Module B1 Study Book - the Graduate School of the Environment

Overpopulation is one pillar of our crisis; the other is gross overconsumption.
The goal of stabilizing global growth in human numbers must never become
an excuse for continued domination of two thirds of the world by the other
one third. People in the developing world cannot be expected to bear the
burden of sacrificing their welfare and future development so that inhabitants
of developed nations can continue to drive their gas-guzzling SUVs. However
difficult it might be for “northerners” to scale back to a far more humble
lifestyle, we must do it for the global common good.
Determining a fair amount of petroleum use across cultures and nations is
exceedingly difficult, and may become a moot point before it is resolved.
Developing nations aspire to share in the fruits of the oil-nourished lifestyle
enjoyed by Americans and Europeans. The latter will continue to claim
their perceived “share” of petroleum and will no doubt defend it by force, if
necessary. How are we to decide by what principles of equity the allocation
of energy resources is to be determined? Sketching an adequate answer
could involve many people in this diverse conference and take months of
time. Even defining the terms and distinguishing with reality and justice
between “wants” and “needs” in Nigeria and Philadelphia, in Bangladesh
and Chile, might take us many months. Nevertheless, if we expect to survive
“powerdown” with any shreds of international understanding intact, these are
questions we must address.
Summary and Conclusions
We have argued that swift action in the face of a rapid and permanent
decline in oil production is not simply a matter of prudential judgment; rather,
it is a question of profound moral obligation. The end of the age of oil is
upon us, and we can expect a progression from peak production to 50% of
that by the middle of the 21st century, when the human population may be
climbing beyond nine billion. Without oil, our agriculture will decline and our
population will decline with it. Only with the help of conscientious religious and
secular leadership to promote lifestyle changes can we successfully make
this transition without the catastrophe of losing three or four billion people
gruesomely to starvation, disease, and resource warfare. The plan outlined
above ― relying upon nuclear-generated electricity in the early years, and
biofuels, solar, and wind power in the later years, and upon voluntary but
comprehensive population limitation ― might possibly mitigate the disaster
that will otherwise overtake us. Specifically, it might allow the carrying
capacity of the planet to remain in the range of three to five billion people,
and allow time for that equilibrium to be reached without the intervention of
the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.
Social organization will have to change to reflect the lessened ability to
transport people, commodities, and manufactured goods. The present
trend toward globalization will probably reverse itself, and most goods will
be produced locally or regionally by 2100.42 Auto-dependent suburbia is
doomed to extinction. Air travel ― if it exists at all ― is likely to be extremely
costly and reserved for absolute necessity. People will commute and travel
far less in general, and will probably form more homogenous communities,
154 Paper: Ethics in uncertainty