Futurism logo

If I was going to save the world ?

by Sustainable Scott 2 years ago in habitat
Report Story

Convincing the world it needs to be saved. Is Covid-19 the first step for Agenda 21?

If I was going to save the world... First, I would have to convince you it needed to be saved. Currently, according to statistics, less than 21% of the people on planet earth are even aware the earth is in dire straights of needing a savior. Or so the news would have us believe... My statistics teacher in college taught me that 77% of all statistics were made up. Kind of wild if you really contemplate it.

Does the world need to be saved? With a population growing to nearly 8 billion people, we are creating more food, energy, and consuming more resources than ever before in history. Each country only out for its own interests while still trading with the world. There have been resolutions such as Agenda 21, the Global sustainable development plan. It has now turned into Agenda 2030. Making lists of Sustainable development goals to make all the people on earth equal, with access to clean water, sanitation, medical benefits, equality between man and woman. The full 17 goals listed as

1. No poverty

2. Zero Hunger

3. Good health and Well-being

4 Quality Education

5.Gender Equality

6.Clean water and sanitation

7.Affordable Clean Energy

8. Decent work and economic growth

9. Industry, innovation, and infrastructure

10. Reduced inequality

11. Sustainable Cities and Communities

12. Responsible Consumption and Production

13. Climate Action

14. Life Below Water

15. Life on Land

16. Peace and Justice Strong Institutions

17. Partnerships to Achieve the Goal

The plan was originally called Agenda 21 to start taking place in 2021, but it was not met, and many conspiracies came out labeling it a depopulation plan. It definitely is not a depopulation plan if you read it. Because this plan seems like the single greatest plan ever conceived for planet earth. The make the earth one world, to care about the planet equally, and truly make it one.

If I was in control of writing the plan on how to implement such an endeavor. I would first take note of some key points that would hinder its ability to be implemented. Such as world superpowers and the level of consumption of their population. For instance, in college, we studied environmental science, and the number of resources each country uses per capita. According to the common knowledge quote, we learned that if the entire world consumed what the average American Consumed we would need 4 planets to sustain that amount of consumption.

According to our professor's stats, the average American consumes 50 acres of land resources per year, while the average European consumes half that amount around 25 Acres of land per year. While Eastern European would be even less than that, and similar to Europe Australia and New Zealand are around the same. This is not just measuring meat consumption or one specific crop because these countries do also have high meat consumption, its more of an average amount of resources used per year per person. With the wealthy included who use many times over the level which raises the consumption per person. While rich desert countries such as UAE and Dubai were several hundred acres per person, many times higher than the USA because they are deserts and need to import all of their resources.

While countries like China use actually many times less per person 1 acre to 1 person. Because they have the world's largest population and only in the last few decades have been lifting their people out of poverty and moving into cities people would be surprised to find out how much less the average Chinese person consumes compared to the consumption of the average American for instance. However, China has poured more concrete in the last 3 years than the US did in the entire 20th century. One look at the skylines of their cities would absolutely amaze most people, seeming like NYC everywhere. India however is the world's second most populated country and its average citizen uses .4 of an acre per person per year. This seems like nothing but when you find out how many people in India live in poverty while the traditional religions of India such as Hindu and Sikh are founded in vegetarianism. They eat astronomically less meat than the western countries for instance.

Meanwhile; the news leads us to believe that China is the world's biggest polluter because China literally makes everything, its level of manufacturing seems to be a tenfold grander scale than western countries simply because they have 1.6 billion people and they make everything. They also use coal as their primary energy source, because during the Kyoto protocol in Japan in 1992, all the countries on earth got together to try and reduce the world emissions. However, they could not come to a complete agreement because China and India; who have the two world's largest populations, could not commit to reducing their emissions. As they were just entering their industrial revolution, they needed the energy to sustain their growth.

While the USA already had it's industrial revolution 100 years ago and now solely focused on creating the technology in the world, leaving the dirty side of manufacturing to countries like India and China. China and India wanted to commit to the reduction but they asked for USAs 3rd generation Nuclear Technology to sustain their energy requirements. And the politics of the USA could not agree to give China and India this 3rd generation nuclear technology because it was privately owned by corporations and not allowed to be given away by the government. This has left the world in a stalemate until the Paris accord which many countries got on board, however, the USA pulled out of even though the USA is still on track to meet the requirements without even agreeing to the accord.

This brings me to the solution to solve climate change. The first factor would be taking into account the amount of fuel used simply for entertainment, and transportation to and from work. My solution would be to create public transportation everywhere and have the majority of the population live in cities. Australia provides a very sustainable example of this in action because 80% of the population lives in cities around the coast and their public transportation system is supreme. Without taking into account countries like Denmark and the rest of Scandinavia and the Netherlands where the majority of the population lives in major cities and rides bicycles every day. In Copenhagen for instance a city of 2 million people, 80% rides bicycles to work every day. And the bicycle riding in the Netherlands is even higher than in Denmark, However, Copenhagen is listed as the world's most Sustainable city on earth. Germany, and France both superpowers with high populations also have a very good public transportation system. And high bicycle usage, Germany seems to be the most efficient country on earth, its ability to support 82 million people in a relatively small-sized country is amazing, being that these countries in Europe are a thousand years older than the USA, and their streets and cities had to be dealt with in such a way to account for such growth.

If I was going to solve the crisis, I would take into account the needs of the world as a whole, I would no longer look at individual country needs. It would also be necessary to trim the fat, as crazy as that sounds, from a governmental, ran aspect if they could design a way to trim roughly 2% of the world's population it could give the world even a few more years to use technology to beat the issue. I would manufacture a crisis, where it would force all businesses and corporations to work from home instead of traveling to and from an office. This alone, forcing roughly 50% of all businesses to come to the realization they could do the same productivity from home as they could at the office. Once they discovered this, it would change the work environment for the rest of human history, using technology to connect one another, would save trillions upon trillions of wasted resources simply to drive to and from work. Another aspect of consumption is the way school is currently used for children, as sad as it is to rob them of their childhood if technology could be used such as virtual classrooms or even VR headsets, nearly the same experience of school could be emulated online. Such as the book (Ready player one). It would require no wasted resources for traveling, no renting of a building, no electricity. Just a VR headset, a child could log into and be in the classroom without even leaving their bedroom. As sad as it is to hear about, it would also solve completely the issue of school shootings, spreading of illnesses, and reduce the consumption of resources 1000 fold.

These measures as drastic as they sound, and depressing, would be the only way to prevent the need for depopulation. It would fix the climate change issue, and give decades of room for technology to pave the way for the golden age of man. Meanwhile improving everyone's lives, ending poverty and, giving people the ability to travel around the world with public transportation would make people's lives so entertaining they would not want to have children. Lowering the birth rate would completely solve the population issue within only a few decades the population of the world would begin to decline on its own with no need for outside intervention. Opening up the s borders slowly, giving free access, and making all countries safe and secure would ensure the endless entertainment necessary to make this happen. Further because of automation and robotics more manufacturing jobs have been lost and will continue to be lost in the next decade than at any time in history. This would force the government to enact a living wage for all citizens, it would have to be enough to sustain them while still allowing room for entertainment, with capitalism still providing additional income to all people who get an education and can help with this technology leap humanity is about to experience. Of course, people who wanted children would still have them, humanity would always need reproduction. But these measures would allow homeostasis and a balance to occur in which the population of the earth could be indefinitely sustained at a level for the rest of human history. By 2050 the level of the population would settle around 5 billion and even out. With no need for depopulation.

Even solutions such as Aquaponics in every community would allow fresh fish a renewable cheap sustainable source of protein to be offered to the world. If every community had stocked ponds, and people raised the baby fish in their homes and stocked the ponds, it could provide unlimited fish and free protein to every community on earth.

The last solution to fix climate change would be to lower meat consumption or only offer it to the wealthy class. Because 80% of the world farmland is being used for meat and to feed livestock animals. To include a massive amount of water consumption. While using technology to create alternative solutions for protein, to me it seems a little unnecessary. But in their thinking, if they can raise the cost of meat and treat it as a luxury good it would drastically lower the consumption. My fix would be instead of using massive amounts of land to raise livestock, and commercial agriculture practices would be instead to encourage individually self-sufficiency. If energy was much less cost, everyone could have a 1000 watt led light in their home in the corner of each house, and everyone could grow 8 plants of their choice, from herbs to vegetables hydroponically and trade and barter with their neighbors, I would also have fruit trees planted in every yard, where every house that had a tree without fruit was taxed. In every community on earth, there could be thousands upon thousands of fruit trees within 5km of your house. I would also enact a rule system where people without a need could not travel more than 5 km away from their homes. Uness they took public transport or sustainable electric vehicles.

If everyone with a yard had fruit trees, and some chickens for fresh eggs, it would completely solve the need for massive livestock land destruction. Americans alone spend 8 billion a year to grow grass. If everyone turned their lawns into gardens and every community had fruit trees, world hunger could be solved completely in one growing season. People could exchange and barter their food for free, just the time and effort it took to grow. They say the gardening is one of the most therapeutic acts one can do, something about planting seeds and watching the beauty of nature unfolds greatly decreases depression. And the amount of vitamin D received naturally lowers depression. If we just imagine how all the animals are treated in factory farms, and when people as individuals raise animals, for the most part, the animals are raised much more humanely. I would imagine a world where I could walk down the street and pick fruit for free from any tree. Where the world produced so much fruit we wouldn't know what to do with it, where people could brew their own spirits and beers, and be entertained. It would provide a much higher quality product and give everyone endless entertainment to focus on and fill their lives with. It would also completely reduce the need for trillions of wasted resources on the transportation of food products. We can completely simulate mother nature, with greenhouses people could grow banana trees in winter, and nearly every plant on earth could be grown in every geographical region regardless of temperature by using greenhouses.

The last solution would be to end all commercial retail and focus completely online, it would allow everyone to have access to all goods and services while conserving all the wasted transportation costs to move the goods from warehouse to retail store to consumer. It would go directly from the warehouse to the consumer. The middle handling or double handling of products consumes double the resources, this alone would save trillions of resources from rental space for retail, energy, and fuel consumption.

While all of these ideas seem radical because we don't like change. It's improtant to note the sheer ammount of resources the world consumes while asking ourselves if this level of consumption is sustainable for 8 billion people? While contemplating one could begin to think like Thanos in avengers, what if we just got rid of half the world's people? Then everything could continue as it is... As sinister as it sounds there is one very fatal flaw in that way of thinking. How do you decide what half of the people live and die? Further, if what if the next genius who could solve a world problem was in the half you killed? It would always benefit humanity to be as diverse as possible while not ending anyone's life purposely. Regardless if you wanted to continue life as it is forever, and continue the waste like we half always done. One day humanity will reach a climax in which the life in front of them forces them to embrace individual sustainability. Regardless if anyone believes or not, one-day sustainability will save humanity. For me, as soon as I can afford a home on my own, the first thing I will do is plant a garden. Right now I'm using words as seeds and because my passion is writing, one day the words would flower into a beautiful garden.

habitat

About the author

Sustainable Scott

Reader insights

Be the first to share your insights about this piece.

How does it work?

Add your insights

Comments

There are no comments for this story

Be the first to respond and start the conversation.

Sign in to comment

    Find us on social media

    Miscellaneous links

    • Explore
    • Contact
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms of Use
    • Support

    © 2022 Creatd, Inc. All Rights Reserved.