Can we save ourselves from environmental catastrophe?
 |
Dr Mark Taylor |
The impact of human activity on the Earth's natural, finite resources is huge and data suggests we are living on 'environmental credit' to sustain a lifestyle that is beyond its long-term capacity.
But despite this, Senior Lecturer in the Department of Physical Geography Dr Mark Taylor writes that it is still possible for us all to make changes to reduce our ecological footprint.
What it is an ecological footprint?
The term ecological footprint describes the land area required to provide the necessary goods and services to support our lifestyles. The average Australian requires some 7.8 hectares of land to support their way of life. However, the amount of land available to the world's 6.5 billion people is only 2.3 hectares of land per person.
A recent survey of Ku-ring-gai residents in Sydney revealed that most believed their lifestyles had a negligible impact on waterway and bushland environments. However in all urban zones, creeks and rivers are degraded due to weeds, excessive erosion, litter, and reduced water quality. It seems that we are either unaware of the links between our lifestyle choices and their environmental impact, or we have chosen to ignore them.
The present
Staggering statistics reveal the extent of our global impact. For example, China's economy has an average growth rate of about 9.5 per cent per year since 1980, meaning that it doubles every eight years. The average United States citizen consumes 50 times more goods and services than the average Chinese citizen, and global energy use is doubling around every 30 years.
In Australia the process of land clearing is our most significant environmental problem. Not only has this contributed to the extinction of 115 plants and animals, it is strongly linked to the growing problem of soil salinity, declining ground and surface water supply and quality, and soil erosion and gullying.
While we are aware of the problem, we also are part of a global economy that can only function if it is growing. Economic growth results in the need to develop more land for inhabitation, food production or to access basic mineral resources.
Can we save ourselves or are we doomed?
As we are ultimately driven by a fiscal bottom line, if we wish to protect the environment, we need to turn the environment into a genuine business proposition.
Although this may be unpalatable to many, the transformation of the generic values we hold for the environment into an actual dollar value may be the key to preserving and sustaining our natural resources.
Willingness to pay for environmental assets already pervades our society - the environmental levy on Council rates, and National Park access fees. Houses and land adjacent to bushland, coasts, and rivers are often sold at a premium, while products with environmental tags such as bottled spring water, organic produce or 'green' electricity are sold for more than the equivalent ordinary products. Therefore, if environmental values can be transformed into real dollar values, it is more likely that large-scale environment protection will occur.
Making changes
It is still possible to makes changes to reduce our footprint. In contrast to what the respondents in the Ku-ring-gai survey perceived, our individual actions are significant. It is the sum total of our actions that create a significant impact.
Many of the changes we could make are simple. For example, if we endeavoured to car share, use public transport, cycle, or walk to work once a week, traffic volume would be reduced in the working week by roughly one-fifth, which in turn would reduce carbon dioxide, improve air quality, provide an exercise opportunity, save money, and perhaps help improve the social links within our community.
Contact Dr Mark Taylor: mark.taylor@mq.edu.au or for information on postgrad study opportunities in the Department of Physical Geography, visit www.es.mq.edu.au/physgeog/