gigatons of
CO2 into the atmosphere, and the overall natural carbon cycle for
the planet is in area of 750 gigatons).

• The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing.
It has not been this high for twenty million years. It appears that
the rate that it has been increasing over the last 100 years or so
is pretty much unmatched in history and this is key. Perhaps humans
can adapt quick enough to this change but will the rest of our
ecosystem be able to adapt as quickly?

• In general, both sides of the debate agree that a
higher CO2 concentration in the atmosphere will lead to a warmer
planet.

• The oceans act as a CO2 buffer and both take in
and release CO2. Recent data appears to show that they are getting
both more acidic (due to increasing CO2) and warmer.

• Methane is a far more serious greenhouse gas but
has a lifespan of about a dozen years in the atmosphere. If the
planet warms up, more methane will be released from the northern
permafrost areas and will accelerate the warm up cycle, releasing
more methane in a vicious self-feeding cycle.

• Unlike ozone, the carbon cycle can take hundreds
if not thousands of years to stabilize. In other words, even if we
stop putting CO2 in the atmosphere tomorrow, it will take a long
time for the acid levels and ocean temperature to go back to where
they were.

There are arguments that a planet that was a
bit warmer than it is now and had a bit more CO2 may be a good
thing for us in that there would be more plant life and other
positive factors. Yes, this is true, that may happen. But do we
know
that this would be the result? Do we have the knowledge
to safely terraform the planet that we live on?

The risk of potentially causing a few-degree
change in the planet temperature and causing a substantial release
of methane from northern permafrost regions or increasing the ocean
acidity level to the point of making many species go extinct is, in
my opinion, too high to ‘gamble’ that it will all work out ok.

Peak Natural Resource Supply

There are several natural resources on this
planet that we are getting close to using up, at least the easy to
get to sources of it. Examples include oil, phosphorus, natural
gas, copper, lithium, and freshwater. A variety of factors go into
determining the timeframe for when we will exhaust the supply for
each of these. These factors include the level of recycling,
replacement with some other material, and the discovery of new
sources. Predictably of the timeframes for when we will reach the
end of the supply for each of these is very erratic.

However, there is a finite supply of these
items and since we continue to draw on them, there must come some
period of time when we will actually run out. From what I have
read, it would appear that a practical timeframe for oil, natural
gas, and coal would be in the 100-to 200-year area. Not that far
off, but probably far enough that we will come up with new
technologies and materials to replace them when the supply is
exhausted. Of course, long before that we are going do more
environmental damage as we try to find more sources, such as
drilling in the oceans for oil, fracking and ocean mining.

The couple of resources that have gotten my
attention though are phosphorus and freshwater.

Phosphorus is a major component in
fertilizers and so far at least there is no alternative for it and
it cannot be made. Without fertilizers, there would obviously be a
dramatic drop in agriculture production. Estimates of peak
phosphorus range from 50 to 200 years. Like oil, this is not too
far off, but unlike oil, there is no good replacement here and the
end result will be much higher prices as supplies of phosphorus
start to dwindle and agriculture output starts to drop.

The amount of freshwater that we have is a
bit different than other natural resources such as copper in that
it is a renewable resource, but where the water is and where it is
needed are two different things. This is already a problem as we
exhaust rivers and underground aquifers to sustain growing
agricultural and urban demands. The problem will only intensify as
our population increases, underground sources become exhausted and
rain patterns change due to climate change.

The timeframe for freshwater is pretty much
right now. There are several major rivers around the globe that
either don’t or rarely make it to the ocean anymore due to the high
demands of irrigation and urban usage. Either due to a short-or
long-term pattern, there are many areas now that are in the midst
of a multi-year drought that is causing heavy reliance on backup
sources of water, such as underground aquifers and lakes. These
backup sources will not last much longer.

I think the situation with freshwater is a
good example of why I am fearful of our future. We have a clear
problem here and several potential solutions, yet we continue to
kick the can down the road. There are some measures that are being
taken to try to either curb water use or to create more through
desalination, yet roughly a billion people on this planet lack
sufficient access to it.

Just for fun, imagine the outcomes if some of
the following items were implemented. In my opinion, each would
have a positive effect on our world. While there would be issues
and problems in introducing some or all of them, an examination of
why the intent of each is not already in place serves as a good
exercise.

1. Similar to drug ads that seem to devote at least
30% of their time outlining potential product side effects, create
a law whereby all commercials inform viewers of the extent of
resources used to build the product being sold. They would be
required to challenge viewers to determine whether they need to buy
the product and if so, to remind them that a good alternative may
be to buy used instead.

2. Unless a meal is ordered in advance as “to-go,”
automatically add a twenty percent tax to a restaurant bill if the
diner does not finish the meal and does not take the remainder
home. Oblige restaurants to offer variable sizes for their
meals.

3. Force cities to allow for small houses (less than
500 square feet), underground homes, and to get rid of bylaws
prohibiting people from living in their car or RV within city
limits (at least allow for a number of designated places within the
city to do so). While working on zoning laws, enforce a certain
percentage of residential areas to be committed to multi-generation
and/or true multi-family homes.

4. Some type of resolution passed forcing each
country to work towards getting a decreasing year over year GDP for
the next twenty years. Countries with increasing GDPs would be
obliged to pay penalties (which would go to the countries with the
decreasing GDP). Would you vote for a political party who had
negative growth as a campaign platform? If not, why not?

5. Force credit scores to include personal net worth
and income as components.

6. Make all public transportation free (this is
already in place in several cities).

7. Impose a country-wide, four-day work week. Make
it illegal to open most places of business for one or two days of
the newly formed three-day weekend.

8. Make it compulsory to show key environment
statistics and trends in the mainstream news, including newspapers,
radio, and television.

9. Put in a law that would put a warning label on
all products that contain plastics that will eventually end up in
the ocean. An example would be all clothing that contain synthetic
textiles.

I hope you have enjoyed
2022
. This
book was written after my first draft of
2222
with the hope
that separately introducing background information on Percipience
will make
2222
a better read. Both
2222
and the third
book in the series
2232
are available now.

All feedback, either through my website or
through a review/rating on your favorite ebook retailer, Goodreads
or Librarything is greatly appreciated.

From the back cover of 2222…

With his act-now-and-ask-questions-later
approach, Alec resolves to unravel the mystery of a radio signal
that shouldn’t exist in a world thrown back into the Dark Ages
after the Great Loss.

In an unforeseen period of self-discovery,
Lauren attempts to understand her own personal capabilities born of
an experiment begun 200 years earlier by a philanthropist whose
goal was to solve the ultimate puzzle.

Alec and Lauren and their ideologically
opposite cultures emerge in a post-apocalyptic world and endeavor
to coexist while racing to rediscover lost technologies—all on a
planet still recovering from events predating the Great Loss. The
challenges are not restricted to the world of fiction and dare the
reader to answer the real-life question: “Are we there yet?”