Going into debt a risky proposition

Science Matters by David Suzuki
Most of us are all too aware of what it?s like to live in financial debt, but what about ecological debt?
On October 9th, according to the Global Footprint Network, humanity went into ecological debt for the year, where demand for resources and the production of waste outpaced the planet?s capacity to produce new resources and absorb those wastes. In other words, we ceased to live off the ecological services provided by the planet and started consuming the ecosystems themselves.

The date is merely symbolic, as in reality human consumption of resources and production of waste is highly varied across the planet. In some areas, we?re already going into debt at the stroke of midnight on New Year?s Day. Other areas, however, are far less exploited and we may never reach those particular ecosystems? ecological limits during the year.
So ecological debt is more of a global average, based on the ?ecological footprint? concept, conceived by Bill Rees and Mathis Wackernagel at the University of British Columbia. The footprint concept is easy to visualize and helps us understand and compare our rate of resource consumption. Canadians? ecological footprint, for example, is huge. If everyone on Earth consumed as many resources and generated as much waste as Canadians do, we?d need the equivalent of nearly five more planets!
Ecological debt is similar, as it also helps us understand how human activities are affecting the planet and the services it provides to us. The concept requires us to look at these services as if they are sorts of paycheques. If we live off our income, we?re doing fine ? that?s sustainability. But when we start living beyond our means, just as we would with our finances, we go into debt and we may end up in trouble. Global warming is one example of that kind of trouble.
The Global Footprint Network calculates that the first ecological debt day occurred in 1987, on approximately December 19. But every year since it has been getting earlier and earlier, as our rate of consumption has increased. What happens if we break the bank? Well, it certainly would be problematic for our species, as the planet could simply no longer provide all the services we need and absorb all the wastes we create. Our population would then have to shrink down to a level that was sustainable with whatever functioning ecosystems we had left.
Although we often talk as though we should reduce our impact on the planet to protect nature, it?s actually much more about protecting ourselves. As pointed out in an excellent recent article in New Scientist magazine (available free online), nature would get along quite well without us. If humans were to go ecologically bankrupt and die off as a species, nature would no doubt spring back.
Human beings may have permanently altered some ecosystems, but life on Earth is remarkably tenacious. Without people around, wooden structures in our cities would start to decay almost immediately, and plants pushing their way into cracks would gradually overtake concrete, turning sprawling suburbs into forests and prairies once again. Over-fished seas would rebound with life. Many species currently on the brink would flourish. Our oceans would gradually absorb the carbon dioxide we?ve pumped into the atmosphere. Even nuclear waste would gradually decay. As the author points out, alien visitors to Earth 100,000 years after our demise would see no obvious signs of what we once were.
It?s sad to think that all we have created on Earth could, in evolutionary terms, disappear in the blink of an eye. Life would go on, but the remarkable story of a unique bipedal species would come to an end. A humbling thought, and a compelling reason to stay out of debt.
Take the Nature Challenge and learn more at www.davidsuzuki.org.
– 30 –