What follows probably shouldn’t be called a “factoid.” Factual events are involved, but the analysis of their significance as a cause of climate change, that part is my opinion. That said, what events conspired to make climate change happen?
Were we simply ignorant of the science involved? I’m afraid not, the greenhouse effect was well understood as far back as the 1890′s and has been discussed frequently since. Here’s a headline from an article in the May 15, 1932, edition of the NY Times, entitled “Next Great Deluge Forecast by Science – Melting Polar Caps to Raise the Seas and Flood the Continents.” Could that be made more clear? The article talks about CO2 and runs down the science pretty clearly. We knew, but it’s also quite possible that the warnings were dismissed as whining by tree huggers or scare tactics by eco-terrorists.
If not ignorance, what then. I think the central story starts in Berlin during the early 20th century. Einstein was teaching there and he was part of a small clique of brilliant scientists that included Fritz Haber, the discoverer of ammonia synthesis, which is the basis for modern chemical plant fertilizers. Oddly, Haber also discovered the poison chlorine gas that was used on American GI’s during WW I. Ammonia synthesis was believed to make it possible to grow virtually unlimited quantities of food because it enabled food production in soils previously considered too infertile to grow crops. The natural method of controlling population had been overcome and hunger had been banished. The world was thrilled, but serious use of the technology would have to await the end of WW II when we planted food crops, wall to wall, across our central plains, fertilized the crops with Fritz Haber’s miracle, and then proceeded to feed a world left starving by the ravages of global conflict. At that moment, Earth’s population was 2.7 billion.
The ability of the miracle chemical to feed seemed unlimited, and best of all, it solved a problem that would allow the U S to become the world’s most powerful nation. We now had the tools to grow population continuously, which resolved the mathematical problem in our economic system which requires continued growth, to avoid complete collapse. Now, we could grow consumers and grow them we did, to nearly 7 billion of us today. Sixty years to grow 4 billion new people and 1 billion of them own cars. Anyone who questioned our path, or cautioned us about the environmental savagery that accompanied the growth, was pushed to the side by the economic engine, now singing in full throat. One simple little law of physics brings the whole thing down: You cannot grow infinitely, in a finite space.
I offer no opinion of corporate capitalism, as an equitable system for the distribution of wealth. I leave that entirely to you, but, if climate change is to be prevented from being our final struggle, it will be because we revised our economic system in a manner that allows us to “build down” our population to sustainable levels. Failing that, will the last person alive, please turn out the lights.
(Peer reviewed research, supporting the claims made in this factoid, can be found at the website)