April 22 marked the 50th anniversary of Earth Day.
The first, in 1970, is credited with starting much of the environmental movement. Certainly, south of the border, it initiated discussions that lead to the Clean Air, Clean Water and Endangered Species Acts. It was also instrumental in the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency by President Richard Nixon. Many countries, including Canada, adopted similar laws with varying degrees of effectiveness.
The original Earth Day was a response to oil spills, air pollution (smog) and rivers that could be lit on fire. The development of industry in the first half of the 20th century had operated, to a large extent, with little in the way of regulatory frameworks. The world’s population also doubled between 1900 and 1970, putting additional stresses on resources. As we shifted to the modern economy, our need to consider the environment changed.
Although much changed in terms of environmental law and regulation during the 1970s, it wasn’t the first time humanity had addressed the issues arising from large populations living in confined spaces. The recognition of environmental degradation and the need for proper controls date back to ancient Greece and China. It intensified with the industrial revolution in the 1800s when smoke from factories killed workers by the thousands. But it was the population boom of the last century that really brought the issue to the fore.
By the 1960s, unattended pollution sources were leading to the loss of species, the loss of agricultural space, the loss of forests and the loss of lives. Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring posited a future in which the hedgerows and fields of North America would see no song birds and environmental degradation would lead to a decrease in the quality of all life.
A small group of individuals initiated the first Earth Day but it quickly grew into a national and then international movement. Governments might not have moved on issues such as whaling and the Antarctic ozone hole without the protest of citizens. Without movements such as Earth Day, we likely would not have the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
But for all the environmental movement’s successes, there is still so much more to be done. Scientific journals are rife with reports detailing declines in animal populations. Yes, we still have emperor penguins but their numbers have been dropped by 50 per cent in the past 50 years. Yes, we saved the whooping crane but we have lost the western black rhino and the Pinta Island tortoise.
A recent article estimates North America has lost 3 billion birds over the past 50 years. Much has been due to habitat loss brought about by the further doubling of the human population – from 3.8 billion in 1970 to the nearly 8 billion alive today. But the use of pesticides and herbicides, the introduction of chemical compounds and the profusion of plastic items in our environment are all taking their tolls.
One estimate argues we need 2.3 hectares of arable land for each person alive but we only have 1.9 hectares available. We are overdrawing our natural bank account. Overfishing has put 17 of the 19 major fisheries in the world in danger of collapse – a situation that will only get worse as the population continues to increase at an exponential rate. Cities are consuming the surrounding countryside, forcing the conversion of agricultural land to suburbs, shopping malls and golf courses. Tropical forests are falling before farming interests as existing land gets nutrient depleted.
And climate change continues apace as we use more and more fossil fuels. Both the growing population and the growing economy require more energy and the bulk of that energy is provided by carbon-based fuels.
All of this is a very depressing view and I apologize for that. We have spent the last 50 years working on trying to make the world a better place. We have done much to save the environment but there is still much to do. Indeed, finding a balance between consumption of resources and protecting the environment will be a perpetual policy paradox. How can we create more while using less?
I wish I had a solution to offer. Some simple things – such as eating less meat or changing consumer consumption patterns – can go some way to saving the environment. But bigger solutions – such as shifting to a totally renewable energy economy – still are a long way off.
The one thing I do know is that we cannot follow the route taken by our ancestors. When resources grew scarce or pollution rendered an area unsuitable, they moved. From Africa to the Middle East to Europe and Asia to the new world, our ancestors spread out around the world to avoid environmental degradation. Unfortunately, we now occupy pretty much every corner of the globe.
Sorry for the depressing column.
Happy Earth Day!
